- Impact of the Early Crises: The Berlin Blockade and Airlift, China becoming Communist in 1949; The Korean War
1948 – 1949: The Berlin Blockade
1949: China “Lost” to Communism
1950 – 1953: The Korean War
2) Development of the Cold War to 1968
- Policy of containment, domino theory and the emergence of peaceful co-existence
Containment
- US President Truman broke away from the traditional American stance of isolation in foreign affairs to fight against communism.
-
The Truman Doctrine and the Marshall Doctrine → products of the long-term US Cold War policy of “Containment”
-
What containment amounted to in practice was a determination to stop the spread of communist influence (assumedly Soviet influenced) around the world.
- Methods included:
- The provision of economic and military aid to anti-communist governments
- The establishment of anti-communist military alliances, such as NATO & SEATO
- US military intervention
- Marshall Plan & Truman Doctrine helped ensure Western European natons remained as stable democracies & the US triumph of Berlin Airlift were initiail successes for the policy of containment
- May have also contributed in a number of ways to a worsening of tensions and a prolongation of the Cold War. For Example:
-
The need to justify the economic cost of containment to the American people led successive US presidents to overdramatise the Soviet threat. This propoganda → self-sustaining effect and also fed paranoia
-
Military demands of containment meant the US engaged in an unprecedented peacetime military build-up → powerful interest group in the military-industrial complex. Once again, this had a self-sustaining effect on tensions & contributed to the dangerous arms race between the superpowers
- In supporting anti-communist regimes around the world, the US often found itself propping up corrupt dictatorships that had ltitle support. Sometimes this drove people to the communists or created Anti-American feelings
- US obsession with spread of Soviet inspired communism sometimes blinded its leaders to the complexity of what was happening in the world, hence the tragedy of Americas military intervention in Indochina - clear case of containment gone wrong.
- Maintain strong enough military forces to resist any Soviet attack
- Provide economic support to those countries that were poor so communism would seem attractive to their people
- Keep Russia diplomatically isolated
The Domino Theory
- Developed in relation to US containment policy in Indochina & South East Asia
- 1954 – Ho Chi Minh’s Vietnamese nationalists defeated French forces at the Battle of Dien Bien Phu, putting an end to French colonialism in Indochina
-
Victory against colonialism → something that would expect US support
- However Ho’s Vietnamese nationalists were also communists and in the Cold War climate this interefered with any US understanding of the situation
- Assessing the consequences of a communist victory in Vietnam, US President Eisenhower suggested a metaphor of dominos – referring about the nations of Asia and the prospect that if one became communist than the rest would follow
- Domino Theory, was a simple rationale for US policy of containment. Influential as it seemed to describe what was actually happening – spread from USSR, to China to Korea and on to Indochina and South East Asia. It set the scene for US intervention in Vietnam.
The Emergence of peaceful coexistence
-
Intense ongoing rivlarly & emergence of occasional crises in late 50s and 60s → superpowers worked out way of getting along with each other & managing conflict so that it never developed into outright warfare
Soviet Policies
-
1953 → Stalin died, replaced by Nikita Khrushchev
-
1956 → Khrushchev made a speech to 20th Party Congress critising excesses of Stalin’s rule
-
1960 → Spoke of possibilities of “peaceful coexistence” between US & USSR
-
Challenge for future was to avoid confrontation between the “groups of countries in which the two systems reign supreme”
- Asserted that was not Soviet intention to conquer world/impose system by force but it is clear he felt the USSR was free to compete for influence in countries that were not a part of either system yet
-
Avoid confrontation but compete in every other way → vigorous pursuit of nuclear arms race, continuation of propoganda war & prolonged campaign to gain influence in areas outside two main power blocs
- Did not amount to allowing greater freedom to Eastern Europe soviet dominated countries
-
Hungary invaded by Red army in 1956 when it tried to exercise independence
-
Khrushchev’s successor (Lenoid Brezhnev) ordered a Warsaw Pact invasion of Czechoslovakia under similar circumstances in 1968
-
Pronouncing Brezhnev Doctrine, justified such aggression by declaring that no socialist country had the right to depart from true socialism.
American Policies
-
Victory of communism in China (1949) → Americans found themselves facing the possibility of world wide commitments in their task of containing spread of communism
- Containment in Korea had been successful but was followed by instability in Indochina and increasing spread of Soviet influence in the rest of the world
-
Truman’s successor (Eisenhower) and Foreign Secretary John Foster Dulles → adopted vigorous rhetoric, speaking of need for the “rollback” of communism and possibility of threatening “massive relaliation” with nuclear arms
- In practice, Eisenhower’s actions were more cautious than his rhetoric
-
EG: Failure to rollback communism in North Korea → accepted
-
Extreme rhetoric → appease America’s “hawks” and prepare the American people for acceptance of larger defence budgets
-
Unfortunate outcomes → contributed to rise of “McCarthyism” in US in 1950s (Communist witch hunts urged by Senator Joseph McCarthy)
- Also contributed to situation in which military industrial lobby began to develop undue influence
Peaceful Coexistence in Practice
-
1950’s & 1960’s → superpowers did learn to coexist → cold war relations considered a long period of “thaw” which culminated in Détente in the 1970s
- Was never a smooth path
-
Competition in 3rd world, space, arms race, propoganda forums such as Olympics and UN was intense
-
PC relied on acceptance of each others spheres of influence → each side accepted stalemates of Korea & Berlin. Nor did US interefere in Soviet’s Eastern European sphere when USSR attacked Hungary in 1956 and Czechoslovakia in 1968 → However, dangerous confrontation could suddenly flare when this “rule” was ignored and one side strayed into each others sphere of influence, as happened in Cuban Missile Crisis.
