IBDP Cold War Test Notes
2/4/2025
Détente “2nd Cold War” The End
Reasons to Detente
Nuclear Parity
By 1969 USSR could match the nuclear arsenal of the United States
USSR could negotiate from a position of equality
Growing awareness of the dangers of a Nuclear war
USSR reasons for Détente
Economy was stagnating
Needed to transfer economic resources from production of armaments to production of consumer goods
Détente would allow for the possibility of being able to import new Western technologies
Sino-Soviet relations deteriorating, crucial for USSR to keep China isolated from the West, tried to do so by engaging the west more
USA reasons to Détente
Pursuit of realpolitik -- a system of politics or principles based on practical rather than moral or ideological considerations.
Nixon hopes to détente to get the USSR and China to put pressure on North Vietnam to end the war
Also hopes to deepen the USA’s global role through negotiation
John Mason, The Cold War (Routledge 1996) p. 51
“Henry Kissinger called for a “philosophical deepening” of American foreign policy. By this he meant adjusting to the charged international order. The Kennedy and Johnson Administations, Kissenger argued, had focused too much on victory in one rather isolated area – Vietnam – at the expense of the global balance of power. The world was shifting from a bipolar balance of power between Washington and Moscow to a multipolar balance shared among five great economic and strategic centers – The United States, the Soviet Union, Western Europe, Japan, and China.”
Henry Kissinger
Nixon’s national security advisor
Expert on international relations
Later was Secretary of State under Gerald Ford
Traveled around the globe establishing contacts with the leaders of different countries
Skilled negotiator, played a key role in negotiating the end of the Vietnam War, worked on Arab-Israeli peace negotiations 1973-1978 and set up key meetings for Nixon with USSR and China as part of Détente
Controversial Nobel Peace prize in 1973 for Vietnam negotiations
Negotiated the Strategic Arms Limitation Talks and the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty with Leonid Brezhnev, General Secretary of the Soviet Communist Party
Improved East-West Relations in Europe
Pressure to Détente from Europe
Political Instability
Soviet Invasion of Czechloslavakia
Operation Danube, was a joint invasion of Czechoslovakia by five Warsaw Pact nations – the Soviet Union, Bulgaria, Hungary, East Germany and Poland – on the night of 20–21 August 1968.
Approximately 250,000 Warsaw pact troops attacked Czechoslovakia that night, with Romania and Albania refusing to participate. East German forces, except for a small number of specialists, did not participate in the invasion because they were ordered from Moscow not to cross the Czechoslovak border just hours before the invasion. 137 Czechoslovakian civilians were killed and 500 seriously wounded during the occupation.
The invasion successfully stopped Alexander Dubček's Prague Spring liberalisation reforms and strengthened the authority of the authoritarian wing within the Communist Party of Czechoslovakia (KSČ). The foreign policy of the Soviet Union during this era was known as the Brezhnev Doctrine.
Student riots and strikes in France, undermining president Charles De Gaulle
Strike against capitalism, American Imperialism, consumerism.
