international retaliations midterm

what is a theory

historically and culturally constructed
- how we view the world and the possibility for questions to ask and assumptions we make
- ideology or prediction what might happen by looking into the past

where does theory come from

past experience or collective material

realism

Thomas Hobbes
- end of feudalism, power struggles, English civil war, super bloody, he lived through all of this.
He believed that human nature is war and humans are self-interested. The only way to stop this is with a powerful leader otherwise without a leader people are short and brutish
- world war 1 and 2 made people abandon the idea

feudalism

people are slaves, people were not valued and there were too many people.
- the black death broke up the system and killed many people. The cost of work rose and broke feudalism. People then got autonomy and enlightenment. People were equal and had a say

mercantilism

nations in a race for a finite amount of wealth to protect themselves from neighbors. There is only so much wealth the world and the country with the most wealth will win and control the wealth

liberalism

John Locke
This comes from the enlightenment
- humans want control of life, anatomy, property
humans will enter a social contract: make security by giving up some things to avoid war

constructivism

born from failures of realism and liberalism. It said that those too were too simplistic and it will not bring peace because liberalism and realism are useful but cannot solve all problems because humans are self-interested and might not want to get into social contracts. Culture matters

Marxism

economic class is more important. by Carl Marx from Germany
- the working class will rebel against elites
- the working class will win in a which is a socialist utopia
- Russian revolution comes from this theory but it fails
- impractical
- materialism : manipulate the material world from geography

dependency theory

core and periphery, first world and third world. the peripheries have lots of wealth that the core wants. An example would be the congo remains poor because the first world takes all the third world's wealth.
Second world can be seen as not as industrial advanced but might still take from third world (China, Mexico)

feminism

patriarchy as central organizing reality and women are left out and not represented in international relations

three views of the roles of morality

skeptics, state moralist, and cosmopolitans

skeptics

moral categories have no meaning in international relations
- there are no moral rights and duties
The basic premise of international skepticism is that states are selfish actors and when necessary, a state should act in its self-interested over any moral proclamation. This belief is derived from the ancient belief that humans are naturally evil, evolving into the more modern form stating that humans are naturally selfish actors.

state moralist

rests on a society of states with certain rules though those rules are not always perfectly obeyed.
believe that everyone must respect state sovereignty and territorial integrity. - let people of own state resolve own issues, thus providing political arena where various individuals/groups have the ability to work out issues.

cosmopolitans

that individuals have a set of universal human rights.
all people are entitled to equal respect and consideration, no matter what their citizenship status or other affiliations happen to be.

state

the state is a territory or sovereignty
- a system of anarch states
- like the united states

sovergnty

right to govern territory and keep authority of state

nation

imagined community
self-determination: people decide
- ethnicity culture, region, share valued, language
a group of individuals who feel that they have so much in common (interests, habits, ways of thinking, and the like) that they should all become a particular state. Unlike the term state, the term nation refers to the subjective feelings of its people.

nation state

all the same race
- japan, korea

power

power to make other people do what you want
actor: people with power. states

hard power

military or missile strikes

soft power

relies on generosity and empowerment rather than harm and manipulation. It depends upon empathy, compassion and respect." Respect is a reciprocal process: To earn the respect of others, you must respect their wishes and priorities
- mickey mouse

authority

moral and judicial empirical or legitimacy to speak on issues. The US can speak on democracy. they have a reputation to speak on something

international system

identify the political system. anarch but not chaotic it creates stability and crisis stability

unipolar systems

one country enjoys great power and can effectively set the terms of international cooperation and enforce or elicit compliance

bipolar system

two countries of similar power enjoy primacy within their particular sphere or among states aligned with them (lesser powers)
- Bipolarity is a system of international order in which two competing powers control the global economic, military, and political relations as the other states choose to ally with one of them. In this system, the international order is based on the rivalry and conflict between the two superpowers. The Cold War era, when global affairs were shaped according to the dynamics between US and USSR, is a commonly used example of a bipolar system. Kenneth Waltz emphasizes the durability and stability of a bipolar system by saying that “Unbalanced power, whoever wields it, is a potential danger to others” (Waltz, 2000, p.28). During the Cold War, the actions and alliances of the US and USSR balanced each other in terms of their ability to influence, therefore, imposing restrictions on the motives of one another and the remaining states.

