How important were nuclear weapons in shaping the cold war?

"war is not just a function of political and economic exigencies, but is also largely determined by ideological imperatives"

Ideology was also important in determining the allies of the respective powers. For example, through the capitalist ideology Britain was automatically allied with the U.S, and the same can be said for China and the U.S.S.R. This is particularly important as China’s involvement in the Cold war created what was perceived by America as a greater threat to its international influence and thus it determined the its involvement in the affairs of certain Asian states.  Therefore as a result of China’s involvement in the Cold War the orientation of the Cold War was moved from Europe to Asia.  Here we can see directly the impact that ideology had on the structure of the war as without its all encompassing reach, the superpowers would not have been able to maintain their respective spheres of influence and these countries would not have entered the conflict.

Ideology was also significant in influencing the policies that shaped much of the Cold war. Part of communist theory involved the notion of international revolution.  This notion is what undoubtedly what threatened the west the most.  Stalin used this notion of international revolution to justify his expansionist policies.  He recognized that through communist theory he could dominate the entire eastern bloc. 

‘Stalin replaced Lenin’s vision of spontaneous proletarian uprisings…with one that linked the progress of the world revolution to the expanding territorial and geopolitical influence of the Soviet Union’

Victories of communism, like that in Cuba, produced the U.S opinion that the communist ideology would spread further and therefore sought to establish a campaign that would encourage a modernization process in Latin America, Asia and Africa in order to prevent the possibility of the Marxist-Leninist ideology from spreading to these areas. This fear shaped the cold war in that it encouraged American intervention in Korea and Vietnam that are integral to the nature of the Cold War.  It can therefore be argued that since many of the policies pursued by Stalin were based on communist theory, ideology certainly played a role in shaping the cold war.  

With respect to nuclear weapons, in this instance it is not likely that they affected how ideology shaped the cold war as these tensions existed before the atom bomb was launched and therefore ideology becomes a ‘shaping’ factor’ in its own right that was not affected by the nuclear element.  

A hugely important factor that must be considered when thinking about the nature of any conflict is the individual actors that were ruling during this period. The personalities of those making the most important decisions are integral to the nature of any period in history.  

The Cold War, lasting 45 years as it did, was witness to a number of changes in leadership with each change producing a different set of conditions.  The Stalin and Truman era marked what was probably the tensest era in Cold war history.  This was largely a result of the nuclear factor and its implications.  Stalin’s personality clearly played a role in shaping the conflict, characterized as it was by intense paranoia and mistrust. ``Suspicion, distrust, and an abiding cynicism were not only his preferred but his necessary environment.''

The decision taken by Roosevelt and then later Truman to retain information on the nuclear bomb shows how individual actors can influence a course of events.  Ignoring the advice given to him by aides such as Henry L. Stimson, the Secretary of War in 1945 that pushed for Russian inclusion in the process is indicative of the importance of personalities in any given conflict.  In a cabinet meeting in September 1945 Truman declared that any decision taken ‘had to be mine to make’

Another example is when Michael Gorbachev came to power, his policy of ‘opening up’ known as Perestroika contributed to an improvement U.S/U.S.S.R relations and therefore a decrease in the tensions that existed. In addition Gorbachev was not an advocate of the use of force or coercion in enacting his policies.  When a revolt began in Eastern Europe Gorbachev’s response was the introduction of the Sinatra doctrine, this basically meant that unlike the Brezhnev era where national sovereignty was limited, they were now allowed to ‘do it their way’

Another area that needs to be considered is the ups and downs of the Cold War.  Given the length of the conflict it is unsurprising that there were fluctuating periods of tension and relaxation.  This period is known as détente that is defined as being a "relaxation of international tension.". The periods of détente shaped the conflict in that it lent it the characteristic of diplomacy, a concept that is not normally involved in war in the traditional sense.  It also defined the boundaries under which the Cold War existed in that it was understood that both sides were required to make concessions in order to prevent the outbreak of all out war.  The achievements of the SALT process (Strategic Arms Limitations Talks) are just one example of the compromises made. Nuclear weapons also played a part in the rise and fall of détente in that tensions were at their highest when the threat of nuclear attack was more likely.  For example, during the Cuban Missile Crisis tensions were undoubtedly high and therefore they contributed to the tensions that already existed.  