-
Middle East (where both sides were keen to extend influence) → generated serious tension between superpowers
- Also signs of cooperation and evidence that superpowers were intent on avoiding outright confrontation – although USSR backed North Vietnam & supplied it with military aid, did not intervene when America became bogged down in war in 1960s
- Beginning with 1955 Geneva Meeting between Khrushchev and Eisenhower, this period also saw a series of meetings between the leaders, something that had not happened in the previous 10 yrs.
PEACEFUL COEXISTANCE led to a number of summit meetings:
- Superpower rivalry: The arms race & the Space Race
-
The Bipolar World – Throughout the course of the Cold War the world was effectively divided into 2 halves – Western Bloc & Eastern Bloc. There were also “non aligned” and “third world” countries and the situation became more complex towards the end of the Cold War. Still, most international disputes were seen through the prism of the Cold War and many nations lined up behind one superpower or the other.
-
Espionage – Each side attempted to steal military & economic secrets from each other. Employed agencies and networks of spies.
-
Economics – Each side determined to prove their economic system superior. Economic aid also became a weapon → Marshall Plan based on idea that giving economic aid to devastated European countries after WW2 would help make communism less attractive. Soviet Union → COMECON tied the economies of Eastern Europe to soviet system.
-
Sport race – Olympics Great interest in whether or not East German or Soviet athletes outperformed Americans. Success was viewed as a victory of one over the other. Following the Soviet invasion of Afghanisatian, The US boycotted the 1980 Moscow Olympics; in 1984 at the height of the “Second Cold War” the USSR retaliated by boycotting the LA Olympics.
-
Politics – Both sides engaged in practices that were against their stated philosophies. Eg – Soviet devoted resources to development of elite athletes to beat Americans – against communism’s basic tenet of equality. America violated core values of democratic philosophy during MacCartyh era of 1950s.
Superpower Rivalry in the Third World:
- Mid 1950s
-
As each superpower tried to increase its influence with the 3rd World Countries, they offered economic aid, trade assistance and weapons
- Aspects of the Cold War in the third world included;
- The US’s support for anti-communist regimes in South Korea and South Vietnam, both leading to military intervention
- USSR’s economic assistance to Egypt for the building of Aswan Dam in mid 1950s – subsequently the USSR backing the Arab states and US backing Eygpt, superpower rivalry became a factor in Middle East conflict
-
Number of reasons for superpower rivalry in the 3rd world:
- Ideological component – supporting democracy or seeking Marxist revolutions
- Middle East – oil wealth was at stake
- US goal of containment
- Soviet Leaders building an empire of influence simply to match US – reckless & wasteful adventures.
America in Vietnam
- Vietnam split into a communist ruled North and non-communist South
- Civil War developed after attempts to reunite under 1 government
- US provided aid & military advisors to South Vietnam
- 1965 – US committed hundreds of thousands of US combat troops to war in Vietnam
- Nixon became aware that America’s military might was being frustrated by the North Vietnamese – humiliating back down – US withdrew
- Major impact on American’s view of the Cold War:
- Country’s first defeat contributed to national crisis of confidence
- “Collapse of the Cold War consensus” (Fitzgerald) – Simple dogmas like Domino theory collapsed (the fall of South Vietnam did not lead to the spread to south East Asia – became North Vietnamese were motivated by nationalism and were not attempting to spread communism – THE US HAD CONFUSED ASIAN NATIONALISM WITH COMMUNIST IMPERIALISM)
The Space Race
-
1957 – USSR launched Satellite Sputnik (first object to be successfully launched into space and orbit around the Earth)
- Scared US that they could be ahead of US in developing space technology
- Significant because:
- Propoganda victory for Soviets – it could be presented as a sign of superiority of the communist system
- Americans had always been confident for capitalism – A soviet “first” in such a high-tech area was a severe blow
- Could give Soviets military superiority over the US through the ability to launch missiles, locate weapons in space or put spy satellites into space about US
-
Early years Soviets maintained a lead and were the first to launch first man into space – Yuri Gagarin in April 1961
-
1961 – President Kennedy made a commitment to land a man on moon before end of decade
-
May 1969 – US Apollo 11 mission successfully landed first man on Moon
-
1960s – Soviet space program experienced quite a number of setbacks
-
1975 – Height of Détente – Soviet and American space craft docked in space and crews met – worlds media showed images of them shaking hands in space.
The Arms Race
- After WW2 USSR maintained its large Red Army in Eastern Europe while Americans were keen to reduce forces to normal peace-time levels confident they could rely on nuclear weapons
-
By start of 1950’s the situation had changed significantly → in 1949 USSR exploded its first atomic bomb, just 4 years after US had gained this advance.
-
The Korean War & America’s new commitment to containing the spread of communism → brought relaisation that US would nee to maintain large conventional forces.
- Therefore, both sides now invested heavily in their tanding armies and conventional weapons
- Both sides also built up large arsenals of nuclear weapons
- Distinctive feature of the Cold War with a number of consequences
Nuclear arms race was a distinctive feature of the Cold War with a number of consequences:
- Generated genuine fear – potential for nuclear war meant that Cold War was an issue for the whole world. At various times during the Cold War there were movements throughout the western world protesting against nuclear testing and the nuclear arms race
- For much of the Cold War it was felt that a nuclear war would result in “mutually assured destruction” – an argument that this “balance of terror” may have helped to restrain the superpowers and esnure that they have always backed off from military confrontation.