multipolar systems

three or more countries wield an unusual degree of power. strongest country within unipolar system
power distribution in which more than two equally powerful states contend for dominance. In this system, states can adjust their relationship by their own will. Throughout history, the multipolar system was the most frequently occurring ones. The Concert of Europe from 1814 to 1914, in which the great powers of Europe managed to preserve the status quo. According to scholars such as Hans Morgenthau, multi-polar systems are more stable than other polarity forms, since the major powers can benefit power through alliances and small wars that do not directly challenge other powers

anarch stability

self-interested and state of war. all states act like self-interested because no higher power can be mediated. not chaotic because of morality and this creates stability

system stability

each state has morality to prevent each other from attacking each other. Said that democracies were better at this because people decide but that's not true

crisis stability

only outcome where everyone loses and takes actions off the table
Traditional definition of the crisis stability belongs to Schelling: the crisis is stable "if neither side has or perceives an incentive to use nuclear weapons first out of the fear that the other side is about to do so".

three levels of analysis

individual, state, and system

individual analysis

down to the single leader or president
focuses on people. People make decisions within nation states and therefore people make foreign policy. Scholars might look at the roles of different leaders. This level of analysis might explain World War II by examining the role of Hitler.

state level analysis

nations that are acting and guiding force is the state
nation-states as actors in a set of particular external conditions, and actors with particular internal characteristics (such as whether they are democracies or whether they are large or small) and considers their strategic and economic positions

systems level analysis

economic and military level
Finally, might we try to look at the global level, the big picture, and try to grasp wider ranging dynamics that emerge from the global economic ‘system’ to affect its various components, states, national economies, societies, individuals?
global warming

why do liberals think democracy can prevent war? What are the limits to their view?

Liberals believe that democracies don't fight each other, "democratic peace theory," because they would only go to war in self-defense. If no countries were the aggressor because they were all republics, then there would be no wars. Economic dependence is another reason why democracies don't fight each other because they need to trade with other nations and nations at war don't trade with each other. However, there are some exceptions such as the Spanish-American War. In conclusion, the view is limited because democracies will seek to bolster their economic and political standings and if necessary, they will resort to force or even war to do so.

Berlin Conference

1884
The goal was to carve up Africa and take control. This was a conference with all of Europe involved but Africans and the US were not there.
- The rules
end slave trade
free trade in Congo Basin and other areas
ship on Congo and Niger rivers
effective occupation: European troops and government structures
signatory powers: Europeans get to do this
the goal was to control the congo
King Leopold 11 evil evil man

imperialism

extending power and dominion or territorial acquisition and gaining political and economic control

age of exploration

Costal Africa, eastern Asia and middle Africa were hard to explore and everyone wanted to get into Africa

Cecil Rhodes

imperialist, businessman and politician who played a dominant role in southern Africa in the late 19th Century, driving the annexation of vast swathes of land. He founded the De Beers diamond firm which until recently controlled the global trade.

The Balance of Powers in 19th century

Russia and Great Britain were the highest powers.
- Russia was land rich but people were poor and kept putting pressure on the ottoman empire
- Ottoman Empire was known as the sick man of Europe and Great Britain held it back
- in a state of anticipating what another country will do and secret and public alliances. Creates a somewhat stable situation but falls apart
- Woodrow Wilson thought this was evil and it encouraged statesmen to treat countries like cheeses to be cut up for political convenience regardless of the concerns of their people. He also believed it causes wars
- people who like this practice say it produces stability but stability and peace are not the same
- not peaceful

Ottoman Empire

always at war with Russia and Russia was still using slavery

Otto Von Bismarck

Chancellor of Germany
- understands power and balance of powers
- leads Germany at expense of their neighbors and invades France
- Austria Hungary were alliances with them
- Germany is land locked and needed more recourses

Turn to Africa

There were technological advances such as quinine which helped fight against malaria so European people wouldn't die from that illness.
- missionaries
it was a race to get land and lead to conflict

the outbreak/start of the great war in Europe (World War 1)

19th century, America got involved later on
- nationalism created traction in this war: rooted in the love for one's nation. Nationalism all over Europe and France.
- lingering conflicts over land, recourses, ethnic identity
- conflicts over imperial holdings such as Africa. Italy wanted holdings

The German Question

between Russia and France. Landlocked and with no warm seas they must push out boundaries to maintain trade and it will fail if it doesn't push boundaries

The assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand

Serbia, 1914
he visits Serbia and they plot an assassination on him. He kept changing routes but gets shot in his car
A month after the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand and his wife Sophie on July 28, 1914, the Austro-Hungarian government declares war on Serbia. Immediately, and within a period of six days, European countries declare war upon one another

Allied powers

The military alliance that fought against the Central Powers was known as the Allies. Initially this alliance was based around the four great powers of Russia, France, Japan and the British Empire, along with the smaller states of Serbia, Montenegro and Belgium that also went to war in 1914.
- Over 30 nations declared war between 1914 and 1918. The majority joined on the side of the Allies, including Serbia, Russia, France, Britain, Italy and the United States. They were opposed by Germany, Austria-Hungary, Bulgaria and the Ottoman Empire, who together formed the Central Powers.

Japan

had to industrialize and make the military intense and use modern weapons
- in 1904 Russia was pushing in on Japan and Japan fought against them and won. Japan then started to colonize and took over and became ruthless

When America enters World War 1

US enters in 1917 three years after most countries and war ends in 1918
- Germany was attacking US ships to bring them into the war or trying to scare them. Once they attack the Lusitania and the Zimmerman The telegram was considered perhaps Britain's greatest intelligence coup of World War I and, coupled with American outrage over Germany's resumption of unrestricted submarine warfare, was the tipping point persuading the U.S. to join the war.

horrors of great war

Germany acted aggressively and hoped for a quick war and said they would be home by Christmas. They wanted to attack France and France wants revenge
- In this war they started fighting with trenches that mirrored each other. Sometimes they would throw things at each other and sit there and wait. No mans land. Sometimes they would push or fall back and only move a couple of miles. Machine guns, mustard gas, tanks, airplanes, and submarines were all involved

impacts of world war 1

Russia takes the most casualties and is already unstable. Slavery ended but people are super poor.
- Germany still had a king and the conditions were bad so people rose up and started the Germany revolution. New German state and moved to end the war after this and people were staring.
- military causalities: 9 million killed, 7 mil disabled, 15 mil seriously injured
- civilian casualties: 11 mil die due to famine and diseases
- Germany lost 15% of its active male population, France 11%, Austria Hungary 17.1%

Russian revolution during WW1

this was a civil war because they did not want to be in a war. The monarch was out of touch with the people. People starving had high inflation, and organize a revolution to end the monarchy. They kill the royal family and declare the soviet union
- out of war after soviet union
- anti monarchs
- millions of people die
- Marxism

end of the so-called war to end all wars

Armistice, November 11, 1918 Berlin wall also fell
- Paris peace conference of Jan-June 1919
6 months and everyone all lived in Paris and Woodrow Wilson was progressive and stayed there

Treaty of Versailles

Wilsons 14 points:
1. new countries based on self-determination and to end all empires. Creates the 1Baltics and the middle east.
2. Reduces army and freedom of the sea. No secret treaties and mediation of colonial claims
3. league of nations
this means:
no self-determination for colonies. only whites
Germany was held responsible for the war. Cannot rebuild and becomes crippled with debt and the economy fails.
the Big Four met in Paris to negotiate the Treaty: Lloyd George of Britain, Vittorio Emanuele Orlando of Italy, Georges Clemenceau of France, and Woodrow Wilson of the U.S. The Paris Peace Conference was an international meeting convened in January 1919 at Versailles just outside Paris.

was WW1 inevitable

No it wasn't. No war or its length is inevitable. It could have been prevented by social democrats coming to power in Germany, no assassination in Sarajevo, more flexibility in alliances between the triple entente and the triple alliance, less complacency of peace, and better leadership.

collective security

work together to keep peace WW2
- the balance of powers had failed and was undermined by secret treaties.
- diffuse nationalism but didn't apply to victors of the colonies
- unchecked arms race created an explosive situation and everyone has a powerful military

league of nations

an international organization formed in 1920 to promote cooperation and peace among nations; although suggested by Woodrow Wilson
- solution to failures of the balance of powers.
- non aggressive states ban together to offset and overwhelm aggressive states' military
PRINCIPLES:
1) aggression on neighbors' illegal
2) non-aggressive states pledge to aid any state that is a victim
3) if fail all states will attack the aggressor state
- Great Britain, France, Italy, and Japan
- Britain entered LN to secure trade and no war
- France wanted Germany dismantled and as weak as possible
- Italy wanted anything they could get

collective security vs balance of powers

1) in collective, emphasis on aggressive policies of state vs capacity to maintain power
2) collective dynamic not created in advance and maintained to adapt to aggressors
3) collective security designed to be global and universal. no neutrals or free riders

covenent of league of nations

article 10: protect all members
11: any war or threat of war is concerned for all states
12: states must dispute and wait to go to war until three months if attributions failed
16: the war that ignores LN procedures would be declaration of war to all LN members

each state had a veto to LN

countries will not give up enough power
state sovereignty remained supreme
members not bound by a higher authority