Nuclear weapons were important in shaping the cold war in a number of ways. Their very existence in the period after the Second World War determined the nature of the war that was to come.  The attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki marked the beginning of a tense relationship between the U.S and the U.S.S.R that was to last decades. This is evident in Stalin’s reaction to the first bombing. ‘The balance has been broken’ he remarked to one of his physicists ‘Build the bomb-it will remove the great danger from us’.

America’s possession of the nuclear bomb was perceived by Stalin as an attempt to control the structure of the post war world.  Indeed since America had in effect a nuclear monopoly there was no limit to the power that they could enforce.  In the summer of 1945 Henry L. Stimson, the U.S Secretary of War suggested that information about the bomb should be withheld until democratic principles were established in the U.S.S.R.  In addition, James F. Byrnes, the U.S Secretary of state assumed that its nuclear monopoly would coerce the Russians into making diplomatic concessions. 

Since tensions between the U.S and the U.S.S.R existed before the creation of the atomic bomb, would the Cold War have developed to the extent that it did in the absence of the nuclear threat?  The distrust shown towards the U.S.S.R is evident in the secrecy involved in America’s production of the atomic bomb.  Although allies in the war against Germany and Japan, the two superpowers were unable to extend this cooperation into the post-war world.  These conditions in the post-war world were undoubtedly a major factor in starting the conflict, however the nuclear element created a situation that escalated beyond mere distrust thus encouraging its continuation and shaping its nature.  An example of this can be found in the nuclear arms race.  The shock experienced by the U.S government when discovering Russia’s nuclear capabilities was reacted to by accumulation of more weapons.  And so it went on.    

Had the U.S cooperated with Russia in the development of nuclear weapons the Cold War may not have escalated and furthermore, there may not have been an increase of the deep mistrust that characterized much of the Cold War.  Nuclear Weapons therefore also shaped the cold war in terms of the sentiments that were maintained as a result of their existence.  

Most importantly however is the preventative aspect of the nuclear threat, which is why the ‘Cold War’ is known as being ‘Cold’ as opposed to a ‘hot’ active conflict.  With the opposed superpowers both in possession of weapons of mass destruction, the opportunity for direct conflict was severely limited.  This is why the conflict between the two powers was never a direct one but one fought through proxy in their spheres of influence.

.  

Instead the Cold war was fought through a series of proxy wars in other areas of the world, such as the Korean and Vietnam wars.  The closest the world came to nuclear war or to being ‘hot’ was during the Cuban Missile Crisis but negotiation and compromise ensured that Armageddon did not take place in 1962.  This was because both powers were aware of each other’s retaliatory capability and any attack would therefore effectively constitute suicide.  

The concept of Mutually Assured Destruction is used to explain this argument. MAD is the condition in which both of the superpowers possess the means to destroy their enemy even after any attack by the other.  Both Krushchev and Truman agreed that nuclear weapons had their uses.  Neither one desired a nuclear war, yet it was understood that the best way of preventing one was further accumulation.

A number of instances that may have resulted in conflict were therefore overlooked in order to prevent all out war.  The invasion of Hungary by the soviet forces in 1956 and the response of non-intervention from the U.S are indicative of this approach.  Eisenhower remarked at the time that it was ‘a bitter pill for us to swallow…but what can we do that is really constructive?’

Therefore it can be argued that nuclear weapons shaped the Cold war from the outset in that they limited the choices that each superpower could take.  Because of the fear of nuclear war and the knowledge of the destruction that would ensue, world leaders acted with previously unknown restraint. "One deters another party from doing something by the implicit or explicit threat of applying some sanction if the forbidden act is performed."

The existence of nuclear weapons prevented the war becoming a war in the traditional sense, ie becoming ‘hot’. This one factor had an immense impact on the shape of the war as the fear of what could happen was so strong that it can be considered the main factor in my opinion, restricting what could and could not happen. In addition, the fact that tensions were at their highest when the nuclear threat was most likely shows that nuclear weapons defined the nature of the cold war more than any other single factor. All the other factors that I have mentioned, the impact of ideology on the conflict, the individual personalites of each leader, the length of the conflict, and the bipolar structure were also extremely integral to the shape of the war. However the overriding fear that the existence of nuclear weapons produced, was in my opinion the key factor that shaped the conflict and ensured the ‘cold war’ stayed ‘cold’.

---