- For the USSR in particular, the arms race was enormously wasteful, undermining the economy and contributing to its eventual collapse.
Nuclear Strategies and Policies in the 1960s
- Closely linked to policies of two superpowers
- 1940s – US hoped that its nuclear weapons could make up for the Soviet superiority in conventional forces
- 1950s – The USSR now had nuclear weapons but clear US superiority meant that it could rely upon threats of ‘massive retaliation’ against a Soviet “first strike”
- 1960s – Soviet Missile technology (ICBMs) had now improved but the US maintained the ability to launch a three-pronged response during B-52 bombers, ICBMs and SLBMs. This superiority gave rise the doctrine of “assured destruction.” That is, even if attacked first, the US could response with such force as to cuase great damage to the attacker.
- Late 1960s – Became obvious assured destruction could work in reverse because of the build up in Soviet nuclear forces since the Cuban missile crissi There was now talk of “mutually assured destruction.” In the event of the nuclear war. There was “a balance of terror” with both sides equally fearful of a nuclear war
- With “balance of terror” the idea of arms control became attractive to both sides – particular when coincided into the early 1970s with beginnings of détente, which assumed there could be co-operation between superpowers based on mutual interest – nuclear arms were obviously a mutual interest
Arms Control & Disarmament
- As the 2 superpowers devoted enormous resources to developing nuclear weapons, they realised arms race was dangerous and should be controlled
- Arms control agreement depending on the general state of the cold war.
- Agreements occurred when tensions were low
-
Actual disarmament, the reduction in the number of weapons → would not begin until the Cold War was almost over
- Two significant developments during peaceful coexistence period:
-
1963 → Partial Test Ban Treaty was a first good step in arms control. US & USSR agreed to ban the atmospheric testing of nuclear weapons
-
1968 → Non-Proliferation Treaty signed by US, USSR & 121 nations – to restrict spread of weapons
- Nature and Impact of Crises: Berlin Wall 1961, Cuba 1962, Czechoslovakia 1968
Berlin Wall
The Cuban Missile Crisis
Czechoslovakia
Eurocommunism: new trends of 70s and 80s within various Western European communist parties to develop a theory and practice of social transformation that was more relevant in a Western European democracy and less aligned to the party line of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union.
3) Détente
- During the late 1960s and early 1970s
- Relaxing of tension between the two Cold War enemies
- Development from the period of peaceful coexistence – it went further, with the hope that the superpowers could not only learn to live with each other, but also actively cooperate and even resolve their major differences
- There was talk of the Cold War being over – unfortunately it did not survive the decade
- Been suggested that there were 6 characteristics of Détente
1) Break in the arms race – limits placed on the increase in weapons
2) Greater tolerance between the two of each other’s political system
3) Agreements on the 3rd World Conflicts Made
4) The leaders met more frequently at summits
5) The US wanted to avoid another Vietnam – hoped that better understanding with the Soviet Union would prevent US military action
6) The Soviet Union began to relax some of its political controls over the Eastern Bloc
- Economic and Political Reasons for Détente
Economic Reasons
- The USSR had achieved rough parity with the US in nuclear weapons – both sides now had an interest in seeking agreement on arms control rather than simply continuing the wasteful arms race. Military spending was draining both economies.
- Soviet Union wanted to limit nuclear weapons because it had superior conventional forces in Europe – reducing nuclear arms would give Soviets a strategic advantage over there over NATO. Similarly, the US wanted to limit nuclear weaponry because it had a strategic advantage in its own store of nuclear weapons and did not want other countries to catch up.
- Stalemate in Europe had been accepted for some time – both interested in easing tensions and cooperating in trade and other areas
- The Soviets could see many advantages in cooperation with the US – attraction of US trade & technology, time of tension between China & USSR (Fear that China was developing nuclear capability) – obvious sense in mending fences with US
Political Reasons
- Natural progression from peaceful coexistence
- US was desperate to extract itself from Vietnam War – Nixon’s “peace with honour” such a withdrawal could only happen if the North-Vietnamese co-operated in Peace Talks – Americans thought the Soviets might be able to help influence this outcome (in return US could offer trade deals or new technology) US hoped to base détente on such a cooperation
- American experience in Vietnam has led to the painful lesson that a focus on ideology would not produce sensible policy
- It was realised that “Soviet Communist Expansionism” of US cold war propoganda did not reflect reality – e.g. a split between USSR & china was evident – the Soviets did not dominate the communist world – such realisations took the heat out of the ideological dispute and encouraged a more pragmatic approach on both sides
- Brezhnev believed that peace could create the most favourable conditions for promoting communism
- Geopolitical developments: Vietnam, Sino-Soviet Split, The Middle East
America and the Vietnam War
-
Following the expulsion of the French from Vietnam in 1954 the country was divided into communist North (Ho Chi Minh) and non-communist South (Ngo Dinh Diem)
-
Provision made for elections to reunite the country under a single government → never held
- A civil government developed as northern communist forces began to infiltrate the south
- US provided aid and military advisers to the Southern government
-
1964 → become obvious that South Vietnam would be defeated by the North unless the US intervened militarily
-
1964 → USA justified military intervention by saying their ships had been attacked by North Vietnam → Gulf of Tonkin incident
-
1965 → President Johnson committed hundreds of thousands of US combat troops to the war in Vietnam
- President Nixon maintained this commitment
- End of the decade US had half a million troops involved
- Nixon came to realise America’s military might was being frustrated by North Vietnamese
