To what extent did the world come close to nuclear war during the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962?
To what extent did the world come close to nuclear war during the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962? When the Cuban Missile Crisis broke out in 1962, it culminated what had become a very tense global situation. The beginning of the Cold War in 1945 meant that both the Soviet Union and the USA had become rivals in terms of their distinct ideology and position in the world, leading to an elaborate race between the two to be seen as the "great superpower." The crucial question is, however, how far did the Cuban Missile Crisis bring the world to the brink of nuclear war, and how much can be attributed to carefully premeditated game of brinkmanship in the contest to gain superiority? Before the question can be answered, it is important to distinguish between the ideologies of the USA and the Soviet Union and how this would lead to conflict when Khrushchev placed his missiles in Cuba. The long-term causes can be traced back to the Bolshevik Revolution in 1917; the newly established communist ideology was seen as a threat to the capitalist world system, with many capitalist countries such as the USA being fearful of this new state. The socialist economy that Soviet Russia tried to create was based on state ownership which put the needs of society before that of individuals. This was a stark contrast to the capitalist system in the USA, which was based on private ownership and
Analysis of book "Eichman in Jeruselum" by Hannah Arendt
Eichmann in Jerusalem The 'banality of evil' and the concept of 'thoughtlessness' are used by Arendt to think about the nature of Eichmanns actions and aims, the state of his conscience and responsibility for the actions of criminal regimes in general. That Eichmann should not be seen as a monster is important to Arendt in the sense that Eichmann stated himself in the court that he had always tried to abide by Kant's categorical imperative (1964, pp. 135-137). She argues that Eichmann had essentially taken the wrong lesson from Kant: Eichmann had not recognized the golden rule and principle of reciprocity implicit in the categorical imperative, but had only understood the concept of one man's actions coinciding with general law. He attempted to follow the spirit of the laws he carried out, thinking that the legislator himself would approve it. According to Eichmann, the legislator was Hitler and so he claimed this changed when he was charged with carrying out the final Solution, at this point Arendt says "he had ceased to live according to Kantian principles, that he had known it, and that he had consoled himself with the thoughts that he no longer was master of his own deeds, that he was unable to change anything (1964, pp. 136). In his entire life, Eichmann was a joiner, in that he joined organizations in order to define himself, and had difficulties thinking for himself
How can we best explain the failure of Kennedy administration in the Bay of pigs fiasco but its successes in the Cuban missile Crisis?
Q. How can we best explain the failure of Kennedy administration in the Bay of pigs fiasco but its successes in the Cuban missile Crisis? In this essay I will argue about the Bay of Pigs fiasco, and why is it failed. Actually, the Bay of Pigs was mismanagement in 1961 and was an attempt to overthrow the Cuban government. Essay outlines the approaches followed in this essay. During this essay I would explain the failure of Kennedy administration and how they treat this fiasco. Politically, I used to put the question with which people are concerned as: how Kennedy overthrow Castro and make his decision?. The aim of this essay, first of all is to explain what the Bay of Pigs was?, how the Bay of Pigs invasion related to the crisis as well as how John F. Kennedy and his administration handled the crisis?. Secondly, I would highlight my understanding of Cuban missile crisis and the involvement of John F. Kennedy's administration in the crisis. This essay will also address the following issues; How Kennedy played an important role in the crisis?; how did the failure of the Bay of Pigs affect his solution to the Cuban Missile Crisis?; and how Kennedy waited until after the Bay of Pigs before making a public announcement about the crisis. Although, many Americans refer to the Kennedy administration's fiasco as either the administration's fiasco as either the Bay of Pigs invasion or
How did Margaret Thatcher transform Britain?