Lead by students, eventually spread to factories, at one point 11 million works (roughly 25% of the population of France) went on strike
Willy Brandt
Chancellor of West Germany
Pushed for improved relations between East and West Germany
Believed Europe would benefit from reduced tensions
Policy of encouraging channels of communication between the two Germanys: Ostopolitik
Successes of Detente
SALT I
Strategic Arms Limitations Treaty
1972
Areas Covered:
ABM (anti-ballistic Missiles) Treaty: ABMs were allowed at only two sites – and each site was to contain no more than 100 missiles
This was key to ensuring the continued emphasis on mutually assured destruction, thus the deterrence of war
If defenses were allowed, then one or both superpowers might believe that they stood a chance of using nuclear weapons and this would take away the stability that came from Mutually Assured Destruction
This also keeps the Cold War going longer for so long, the arms race exchanged destruction for duration
Interim Treaty: Placed limits on the number of ICBM (inter-continental ballistic missiles) and SLBMs (submarine-launched ballistic missiles)
Basic Principles Agreement: This laid down rules for the conduct of nuclear war and development of nuclear weapons, and committed the two sides to work together to prevent conflict and promote more peaceful co-existence
Followed by 1973 Agreement on the Prevention of Nuclear War
if a nuclear conflict looked imminent, both sides would immediately enter into urgent consultations with each other and make every effort to avert this risk
John Mason: SALT I began a process of institutionalized arms control
Confirmed the USSR parity with the United States
Reduced tension between the two nuclear powers
Nixon would make visits to Moscow in 1972 and 1974
Brezhnev would visit Washington in 1973
Criticism of SALT I
Did not go far enough in limiting nuclear weapons
Did not mention MIRVs (multiple independently targeted re-entry Vehicles)
Stephen Ambrose: this omission “made the treaty as meaningful as freezing calvary of European countries in 1938, but not the tanks.” (Rise to Globalism p. 231)
Salt II
1979
Limited the number of strategic nuclear delivery vehicles for each side (ICBMs, SLBMs, and heavy bombers)
Ban on the testing or deployment of new types of ICBMs, heavy mobile ICBMs and rapid reload systems
This was the most extensive and complicated arms agreement ever negotiated
However by the time it was signed, both Democrats and Republicans were criticizing the arms control process as one that accomplished little and which gave advantages to the Soviets
NEVER ratified by the US Senate
Agreements between the Two Germanys and the Soviet Union
Moscow Treaty 1970: Recognized the border between East and West Germany and formalized the border in the East with Poland
Final Quadripartite Protocol 1972: Major victory for Willy Brandt, confirmed that West Germany had a legal basis for access routes to West Berlin – giving West Berlin a greater degree of security
Basic Treaty 1972: Accepted the existence of two Germanys
Agreed to increase trade between countries
Agreements Between the US and China
The USA dropped its objections to China taking a seat at the UN Security Council
China (PRC) replaces Taiwan
Trade and travel restrictions between the two countries were lifted
Sporting events between the two countries took place: most famous is the US table tennis team visiting Beijing (ping-pong diplomacy)
Nixon Visited China: first American president to do so
Triangular Diplomacy between US, China, and USSR
High Point of Détente: Helsinki Agreement
Nixon agrees to participate in European Security Conference in Helsinki in 1973 while in Moscow in 1972
33 countries attended and produced a final agreement, the Final Act on August 1st 1975
The “Three Baskets”
Basket 1: Security. Recognized that Europe’s frontiers were inviolable: they could not be altered by force. This means East and West Germany was on both sides
Basket 2: This was the co-operation basket. It called for closer ties and collaboration in economic, scientific, and cultural fields.
Basket 3: This was the humans rights basket. All of the signatories agreed to respect human rights and individual freedoms, such as freedom of thought, conscience, or religion, and freedom of travel.
Soviet attitude towards humans rights made basket 3 the most controversial.
West hoped it would undermine Soviet Control in the satellite states and set up organizations to monitor Soviet control in the satellite states.
Brezhnev signed it anyway
Political Factors that Undermined Detente
Many in the United States felt that the arms agreements were benefitting the Soviet Union
Actions in the Middle East and Africa seemed to indicate that the Soviets were continuing to expand its influence
Yom Kippur War: USA suspected that the Soviets had known in advance about Egypt’s surprise attack on Israel. There had been an agreement between USA and USSR to inform each other about conflict that might threaten world peace.
Damages trust that was building between countries
Popular Movement for the Liberation of Angola (MPLA)
Soviet Union is involved in the Civil War in Angola military aid
Along with Cuban aid, key to success of MPLA
Soviets and Cubans were also involved in supporting Ethiopia against Somalia in 1977
Soviets seem to still be backing many Marxist rebels
Belief that that Soviets would actually follow Basket 3
Jimmy Carter began the policy of linking economic deals to improving human rights
Political Factors that Undermined Detente
Critics of Détente within the Soviet Union
When Israel struck back in the 1973 war, trapping Egypt’s army, Soviets tried to negotiate a solution with the US within a détente framework by using the UN Security Council to agree to a joint ceasefire.