The US and LN

Wilson focused on international affairs and neglected at home affairs.
Republicans take house and senate in 1918 and Wilson cannot get things through congress. For six months he leaves to work on LN and the treaty of Versailles. He abandoned US politics

opposition to the LN

The Republican party is concerned with US autonomy and congressional authority. Wilson then gives up on republicans and tries to get citizens' approval to ratify and become LN
- US never joined LN and never signs the treaty of Versailles.
- The US was worried they would not be able to say no to war
- Russia is not a part of any of this

Treaty of Locarno 1925

Germany was allowed to enter the league of nations and guaranteed western borders with Poland and Czechoslovakia

Germany before WW2

Germany cannot pay back the money and the economy is crippled.
- suffers more per capita
- humiliated
- Roosevelt forgives the debt
- Great Britain forgives but France doesn't want to
- Germany is now in hyperinflation
- Germany in the great depression and people are starving
- France ends up forgiving if Germany is demilitarized by France

Kellogg-Briand pact

world peace and no war ever again
In light of the casualties that resulted from World War I, Secretary of State Frank B. Kellogg and French Foreign Minister Aristide Briand crafted the Kellogg-Briand Peace Pact. This international peace proposal committed 15 nations to outlaw aggression and war in settling disputes.

league limits in Manchuria

Japan invaded Manchuria China in 1931
- LN finds Japan an aggressor in 1933 and rather than comply, Japan withdraws from LN
- Japan doesn't have a lot of rubber or oil and they must trade or conquer to succeed. Manchuria has recourses they need
- Japan believes they are superior, especially after the war with Russia
- China is already in a civil war and Manchurians endure 14 years of brutality Japan acted like genocide and LN did nothing about it. It remained occupied by Japanese until WW2

league limits with Ethiopia

Italy invades Ethiopia in 1935
- Italy was clearly the aggressor
-LN prohibits trade and tries to cripple Italy's economy yet they let them buy stele and coal and oil to keep diplomatic relations
- Britain keeps canal open for Italy
- Hitler is in power now and they believe if they isolate Italy they will team up with Germany

March 1936

Hitler violates the Locarno treaty and collective security fails

Europe in WW2

- D-day (Normandy France) June 6,1944 brought together the land, air, and sea forces of the allied armies in what became known as the largest invasion force in human history. The operation, given the codename OVERLORD, delivered five naval assault divisions to the beaches of Normandy, France
- battle of the bulge in winter (1944-1945) dense forests and Hitler makes one last big attempt to keep power and they lose
- Yalta Conference: 1945, post-war. Stalin asks to end the war quick as possible and US and Britain said no. They wanted Germany and Japan to surrender completely

Germany surrenders what year?

May 8, 1945
- This is when the allies see the holocaust in person and the torture and death camps. They liberate the camps

Potsdam Conference

Stalin knew about the atomic bomb. Truman knew once he became the president of US but didn't know as vice president.
- The Big Three—Soviet leader Joseph Stalin, British Prime Minister Winston Churchill (replaced on July 26 by Prime Minister Clement Attlee), and U.S. President Harry Truman—met in Potsdam, Germany, from July 17 to August 2, 1945, to negotiate terms for the end of World War II

Atomic Bomb

August 6, 1945 bomb dropped on Hiroshima and August 9 was on Nagasaki
- over 100,000 people died
-On August 14 Japan surrendered and war is done

Bipolar world

US emerges as a world power
- break up European empires and India, Korea, and Vietnam declare independence
- democracy/communism
- Iron Curtain, the political, military, and ideological barrier erected by the Soviet Union after World War II to seal off itself and its dependent eastern and central European allies from open contact with the West and other noncommunist areas.