-
Humiliating back down → US withdrew from South Vietnam in 1973
- North Vietnamese forces overran the country, became communism in 1975
Impacts
- Caused enormous suffering to people of Indochina
-
Also had major impact on American’s view of the Cold War:
- One level – country’s first defeat contributed to national crisis of confidence – to have a backlash in the years of the Reagan presidency
- Another level – Vietnam war led to a “collapse of Cold War consensus” – the faih of American power and simple dogmas like the Domino theory collapsed
- As the fall of South Vietnam did not lead to the rapid spread of communism throughout South East Asia
-
Was because the North Vietnamese were motivated by nationalism and the desire to address their people’s economic plight → not attempting to spread Chinese or Soviet communism
-
Lesson → US had confused Asian nationalism with communist imperialism
- For the rest of the CW, Americans would take a more sophisticated view of ideology and there would be no rush to military containment
Sino-Soviet Split
- Soviets provided a great deal of economic and political support to help China after it became communist in 1949
- Seemed national allies – bonded by adherence to communist ideology
- Never a case of USSR spreading communism to China and dominating it as Americans believed
- Following Stalin’s death in 1953 a rift developed that soon deepened into an open split between the worlds two largest communist nations
Reasons for the Sino-Soviet Split
- China’s communism (Maoism) was as much home-grown as Soviet inspired. Moreover, as a large and potentially powerful nation that was eager to assert its new-found independence, China was never going to be dominated by the USSR. In the 1960’s, the USSR might impose its Brezhnev Doctrine on Eastern countries but not on China.
- Old fashioned nationalist dispute between the USSR and China about their long common border in Asia – reminder that the two were more traditional rivals in North Asia than allies
- Soviets were accused of not fully sharing their nuclear technology with the Chinese
- After the death of Stalin, Mao Zedong considered himself leader of the communist world. He attacked Khrushchev and other Soviet leaders for going soft on ideology and not being supportive enough of the world revolution. Also attacked Khrushchev for backing down over the Cuban Missile Crisis.
- 1959 – Soviet’s withdrew their promise to help China develop nuclear weapons
- 1960 – USSR withdrew economic aid to China
- In 1960 – Soviet advisers were withdrawn from China
- 1969 – Chinese & Soviet troops clashed along their border on the Ussuri River
- Chinese leader Mao Zedong thought it was important to make a stand because he feared the implications of the Brezhnev Doctrine with its justification for invading countries on the Soviet Border
- Clear evidence that it was a mistake to adopt a simple view of international affairs that saw the spread of communism as Soviet inspired and dominated plot
- The emergence of China as a major independent power created an interesting triangular relationship with the CW
- Improvement in Chinese-American relations could present a threat to the USSR
- 1972 – Breakthrough contact with the communist world, US President Nixon visited China before the USSR
- Dramatic improvement in Sino-American relations was an added incentive for Soviets to improve their relations with the US
Impacts:
1) The Sino-Soviet Split led to an improvement in relations between the US & China
2) Soviet Union & China began engaging in polemics against each other, opening up a period of unhidden hostility between the two former allies that lasted for the remainder of the Cold War era
3) The bipolar world of the early Cold War had now become multi-polar
4) Split in the communist camp and a reduction in the power and influence of the Soviets
The Middle East
Arab-Israeli Conflict and the significance of the region’s resources drew the superpowers into the Middle Eastern conflict. Number of reasons suggested for this:
- US - genuinely sympathetic to the quest for a Jewish homeland, especially in the wake of the terrible suffering during WW2. Period immediately after this, USSR was also supportive of the idea of a Jewish state especially if it was set up on Socialist Zionist principles and helped dislodge Britain as the dominated power in the Eastern Mediterranean. As Israel was set up as democracy and began to develop a close relation with US, USSR eventually became hostile to it
- Both superpowers felt they had strategic interests in the Middle East. USSR for example, had a long – held interest in gaining greater control over the Eastern Mediterranean, which gave access to its Black Sea ports. Of greater significance was the region’s oil worth.
- With the demise of Britian’s influence in the area, clearly evident after the Suez Crisis of 1956 both US and USSR attempted to increase their influence
- US naturally supported Israel as a bastion of democractic capitalism in the Middle East. USSR saw opportunity to spread communism amongst developing Arab nations (little success)
- To an extent, superpowers could be manipulated by the two sides involved in the Middle Eastern conflict. Israel’s leaders could point to the voting power of America’s sizeable Jewish population when lobbying support from US presidents. Egypt’s Nasser could attract generous aid and arms supplies from the USSR by adopting an anti-Western stance and holding out a promise of increasing Soviet influence once he had defeated Israel
US and USSR became increasingly involved in the Arab-Israeli conflict after the Suez Crisis of 1956. Their involvement approached a crisis point during the Yom Kippur war of 1973, after which the USSR’s influence began to decline.
- Lead up to Suez Crisis of 1956 Egypt’s President Nasser was effectively playing the West off against the USSR in his bid to assert Egyptian independence and establish himself as the leader of Arab nationalism. Rebuffed by the West, he secured arms and financial support for the Aswan Dam project from the USSR.
- Aftermath of Suez Crisis it was apparent that Britain could no longer sustain its influence in the Middle East. USSR and USA moved in to fill the vacuum. While the USSR continued to supply arms to Egypt and other Arab nations, Einsehower announced the Eisenhower Doctrine, which commited the US to containing the spread of communism in the Middle East. Thus, the Cold War spread to the Middle East.
