In what ways did the Cold War represent a fundamental change in the international system?

Nevertheless, the League of Nations was the first attempt in the international system to constitute a new global society of states. It was open to all recognized states as independent, provided a permanent forum and represented the principle of collective security. During the inter-war period, sovereign states and multipolarism remained the basis of international order as well as the principle of balance of power governed international system – which the demise of the League of Nations is the illustration of. Moreover, Europe remained the centre of the world in spite of the emergence of others powers like the United States and Japan. The Second World War was going to modify this order.

The end of the Second World War implied new changes in the international system. Europe lost its predominant position and led the both new powers, namely the United States and Soviet Union which defeated Germany and Japan, to control the system. However, the relationship between the two states degenerated rapidly into a conflict, the Cold War. According to Watson, “The Cold War was a global but restrained struggle, marked on both side by defensive strategy and by competition for the allegiance or sympathy of people all over the world”. Each party possessed its own sphere of dominance (who were first settled at Tehran, Yalta and Potsdam conferences) and Europe became divided among the both superpowers. They were sometimes accused of imperialism. The struggle was also ideological, Communism against liberal-democracy. Moreover, Alliances such as NATO  (and the Warsaw Pact) were created to protect members of each sphere of dominance from the other side. The new international system became bipolar.  

At the same time, the post-war period was marked by others events which influenced the international system. First of all, the United Nations were created in 1945 by the victors on the ashes of the Leagues of Nations. The aims of this new organisation were nearly the same than its predecessor but the functioning was different. Indeed it was ruled by the Security Council where sit the permanent members (the Victors of the war: the United States, Soviet Union, the United Kingdom, France and China) who have the use of veto. Next, decolonization movement began after the war and confirmed the decline of European states. Decolonization was encouraged by the superpowers and its consequence was the birth of a Third-World beside the two spheres of dominance. Lastly, the development of the Nuclear weapon, first by the United States and later by Soviet Union and others countries, changed the nature of the relations because of its deterrent effect.

The new international system became thus bipolar and was given only by the balance between the two dominant powers. Indeed, each superpower decided in these own sphere of influence and the both sides were every time in rivalry. However the Cold War was not a homogenous period and the relationship were relaxed during the détente (1962-1979). The Bipolar system implied by the cold war made the United Nations inefficient. Indeed, each side vetoed the resolutions of the other side within the Security Council and the United Nations served finally better the interest of the weak powers. Finally the concept of Balance of power was still very important even if it was reduced to a pair of power.

The Cold war certainly changes some aspects of the international system like he was before. First, Europe ceased to be the centre of the system even though it was a major focus of the tension between East and West. France, Britain or Germany became medium powers and could no longer act alone or without consent of the United States. Second, even though direct fights occurred regularly between the major powers (for instance the two World Wars, the Franco-Prussian War in 1870-1871 and the Crimean War in 1854-1856), the period since 1945 has been the longest phase of peace between great powers. The United States never fought directly the Soviet Union. One of the reasons of this “Cold” War is certainly the Nuclear Deterrence. The Final and probably the most important changes was probably the transition from a multipolar system to a bipolar system. But this transition can be explained by the fact that they became the most powerful powers in term of population and industrialization and because European Powers was devastated by the war, not yet unified and less populated.

However, the international system kept its main traits that it has acquired since the treaty of Westphalia. During the cold war, the sovereign state remained (and remains still today) the core of the international system. The Balance of Power, which characterized the relations since Treaty of Utrecht, was also present. The anti-hegemonial issued from Vienna settlement remains at once between the two superpowers but also inside a same side against the superpower. Gaullist France developed his own nuclear bomb and took out NATO. Finally, the role of the United Nations during the Cold War was as well as inefficient to prevent war than the Leagues of Nations and the Third-World, as well as small powers or neutral powers before the Second World War, can nearly say nothing.

The Cold War, despite of its bipolar character which is an important modification, did not change fundamentally the international system. After the Collapse of the Soviet Union and thus the “victory” of the United States, the Bipolarism was replaced by the American Domination and the United Nations has obtained a better role. Nevertheless, the international system stays anarchic and the state remains at the core. There is not yet a world government but only some general rules, such as the United Nations’ charter, and beginning of regional entities, such as the European Union. Actually the end of the cold war represented a more fundamental change of the international system than the cold war itself.

Bibliography  

• Barry Buzan and Richard Little, International systems in world history, remaking the study of international relations, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000
• Peter Calvocoressi, World Politics since 1945, sixth edition, London: Longman, 1991 Chapters 1 and 2.
• Michael Nicholson, International relations, a concise Introduction, second edition, London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2002,
• Michael Sheehan, The balance of power, History and theory, London: Routledge, 1996
• AdamWatson, The evolution of international society, a comparative historical analysis, London: Routledge 1992, Chapters 13-14
• Martin Wight, The Balance of power, History and Theory, in Alan James, The basis of international order,Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1973, 85-116

   

 

           

---