Israelis ignored this, and Soviets were unable to get the United States to force Israel to abide
Soviet concerns over the US backing anti-communist governments in the third world: Chile is a big example.
Economic Factors that Undermined Detente
In the 1960s, both countries viewed Détente as a way to benefit their respective economies
US economy recovers in the late 1970s, giving the US less incentive to pursue détente
OPEC (Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries) launch an embargo against Israel’s allies in Yom Kippur War
Western economies took measures to make their economies more secure
G7 – group of the main world economies – work at creating economic stability at the international level
Between 1974 and 1978 the price of oil stabilizes, removing US economic pressure to détente
USSR was experiencing decline
Inefficiencies of central planning and a rise in interest rates had a disastrous effect on the economy of the Soviet Union – growth rate falls to only 3%
Jackson-Vanik Amendment passed by Congress in 1974 placed significant trade restrictions on US-Soviet trade
Carter Doctrine
Soviets invade Afghanistan
Carter refuses to approve SALT II
Stopped all electronic exports to USSR
Forbid US athletes from competing in the 1980 Moscow Olympics
Carter Doctrine: US will intervene if USSR threatened Western interests in the Persian Gulf
Historiography of Detente
Posts Revisionists: stress the positive achievements of Détente in terms of reducing tension and the threat of Nuclear War
Détente was a necessary strategy to deal with the international situation and to find out methods of managing competition in a way which prevent them from degenerating into hostilities.
John Lewis Gaddis: to call détente a failure is to misunderstand what détente was about in the first place: it was not intended to end the arms race, to reform the Soviet Union internally in the area of human rights, or to prevent Soviet-American rivalry in the developing world. It was intended to turn a dangerous situation into a predictable systems
Right wing historians interpret détente as a weak policy that allowed the Soviet Union to continue to strengthen itself and gain access to Western technology at the expense of American interests.
Hardline policies of US in 1980s had forced collapse of Soviet Union, Détente had propped them Up
The Second Cold War: Reagan
Tough Anti-Soviet policy
Defense spending was increased by 13% in 1982 and over 8% in each of the following two years, largest peacetime build up in history
Strategic Defense Initiative (Star Wars) was announced in 1983. Research program for setting up a space-based laser system that would intercept and strike Soviet Missiles. This undermined MAD
Reagan Doctrine was announced: Gave assistance to anti-communist insurgents as well as anti-communist governments: Contras
Right winged military group fighting against the left-wing government of the Sandinistas in Nicaragua. USA also supports an unpopular right wing government in El Salvador, US invades Grenada, and aid was stepped up for the Mujahidin in Afghanistan
US deployed Intermediate Range Missiles (IRMs) in Western Europe to counter the Soviet SS-20s
Reagan restricted trade with the Soviet Union, limiting Soviet access to US technology and oil/gas
Aggressive language: Evil Empire, the focus of Evil in the modern world.
Impact of Mikhail Gorbachev
“We can’t go on living like this”
Focus in USSR was on producing military hardware, rather than housing, transport, food, consumer goods, and healthcare
Perestroika: restricting the economy
Glasnost: openness – every area of the regime should be open to public scrutiny
Democratization with more people involved in the Communist party
Military spending would have to be reduced, no way to match USA SDI system
Abandoning of the arms race
“He called for a new thinking in international affairs, and he said that there could be “no winners” in a nuclear war. Gorbachev declared the world to be interdependent and likened all its people to climbers roped together on a mountainside”
John Mason, The Cold War p. 62
Chernobyl Disaster
Explosion that destroyed a nuclear reactor at the Chernobyl power plant in Ukraine
Heightened sense of danger of nuclear power
Zero Option
Eliminate all intermediate range missiles in Europe
Geneva Summit: November 1985
No substantial progress was mad but the two leaders established a personal rapport
Reykjavik Summit Octboer 1986
Talks ended without agreement, mainly because of the disagreement over the SDI. Talks covered the most sweeping arms control proposals in history, Gorbachev declared it had been an intellectual breakthrough in relations between the US and USSR
Washington Summit, December 1987: At this summit, agreement was reached, Intermediate-Range Nuclear force treaty
Moscow Summit, May 1988: arms reductions negotiations continued, but no agreement. Reagan, standing in Red Square, confessed he no longer believed in the “evil empire.”