- Israel’s victory in the 1967 Six Day War served to polarise superpowers even more. America became Arms suppliers and financial supporters Israel while Ussr armed Arab nations such as Egypt and Syria.
-
1973 – Yom Kippur War launched by Arab states with USSR backing and up to date military equipment. Two superpowers then became intensely involved in the conflict by rushing arms to their client states. E.G. Of CW being fought by proxy. Because of the potential of nuclear conflict between superpowers → dangerous time for the world. However, were able to use influence to end hostilities.
- Following Yom Kippur war, USSR’s influence in Middle East declined (rejection of communism by Arab countries, failure of Soviet backed Arab aggression against Israel and decision of Sadat to seek peace with Israel)
-
1978 Camp David Peace Agreeement between Israel and Eygpt was significant in that it was sponsored by US President Carter and there was no Soviet Involvement → Improvement of relations between US & Egypt
- naval facilities in the Mediterranean and the Indian Ocean
-
1948: Soviet supplied arms to Israel to help it win first Arab-Israel war & political pressure from American Jews then forced the USA back to Israel, so the Soviets tried to befriend the Muslim countries (i.e. Eygpt)
-
Suez Crisis of 1956: Sale of Soviet arms to Eygpt prompted US to withdraw economic aid from Egypt, popular nationalist leader Colonel Abdul Gamal Nasser reacted by nationalising the Suez Canal (owned by Britain & France) → Britain & France, backed by Israel, invaded Egypt.
-
USA & Soviet Union used UN to condemn invasion & force the withdrawal of troops → policy of US aid to Middle East began
-
1967 – Arab – Israeli War: USA backed Israel, Soviets backed the Arabs – neither superpowers wanted to escalate the conflict
-
1973 – Yom Kippur War: Arab nations placed an oil embargo on the USA, reminded the US of how dependent they were on the Middle Eastern oil
-
1978: Usa played a major role in trying to create peace in the Middle Esat, holding the Camp David talks – led to the signing of a peace treaty between Israel and Egypt in 1978
-
1979: USA lost a long-standing ally when the Shah of Iran was overthrown by an anti-American fundamentalist Islamic Revolution
-
1980: Iraq attacked Iran, US navy escorted oil tankers to protect them from attack and to keep shipping lanes open in the Persian Gulf, USA became more hostile towards Iran than to Iraq at this time because of the Iranian treatment of Americans during its revolution
-
1985: Iran benefited from secret US arms shipments in order to raise money for Reagan’s war against the Contras in Nicaragua
- Features and consequences of Détente
- US President Nixon’s dramatic visit to Bejing (where he negotiated “normal relations” with China – recognition of Red China and Chinese Admission into the UN) And Moscow in 1972 – enormously important in demonstrating America’s new found willingness to ignore ideological differences and establish good relations with communist powers.
- Regular meetings between US and Soviet Leaders followed the initial summit in 1972
- Brezhnev visited Washington in 1973
- Brezhnev met Nixon in Moscow and Gerald Ford in Vladivostok in 1974
- Carter and Brezhnev met in Vienna in 1979 to sign SALT II (The frequency of summits was a sign of improved relations)
-
Singing of SALT I (1972) and SALT II (1979) arms control agreements
-
1972 the Basic Treaty established normal diplomatic relations between East and West Germany
-
1972 Sea Bed Treaty banned nuclear weapons from the sea floor outside the territorial waters of each country
- In 1972 there was a ceasefire in Veitnam (US believed it was thanks to pressure from Moscow)
-
1975 – Helsinki Leaders from 35 nations agreed to accept existing European borders, seek greater economic cooperation and respect human rights Helsinki Agreement (Brezhnev confused about final point and Soviet approach to human rights reignited tension between them)
- Trade between US and Soviet Union increased
- Number of cultural and educational exchanges took place, e.g. 1975 – US and Soviet spacecraft linked up whilst in Orbit
-
High point “triangular diplomacy” conducted by Nixon and Kissinger from 71 to 74 – China admitted to the UN, ending 22 Years of isolation – Bejing Summit in 1972
There were some tense moments…
- Before ceasefire in 1972, the US resorted to massive bombing campaigns in an effort to bring the North Vietnamese to the negotiating table – the North was backed by the USSR
-
In October 1972 the US supplied Israelies and the USSR supplied Arabs in the Yom Kippur War – Israelis gained the upper hand – USSR threatened to intervene – US put its forces on ralert – both supported a ceasefire (Feature of early stages of détente that such crises could not disrupt the improved relations.)
Strategies and Policies
- 1972 Nixon and Brezhnev signed SALT 1 – banning ABM’s was significant as without a defence system both sides had to live with the balance of terror recognised by the MAD doctrine. This, as the acronym implies, contributed to preserve stability and may have helped to preserve the peace. (In the late 1980’s Reagan’s proposed Star Wars system was important because, as a defensive system, it had the potential to upset the balance and give the US an advantage.)
- SALT I followed by SALT II – US found concerns about the progress of Détente.
- Amidst general concerns that Soviets had used the period of good relations to move ahead of the US, there was talk of a “window of opportunity” when a Soviet first strike might succeed against the US.