How did Margaret Thatcher transform Britain? In 1979, Downing Street saw its first woman Prime Minister: Margaret Thatcher. She was described as dominating British politics 'more than any other prime minister of the twentieth century'1 and by the time she had resigned in 1990, Britain had undergone many changes. 'Thatcherism' is derived from the many policies she introduced, most of which will be looked at within this essay when answering the question how Thatcher transformed Britain. The following factors will be looked at: inflation, education, the National Health Care system, Legalisation, trade union legalisation and finally housing policies. The first factor to be looked at is inflation. Thatcher can be said to have transformed Britain through several economic policies, such as 'Commitment' which ultimately aimed to cut the money supply and boost indirect tax to suppress inflation. However the most important economic policy was 'Monetarist' which meant 'high interest rates and no subsidies to ailing companies'.2 In 1975 inflation within Britain was at an all time high of 24.2% however after Thatcher's eleven year reign, it was down to a mere 9.5% in 1990,3 giving evidence to show she had transformed Britain's economy. However it can be argued that her policies did not have a lasting effect and thus she did not transform Britain, as after she resigned, events such as
Fidel Castro emerged from the foothills of the Sierra Mountains as a symbol of freedom and equality, mottos of the long awaited Cuban revolution. This was in 1959, Fidel Castro has managed to maintain his absolute power for over 44 years.
Fidel Castro emerged form the foothills of the Sierra Mountains as a symbol of freedom and equality, mottos of the long awaited Cuban revolution. This was in 1959, Fidel Castro has managed to maintain his absolute power for over 44 years. Fidel Castro's social, and educational reform as well as his international revolutionary victories have kept Fidel Castro in power. Fidel Castro's social reform, which promoted national equality, was partially responsible for keeping him in power. Fidel Castro managed to integrate discriminated groups into the revolution and win their support. Fidel Castro began by incorporating "outsiders" such as women into the revolution. The Federation of Cuban Women (FMC) was founded in 1960. The FMC became an instrument for the government to communicate its objectives to the public and to report women's needs to the government. This two-way communication resulted in the Maternity law, which allowed women to take a six-month maternity leave. In addition, the FMC created the Hygiene Law, which was responsible for the establishment of 838 child care centers throughout Cuba. Fidel Castro's social reform was also responsible for introducing more women into the education system as well as the work force. With education now more accessible, women accounted for 50% of university students and comprised 35% of the work force by the early 1980's. Women also
Why were those who believed in genuinely democratic market socialism unable to prevent the collapse of the Soviet state and the Soviet system?
Why were those who believed in genuinely democratic market socialism unable to prevent the collapse of the Soviet state and the Soviet system? The collapse of the Soviet Union in December 1991 seems astonishing considering the fact that its leader had been dedicated to ensuring its survival by means of radical reform. On his return to Russia after the August coup Gorbachev even offered to relinquish the Presidency of the USSR to Yeltsin in the vain hope that he would preserve it in some form. When Gorbachev finally resigned as President of the USSR the outcomes of perestroika seemed the exact opposite of its intentions. Rather than animating the inert superpower with the revitalising currents of democracy and market socialism, he had dealt it a mortal blow. This was by no means the expected outcome; in 1988 Moshe Lewin was still confident enough to suggest that "the USSR is entering its new age - the conditions may now be ripe or ripening for the system to reclaim some of the hope of its idealistic revolutions".1 By the end of 1988 Gorbachev had revolutionised the political system to the extent that a genuine contested elections to a new democratic body were planned for the following spring. At this stage the arguments of perestroika were, in Gorbachev's own words, "fully based on the principle of more socialism and more democracy".2 This idealistic goal owed an
Communism collapsed in Eastern Europe because of Gorbachev
'Communism collapsed in Eastern Europe because of Gorbachev's blunders.' Discuss The disintegration of the Soviet Union in 1991, into 15 completely separate nation states, was generally perceived to be a great triumph for the west - as well as for democracy and freedom - over a tyrannical socialist state. What actually caused this downfall has plagued historians and speculators and caused massive worldwide debate on the issue. The conventional argument is that issues such as Stalin's despotic nature and the increasing calls for freedom from the Eastern Bloc satellite states had a major impact; however more recently historians have questioned whether the collapse was doomed from the start due to issues entrenched in the regime from the start, by leaders such as Lenin. More importantly in this case is question of Gorbachev's role in bringing down the USSR and communism in the Eastern Bloc and if indeed: "The culprit to be blamed is Gorbachev".1 Communism formally took hold of Russia in late October 1917 following the success of Lenin and the Bolsheviks in the October Revolution. This government was in fact socialist, not strictly communist, - according to Marx's definition of the word - and within the next decade had unified the other soviet satellite states into one "Union of Soviet Socialist Republics', the USSR, marking the start of Stalin's rule in April 1922. Based on
What do you understand by the term "dtente", & how successful was its application during the Cold War period?