post-war reconstruction-Marshall Plan

1945
named for Secretary of State George Marshall, who in 1947 proposed that the United States provide economic assistance to restore the economic infrastructure of postwar Europe.
- offers to rebuild soviet union buy they refuse to take it

post-war reconstruction- Molotov Plan

1947
Soviet union rebuilds countries on their border and makes them adopt their politics such as communism.
- satalities controlled by soviet union

Berlin Crisis

1948-1949
divided up Germany into four different sectors ran by different powers. Berlin was into four sectors for soviet union and the other three sectors all come together. The Soviet Union doesn't like this and threatened to shut down Berlin. They close off Berlin and barricade it so there is no food, money, or info. People were stuck inside and made it Soviet territory.
- the US wanted them to know they cannot do this
- Great Britain and US send food to a part of Berlin and the Soviet Union does not stop it but tensions are high.
- there was no travel

Hitlers options to power

1. passivity- accepting Germany's weakened international position and he could have tried enrichment through economic growth and led Germany to international influence through industrial expansion. He could have revisited the Treaty of Versailles and regained Germany's losses. The last option was to choose the expansion strategy and break out of Germanys' containment

Phases of Expansion Strategy

- Hitler destroyed the Versailles framework. Germany withdrew from the Leage of Nations and blamed it on the French. Signed a treaty with Poland. He then says he will triple Germany's economy.
- the second phase was to expand into small countries neighboring Germany

Role of the Individual in WW2

obsessive personality lead him to want more and more and his racist tendencies even made him think Slavs were inferior so he lost an ally.

Structural level of WW2

Treaty of Versailles blaming Germany and the growth of fascism and communism.

What lessons of WW1 did policy makers draw at the time? How did those lessons affect their behavior in the interwar period?

They believed that the balance of power was not working so they switched to collective security in the League of Nations. The interwar period was affected by a want for too much peace that lead to complacency and boom Hitler's rise of power.

How did the concept of collective security differ from balance-of-power politics? Is the notion of collective security utopian? If not, how might collective security have worked better during the interwar period?

Collective security is different because it gives equal power and support to all nations of every size, coalitions and alliances were not to be formed in advance because it was not known who would be the aggressor, and once an aggressor strikes, all states put bans on them. It was designed to be global and universal, with no neutrals or free rides. It was not a utopia because states would only give up some sovereignty for protection in return. It would have worked better to maintain peace in the interwar period because everyone is equal and there is not balancing of power that needs to be done. Also, if Germany were to rise, every state would ban them and join against them.

Was WW2 inevitable? If so, why and when? If not, when and how could it have been avoided?

No, but it seemed very likely as time passed. It could have been prevented if countries like Britain had not appeased Germany. The two WW needed to be switched around in their handling. WW1, Germany should have been appeased, and WW2, Germany should have been fought.
- The great depression led to Hitler's power and the funnel of choices narrowed until the war became Global.

To what extent can the outbreak of WW2 be attributed to the personalities of the leaders involved?

WW2 was greatly Hitler's doing. He was smart enough to play on Western democracies guilty, weak, and internally divided states. He was skillful and bold enough to maneuver Germany through the second and third phases because he wanted war, even if some of his generals did not. He made two errors though: fighting the Soviets first and declaring war on the US. Also, his racism was a big part of his downfall because the people he hated could have been helping and contributing in numbers to his cause all along.

What might be some lessons from the interwar period that might help policy makers avoid war today?

To really pay attention to other countries and their leaders beliefs and personalities. To not base thought process and future strategies completely off of past wars, either victories or loses.

Was Japan irrational to attack the United States in 1941?

No because they saw that as their only option, the best way to die. They believed that the US had a noose around them and that their country's death would be slow and painful. So, in one last stand, they decided to attack the US and go out with a bang. It was not very well thought out because odds are the US would have helped them if they had reached out instead of lashed out.

What role should ethical considerations play in the conduct of international relations? What role do they play?

Less of role in international than domestic because:
Weak international consensus on values
States are not like individuals
Complexity of causation- hard to know outcomes and consequences
Institutions of international society are weak and disjunction between order and justice is greater (chaos of international makes it harder to preserve order that precedes justice)

How might authority be a source of power? Would it be a source of hard power or soft power?

Authority is more of a soft power because it is a state's right to do something while power is the ability to do something. It is a more justifiable cause than power because if it is within right, other countries may support you or even just allow it.

What is the relationship between system stability and crisis stability?