- 1979 – President Carter and Soviet leader Brezhnev did sign the SALT II. However, by the time détente had lost a lot of support in the US. Critics in the Senate felt the agreement allowed Soviets to maintain an advantage. To meet this criticism, in an effort to persuade the Senate to ratify the treaty, Carter took a number of tough measures
- He agreed to deploy a new system for mobile ICBM launcheds, supposedly allowing them to avoid detection
- He deployed cruise missiles in Europe (This upset Soviets and helped reactiviate the European nuclear protest movement.
Consequences
Advantages of Détente
Opinions on détente remained divided…
- As détente was never meant to end war, it was successful to an extent. It had a huge impact – it eased tensions in parts of the world, BUT promoted the USSR to start expansion in others
- It achieved success in arms limitation and European stabilisation, BUT the Soviet expansion into the Third World brought détente to an end…
- May have been a temporary solution to a long term problem
“Détente collapsed in 1980 but it provided essential lubrication and reduced the friction in the transition from a bipolar to a triangular Cold War” (Bradley)
Signs that détente was fading
-
Neither side entirely trusted each other or at all condoned or tolerated any form of the others ideology – the signing of treaties were a sign of enthusiasm but their relationship remained “essentially competitive” (Spellman)
- Nixon was forced to resign, seen as weak and unreliable, Brezhnev was particularly annoyed by Carter’s attacks on the Soviet Union over “human rights” – Brezhnev saw this as a direct interference in Soviet domestic policy and believed it was none of Carter’s business
- Conservatives in the US began to attack SALT I, saying the US had given away too much and allowed Soviet Union to keep pace
- When Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan in 1979 détente was well and truly dead
4) Renewal and the end of the Cold War
Reasons for “The Second Cold War”
- US conservatives that USSR had gained much more in the détente than the US – arms control agreements, it was felt, favoured the Soviets who had moved ahead in missile numbers – felt they’d gained most from technological exchange & trade
- US suffered a national crisis of confidence due to:
1) Withdrawal from Vietnam War – America’s first defeat in a war – division in the American society
2) Watergate scandal – loss of faith in America’s leadership and institutions
3) American backed regime of the Shah of Iran was overthrown by Muslim fundamentalists – US embassy seized and diplomats taken captive
- Nixon replaced by Ford and the Carter replaced him – Carter genuinely tried to engage the Soviets in détente, considered as “soft” and was severely undermined by the Iran hostages crisis/failure of his calls for human rights in Soviet Union/Soviet invasion of Afghanistan
-
Collapse of détente had a lot to do with America trying to restore their position – in hindsight clear that real leadership crisis was in SU – Brezhnev was a sick, elderly man, replaced by two more elderly sick men, USSR locked into conservative Cold War mode – continued wasteful arms race/continued adventurism in the 3rd world/failed to address problems within the country
Characteristics of “The Second World War”
- There was a renewal of the fear of war; both sides openly expressed concern about the likelihood of war
- Hostile propoganda – Reagan called the Soviet Union “evil” Gorbachev described Reagan as “dangerous”
- There was little success in negotiations between the two – more discussion but little achieved
- Both sides tightened controls on groups within their own society. E.g. Reagan criticised “peace” and “anti-Nuclear” groups, claiming they were helping the USSR
- Fear of the Soviet Threat again became the focus of US foreign policy
- Soviet Invasion of Afghanistan and its impact
-
“Marked the beginning of a brief but intense period of Soviet-American conflict, one of the last of the Cold War” (Rasanayagam)
- Afghanistan acted primarily as a buffer of the USSR’s southern flank
- Afghanistan was the southern neighbour of the Soviet union – up until 1979 it had a communist government (People’s Democractic Party of Afghanistan) which had close ties to the USSR and received economic and military aid
- New Afghani leaders met with stiff resistance to many of their racial, social and economic reforms – resistance armed thanks to US and Pakinstani funding
- 1979 – this government overthrown by a group of Muslim fundamentalists
- The Soviets, under Brezhnev, decided that if a policy of appeasement to Afghanistan was employed then the chances of Iran gaining influence in the region through a racial Islamic region was high – new leaders would then welcome the Us would could then deploy nuclear missile sites
- Decided that the least harmful path was to send in troops and re-establish the nation
- Fearing the conversion of friendly communist neighbour into a Muslim extremist nation, the USSR invaded Afghanistan, overthrew Muslim fundamental government and reinstated the communist government
- December 1979 – Military campaign began – believed it would be a relatively short war – proved to be a long affair, costing many Soviet lives and resources and ended in failure
- The US viewed the occupation of Afghanistan as a strategic move by the USSR to control the Persian Gulf region and a result deny crucial oil to the US – Carter hence acted on this view
-
Communist Afghan army and the Soviet troops controlled the cities but in the rugged countryside the “Mujahideen” (Afghan fighters) using American supplied weapons, exploited mountainous terrain – invulnerable to Soviet helicoptor attacks – led to a need for more Soviet ground troops to find an ddestory the resistance. Result → Increasing Soviet Casualties/drained Soviet resources
- February 1989 – Soviet forces conceded defeat and completed their withdrawal from Afghanistan
- Fundamentalist Muslim groups regained control of Afghanistan
Impact
- The obvious Soviet aggression and fierce US response to it marked a clear dividing line between the hopeful years of détente and the period of dramatically renewed tension that followed – increased tensions between the two superpowers
- Soviet experience in Afghanistan had a number of parallels with the American experience in Vietnam – bogged down in a frustrating war where its superior technology and manpower could not overcome the guerrilla tactics of its enemy – Afghanistan was left as a destabilised region whose people would be victims of many more years of violence
- The casualties suffered by the Soviet military and drain on resources contributed to internal problems that culminated in the USSR’s collapse in 1991
- Cold War impacted when President Carter decided to “curtail trade with the Soviet Union, advocate a Western boycott of the 1980 Olympic Games to be held in Moscow, increase military spending and withdraw the SALT II treaty from senate consideration”
- For the first time in almost a decade, a military clash looked possible and nuclear war was once again in the forefront of the public spectrum
- US Attitudes and policies under Reagan
- Became President in 1981
- Renewed the Cold War
- Strongly supported by British Prime Minister – Margaret Thatcher
- Re-elected in 1984 on a wave of patriotism, but the change of leadership with the arrival of Gorbachev in the Soviet Union moved Reagan back towards détente
Attitudes
- Reagan believed communism limited human freedom, denied choice and ultimately killed the human spirit
- Preferred to take a hard line against what he called the “evil empire” of the Soviet Union
- Critics in the US pointed out the fact that SDI was an unproven technology that was expensive to the US public.