Manav Thakral November 17, 2002 Period 3. I.B History What do you understand by the term "détente", & how successful was its application during the Cold War period? After World War II, a struggle for ideological, economic & military global supremacy between the USA and her allies, & the U.S.S.R and her allies emerged. The struggle, known as the Cold War, was never a direct confrontation between the super powers but rather a difference in ideology and clash of expansionist ambitions. Through the years, it became apparent that the Americanization of Western Europe opposed the Sovietization of Eastern Europe in which both used spheres of interest in order to maintain their supremacy. By the 1950's, both superpowers realized that Détente reduced the chances of a nuclear war, it gave economic opportunities by opening new markets and allowed management of the Globalization of the Cold War. Détente is the continuing process for managing relations between rivals and it was established through meetings, agreements, treaties and joint activities. Arms Control Agreements which include, the Nuclear Proliferation Treaty, SALT I & SALT 2, Limited Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, Anti Ballistic Missile Treaty and START, effectively contained and managed the spread of Nuclear Weapons However, Détente was more than simply a process of containing and reducing nuclear weapons. It gave way to
Examine the role of Fidel Castro in East/West relations.
Examine the role of Fidel Castro in East/West relations. The Cold War, which existed between the Soviet Union and the United States following World War II, and the incessant threat of nuclear destruction which it presented, evolved throughout its history. The relationship between these two countries was strained at best - at worst, it was hostile and came near the unleashing of the devastating nuclear arsenal both countries possessed. The relationship also evolved over time, and the emergence of Fidel Castro in Cuba was a catalyst for a change in the nature of the relationship between these powers. The threat he and his Communist party presented to his American neighbours would change the way Americans dealt with their Cold War enemies. In the same way, Castro's Communists also gave Nikita Khrushchev and the Soviets an entrance into North and Central American affairs. Prior to the revolution in Cuba, during Batista's brutal regime, there was what is described as "an easing of tensions" (Lundestad 100) in relations between the East and the West. These tensions were eased because many of the potential conflicts between East and West had been resolved, such as the 1956 uprising in Hungary and the Suez conflict of 1956, which led to war between Egypt and the alliance of Britain, France and Israel. The Soviets promised support to the Egyptians, bringing with it the threat of a
Why did the USSR collapse in 1991?
Why did the USSR collapse in 1991? The USSR collapsed on the 25th December 1991, the moment Gorbachev signed the documents creating the CIS. The reason behind the creation of the CSI are mainly due to the internal pressure the Soviet Union faced during the six and a half years Gorbachev was in power. However the external pressures the Soviet Union faced do contribute to its downfall. The Soviet Union failed due to two specific factors; internal pressure in the form of economic and ideological changes and external pressures which led to a low moral for the country and more economic strain. In regards to the economy, the USSR had been centralised since the New Economic Plan of the 1920's meaning that economic survival of both Russia and all the soviet satellites lay within the Kremlin. If this failed it would be devastating for the Eastern bloc, and ultimately it did, since decisions were made in circumstances which did not represent realistic economic views. The economy of the USSR was put under a great deal of strain due to the fixation of prices, unlike free markets, where the price of goods would be determined on supple and demand all prices remained rigidly set by the Kremlin. Thus meaning when the subsequent arms race began with the United States occurred, money that was needed to help maintain the fragile economy was spent on military expenditure, something of which the