Role Of Reagan
Gorbachev’s willingness to tackle the issue of nuclear weapons and doing business with the West were key to explaining the breakdown of the Cold War
Many Historians also give Reagan a lot of credit for ending the Cold War as well – historians know as the Reagan victory school
“As former pentagon officials like Caspar Weinberger and Richard Perle… and other proponents of the Reagan victory school have argued, a combination of military and ideological pressure gave the Soviets little choice but to abandon expansionism abroad and repression at home. In their view, the Reagan military build-up foreclosed Soviet military operations while pushing the Soviet economy to the breaking point. Reagan partisans stress that his dramatic Start Wars initiative put the Soviets on notice that the next phase of the arms race would be waged in areas where the West held a decisive technological edge.”
Reagan Victory School
“The Jimmy Carter– Cyrus Vance approach of rewarding the Soviet build up with one-sided arms controls treaties, opening Moscow’s access to Western capital markets and technologies, and condoning Soviet imperial expansion was perfectly designed to preserve the Brezhnev-style approach, delivering the Soviets from any need to re-evaluate (as they did undere Gorbachev) or change their policies. Had the Carter-Vance approach been continued… the Cold War and the life of the Soviet Union would almost certainly have been prolonged.”
Patrick Glynn, letter to the editor, Foreign Policy 90 (Spring 1993) pp. 171-173
Other Historians claim that Reagan plays an important role, but believe that his role was more connected to his views on eliminating nuclear weapons, which helped at the different summits to convince Gorbachev of the possibilities of halting the nuclear arms race.
“To his great credit, Reagan proved willing first to moderate, and then to abandon, deeply held personal convictions about the malignant nature of Communism, thereby permitting a genuine rapprochement to occur.”
RJ McMahon, The Cold War: A Very Short Introduction p.162
Long Term Factors in Ending the Cold War: Soviet Economy
Under Brezhnev, the Soviets spent even more resources on foreign policy
Achieved parity with the USA in the nuclear field, and in some areas, surpassed it.
High price to pay – 25% of GDP was being spent on military by mid 1980s
USA was spending 4-6%
Imperial ambitions were costly – Afghanistan and Africa cost billions of dollars
Cuba received $4 Billion in aid and subsidies
Vietnam: 6 billion
Members of the Warsaw pact got 3 billion in oil subsidies
Brezhnev era is known for stagnation and decline
Falling behind on technology and industrial output was declining
A large portion of agricultural workers lived below the poverty line
Grain was imported from North America
Workers had little incentive to work hard or produce better goods
Labor moral low: high absenteeism, and chronic alcoholism
Between 1967 and 1980, the annual growth rate for Soviet Industrial output declined 5.2% to 2%
Thus it could be argued that Gorbachev was forced to act regardless of the actions of the West
Impact of Gorbachev’s Reforms: Economic
The collapse of the Soviet Union – though unintentional.
Economic reforms that encouraged private ownership led to chaos
The Law of Co-Operatives of 1987 permitted private ownership of business in service, manufacturing, and foreign trade. Workers were allowed to leave collective farms
No effective system set up to cope with a market economy
Economic growth by 1991 dropped to -15%
Impact of Gorbachev: Glasnost
Glasnost: Openness and discussion – leads to a floodgate of criticism
“What no one understood, at the beginning of 1989, was that the Soviet Union, its empire, its ideology – and therefore the Cold War itself – was a sand pile ready to slide. All it took to happen was a few more grains of sand. The people who dropped them were not in charge of superpowers or movements or religions: they were ordinary people with simple priorities who saw, seized, and sometimes stumbled into opportunities. In doing so they caused a collapse no one could stop.”