- US citizens were also concerned about the rising anti-Soviet rhetoric from the White House and feared that a nuclear war was imminent. Protests grew to a crescendo in June 1982 when 1 million Americans protested across the country – Public support plummeted.
- Things that created support for SDI
- Events in Afghanistan, Central America and Africa
- The assassination attempt on Pope John Paul II who supported the US
- The Korean Airlines Disaster of 1983 – passenger jet accidentally entered Soviet airspace and was shot down
- STARTs discussions on nuclear arms reductions, intermediate-range weapons and conventional forces in Europe ended in chaos when the Soviets walked out due to demands made by the Americans
Policies
- Tough and anti-Soviet rhetoric
- Strongly opposed to détente and the SALT II treaty because he believed that it weakened the USA and benefited the USSR
- In elections he promised much needed economic reforms and when he became president he tried to do this by:
- Increasing worker productivity
- Lowering taxes
- Reducing government regulations of industry and employment
- Returned to military rather than diplomatic ways of containing communism
- Increased defence expenditure to the largest amount ever in peacetime
- Increased arms supplies to the rebels in Afghanistan
- Tried to contain communism activity in Central America
-
Embarked on a “get tough” approach – e.g. demonstrations of US military might and purpose such as the Invasion of Grenada in 1983 (to oust a new left-wing government) and the bombing of Libya – accused of sponsoring terrorism
-
1983 – Reagan announced the development of a new defense system, the Strategic Defence Initiative (SDI) or the “Star Wars” proposal – salellites could destroy incoming missiles and could protect the US from nuclear attack – worried Soviets, Europeans and nuclear protestors because it suggested the possibility that the US could launch a “first strike” nuclear attack without fear of retaliation – Reagan’s advisors spoke of a “winnable nuclear war” – cost the US $1.5 Trillion
-
1983 – Reagan deployed cruise missiles in Europe
-
Reagan Doctrine – Although the US would avoid wars such as Veitnam, it would support pro-US regimes in the Third World and back anti-communist groups to overthrow left-wing governments
-
1985 – Last years of Reagan – there was progress in arms controls, Gorbachev entered
- Economic reforms – increased productivity but national debt rose significantly and his economic policy was a factor in the October 1987 Wall St Crash, which was bigger than 1929 except it was not followed by a depression
-
Reagan wrongly believed that an arms race would put great strains on the Soviet economy and thus bring the nation, thus communism, to an inevitable demise – consequence → budget deficit spiralled out of control
- Policy of “peace by strength”
- Soviet attitudes and policies under Gorbachev
- March 1985 – Mikhail Gorbachev assumes leadership in USSR
- Relatively young man who brought energy and new agenda to role
- Inherited many problems – economy continued to shrink, becoming half size of US’s in 1985 due to cessation of the oil-boom. Living standards low, infant mortality high and life expectancy was declining – realised something had to be done to save communist party
Attitudes
- Glasnot and Perestroika allowed government to be faced with increasingly vocal criticsm
- Nationalist tendancies of the East European satellite states, which up till that point had been severly repssred, were released
- Benefits of glasnot and perestroika – highlighted failures of Soviet systems (Soviet economy continued to decline rapidly as consumer items disappeared off shelves, medecine and food were in short supply, there were long queues at shops, black markets flourished. Communism proved to be a failed system and Perestrokia was not able to save it.) – sudden collapse of Communism – removed ideological component of the Cold War
- Perestrokia had weakened the economy as the totalitarian structure of the Soviet Union ensured the reforms were ineffective, leading to shortages in food and consumer goods.
- Perestroika & Glasnot – policy did not go as planned as people tarted using the openness to criticse Soviet history and its leaders – people now spoke openly about the murder of the Romanovs, Collectivisatin, the purge trials and the 5 million gulags (political prisoners) that died from the 1930s to 1980s. They were also able to read literature that was not available to due to censorship
-
“New Economic Program” – private enterprises not profitable – black markets and inflation sprang up – labour unrest was a way for citizens to vent their anger
- Became a popular man for US
- Moves not only decreased Soviet Union’s ability to wage full scale war but also signalled to the US and world that USSR was no longer willing to compete in the Cold War when their internal problems are in need of such urgent attention
Policies
- Realised a radical change was needed to address the problems of the Soviet economy – realised the closed nature of the communist system left it ill-equipped to deal with the problems of the consumer sector or the challenges imposed by the info age
-
Introduced two reforms, glasnot (media and people gained freedoms – freedom of expression & information) and perestroika (introduced democracy to Soviet politic and a limited free market) – aimed at opening up an restructuring Soviet society – solved few problems, the new openness led to more info being available to the people about the problems plaguing their economy
-
1985 Geneva Summit – Gorbachev and Reagan agreed on some issues, e.g. to improve Soviet-US relations through ongoing dialogue and further meetings in the near futures, nuclear war could never be won and must never be fought.