Crisis stability is the condition that exists when a leader feels pressured by emotion, uncertainty, miscalculation, or the posture of forces to strike first. The Cold war was stable because of crisis stability cuz imagine you and enemy are locked in a room tied together and covered in gasoline, neither of you want to strike the match first cuz both would be killed or injured so both would rather peace. MAD (mutual assured destruction) is highly crisis stable cuz no one wants to hurt someone if it may bounce back and hurt them as well. System stability= good social fabric of international society (good relationships and bonds), distributions of power

What are Waltz's 3 images? Can they be combined, if so how?

Individual- why people do what they do, prisoner's dilemma
State- what happens within an individual state (Marxism and liberalism emphasize this level)
International system- interactions between actors and states

Why were the leaders unable to restore a nineteenth-century-style Concert system aster WW2? What sort of system evolved?

Unable to because Europe was extremely weak after WW2, but Russia and US were both prospering. A pure bipolar system evolved.

Was the Cold War inevitable? Is so, why and when? If not, when and how could it have been avoided?

Bipolar- highly probable cuz intense ideological climate stopped work of UN, restricted communication, and roughened the international system. Role of ideology and exaggeration in domestic politics, Stalin used ideology because Soviets domestic problems after the war , and Truman exaggerated the nature of communist threat to rally support for changing US foreign policy. Could have been avoided if US had taken Kennan's advice and responded firmly in 1945-1947 and if US used more pragmatic negotiation and communication from 1947-1950.

How important were first and second-image considerations in the development of the Cold War? What were the views of US and European leaders on the Soviet Union and its international ambitions? What were Soviet views of the US and the rest of the West?

Systemic- Before WW2, Russia and US could avoid each other at a distance, but after 1945- they were face to face, Europe was divided. Neither could stay in "domain" cuz key states were located near peripheries of Soviet Union (Japan and Europe), and Europe and Japan allied with US = great importance.
State- Russian political culture emphasized absolutism instead of democracy, desired a strong leader, fear of anarchy, fear of invasion (geographically vulnerable land power that had been invaded by neighbors many times) worry/shame about backwardness (trying to prove they were vital to international relations), and secrecy (hide bad part of Russian life). US emphasized liberal democracy, pluralism, and fragmentation power, took pride in technology and expanding economy, had little fear of invasion cuz weak neighbors and separated from other major powers by two big oceans, government was not secretive and documents reached the press within days, stressed individual justice instead of class justice, foreign policy was moralistic and public and often appeared inconsistent and incoherent to public. The strength of openness and pluralism protected from bigger mistakes.
US could see everything that went in and came out but never inside Soviet Union, and the Soviets got so much chaos and white noise from America that it was difficult to hear true signals clearly (too many saying too many things = Soviets could not hear what America really wanted)

What is the difference between cooperation and coordination?

Cooperation is working together with a Kay component of not cheating, no free rides, and no defect. Must be arranged cuz does not come naturally.
Coordination is harmony and leaves everyone happy with the same preferences. Coordination requires cooperation

How do international organizations differ from domestic governmental agencies, ministries, or departments?

International organizations do not hold as much solid authority. The UN, NATO, and the European Union can not pass binding legislation whereas domestic politics can, only makes resolutions, not laws. Everyone is equal internationally with one vote, but that is not true because US and Russia are much bigger than the Maldives.

How do collective security, peacekeeping, and peacebuilding differ from one another?

Collective security is everyone goes against the aggressor, peacekeeping is that the UN sends in forces to not judge but hold back each side, and peace building is establishing United Nations Assistance Mission for Iraq (UNAMI) that advises, reforms, promotes dialogue (makes peace support operations for countries)

Soviet Union beginning of Cold War

the soviet union had a bomb way before they should have and they figure spies must have seen how America did it first. US and Soviet Union both very powerful

Containment

The US tried to contain communism but China soon fell to it and it continued to spread

mccarthyism

unscrupulously accusing people of disloyalty
tons of accusations and gat people were being targeted because they could be blackmailed and lots of people were outed. He kept accusing people and fell from grace after too many crazy accusations

atomic diplomacy

after 1949 the whole game changed and the US and Soviet Union built as many atomic bombs as possible. Dominant feature of cold war and never turns real

NATO

Formed in 1949 with the signing of the Washington Treaty, NATO is a security alliance of 30 countries from North America and Europe. NATO's fundamental goal is to safeguard the Allies' freedom and security by political and military means.