- Internal reform was his priority – it was clear to Gorbachev that the USSR could no longer afford the Cold War – embarked on seires of summits with Reagan
-
1987 INF Treaty – abolished a category of nuclear weapons – both sides were able to agree on a way of supervising this process – atmosphere where nuclear disarmament could finally make real progress
- Once trust established – Western nations began to provide the USSR with aid
-
The New Economic Program was introduced in 1987. It established:
- A new system of self-accounting which was related to the profitability of state-run enterprises
- Procedures to improve the rights of citizens, including the right to sue officials who infringed citizens rights
- Private enterprise cooperatives
- 1988 – Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan
- June 1989 – Successful visit to West Germany – announced the Berlin Wall might someday be dismantled – signal that that USSR was no longer interested in applying the Brezhnev Doctrine to Eastern Europe – Rapid change followed in Eastern Europe – e.g. demonstrations in East Germany went unchalleneged
- Supported reforms in East Germany, Poland, Hungary and Czechoslovakia – allowed the communist regimes in these countries to collapse and be replaced with democratically elected, non-communist governments – withdrew Soviet troops from these countries
- February 1991 – The Warsaw Pact was dissolved – end of Soviet domination of Eastern Europe
- Disarmament agreements 1987 – 1991
- Collapse of communism in Eastern Europe and the USSR
- USSR moed towards democracy – Gorbachev could not retain control in Russia – nationalism fuelled calls for self-determination
- USA appearing to be less of a threat – technical problems limited Star Wars program, Congress refused to pass Reagan’s defence budget
- When Gorbachev released the Eastern Bloc from Soviet control, many of those nations decide to convert to a non-communist style government in order to escape the oppressive horros they had witnessed behind the iron curtain. E.G. Poland – buoyed on by the success of the US in the Cold War and significantly improved liberties and conditions – first non-communist power in Eastern Bloc for 42 yrs – others followed… e.g. Bulgaria & Hungary etc.
Eastern Europe
- In the Ukraine, the native language was used more often, and even though they followed perestroika, the Ukrainian Popular Front and other democratic organizations promoted the rights of the Ukrainians
- Riots broke out in the wake of perestroika in Kazakhstan as people demonstrated anger over the conditions – political movements, demanding an end to nuclear testing, Kazakh language became the official one
-
March 11th 1990, Lithuania decalred its independence from the USSR
- Uzbekistan declared its independence in June 1990 with Ukraine and Belorussia following in July with others shortly following. Gorbachev had severely underestimated these nationalists movements. It seems that by trying to save the USSR with his policies, he unwittingly caused its demise.
- February 1991 – The Warsaw Pact was dissolved – end to Soviet dominated in Eastern Europe
USSR
- Gorbachev’s policies of Glasnot and Perestroika allowed underground nationalist movements to move out into the open, voicing their anger and demands for indepdendence from Moscow
- The end of the Cold War gave Gorbachev an opportunity to reform communism without pressure form the tensions, but the momentum of glasnot and perestroika was too great and allowed the democratisation process to ultimately destroy communism
- Further demonstrating the fall of the communism were events such as …
- Withdrawal of Soviet troops form Hungary and Czechoslovakia
-
Soviet acceptance of German reunification on 3rd October 1990 and Germany’s membership in NATO
- Joining the US-led coalition to remove Saddam Hussein’s Iraqi military forces from Kuwait
-
14th March 1989 – newly elected Congress of People’s deputies voted to end the Communist Party’s control over the government, Gorbachev was elected executive president
- Unsuccessful anti-Gorbachev coup by Soviet empire supporters, August 1991 shifted great authority to the Russian President, Boris Yeltsin – accelerated change
- Gorbachev dissolved the Communist Party, granted the Baltic states their independence and proposed a much looser economic federation between the remaining republics
-
The formation of the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) on 8th December 1991 made the Soviet Federal government redundant
-
25th Dec – Gorbachev resigned as president and the USSR ceased to exist on the 31st December 1991
Why did the cold war end?
- Had to end sooner or later – the old bipolar world of the superpowers was giving way to a multi-polar world with new power centres, e.g. China and Japan – boths uperpowers were at risk of being bypassed if they didn’t address such issues such as technological development
-
There’s a view that Reagan brought the Cold War to an end – SDI meant that the Soviets would have to match US technology – couldn’t afford it and had to give up the cold war – part of a larger view that argues American won the Cold War, “The West, and especially the U.S. had shown remarkable patience and had practiced prudence in its statecract to bring about the victory” (Ambrose)
-
View that the Cold War “represented not so much a victory for one side as a matter of the other side declining to continue to take part in the contest” (McLean) – Cold War ended because the Soviet System collapsed – not just because of Reagan – failure fo communism was evident for some time, disguised by USSR’s status, Gorbachev reforms revealed the extent of the problems
-
Gorbachev must be given credit – Nobel Peace Prize in 1990 – had the courage and foresigh to look at things in a new way and take radical actions – compromised in a way that was completely new for a Cold War leader – “he compromised on long-held Soviet claism and accepted many of the premises of the US negotiating position” – (Kissinger)