John Lewis Gaddis The Cold War p. 238
Late 1980s – resurgence in Nationalist movements began to develop in most satellite states
Deterioration of living standards.
Consumer goods in short supply, along with food, clothes, and housing.
Areas like Czechoslovakia could see images of capitalist Western Europe and it looked superior
Resurgence of Nationalism
Growing disillusion with the Communist Party
Shown itself to be corrupt, leaders more interested in self preservation than making life better for workers
Repressive police networks
Implications of Glasnost and Perestroika – Gorbachev wouldn’t use force to maintain control over satellites
Speech to UN in 1988 – Soviets would cut 500,000 troops from their commitment to the Warsaw Pact.
“It is obvious that force and the threat of force cannot be and should not be an instrument of foreign policy… Freedom of choice … is a universal principle and it should know no exceptions” – Gorbachev
Brezhnev doctrine would no longer be applied, satellite states could determine their own internal affairs
The Events of 1989
Soviet Union began to collapse in May 1989 – Hungarian Prime minister Miklos Nemeth decided that his government could no longer afford to maintain the automatized border control along the Austrian border.
Gave an escape route for East Germans, thousands crossed into Austria to get to West Germany
Poland
Union Movement called Solidarity had been suppressed in 1981 by General Jaruzelski
Martial Law
Legalized Solidarity in 1988
Free elections, Jaruzelski is remained president, but Lech Walsea became prime minister
Communist Party is defeated, Gorbachev does not intervene, Polish Communist Party collapses
East Germany
Erich Honecker, hardline Communist, had been the leader of East Germany since 1971
Stasi – secret police
Kept files on 5.5 million people!
Hoped to consolidate Communist control in East Germany during 40th anniversary of East Germany
People were critical of harsh East German system, openly demanded reforms
Mass Exodus of East Germans – one day alone 125000 people left
November 9th 1989 government announces easing of travel and emigration restrictions
People flood to border checkpoints
Free elections held in 1990, parties in favor of unification won a majority of seats, country reunified on October 3rd 1990
Elsewhere
Hungary – reform came from Hungarian Communist party itself, hardliners were disposed of and reforms took place
Free elections in 1990
Czechoslovakia
Velvet Revolution
Little violence, people are the driving force. Civic Forum leads campaign
Vaclav Havel (an actor), was elected by the federal parliament. USSR does not intervene remembering illegal 1968 intervention
Romania
Nicolae Ceausecu – repressive and violent leader
Uprising in the country, Ceausecu tries to hold a rally, but the army refuses to stop demonstrators. He and his wife try to flee but they are arrested by the army and then executed.
The End of the USSR
Gorbachev gets a Nobel Peace prize in 1990.
Failure at home to bring about an improvement.
1991, communists hardliners try to revolt against Gorbachev, but this is defeated by Boris Yeltsin, who at this time is president.
Gorbachev is restored by Yeltsin but has lost all authority. He resigns in December 25th 1991
Commonwealth of Independent States was established, ending Soviet Union
1/31/2025
Sino-American Relations → China, the United States and the Cold War
Background
During WWII, the US had some direct contact with the Chinese Communist Party (CCP)
Given material assistance to fight the common enemy at the time: Japan
Much more aid went to Nationalist Guomindang Party (GMD)
Following Japanese surrender and withdrawal, these two sides fought each other in the Chinese Civil War
Despite the US giving material support and advice to the Nationalists, Mao and the CCP would come to power in 1949
Chiang Kai-shek (Jiang Jieshi) and the nationalists flee to Taiwan
US ensures that Nationalists on Taiwan and not Communists People’s Republic of China were initially given China’s seat at the UN
Taiwan becomes a major area of dispute, but this tension between the US and China is only starting
Hugh Brogan, on Early Sino-US Relations:
“ The Chinese looked at the Americans through the same sort of telescope as that which the Americans were pointing at them. They too seemed to be a self-confident aggressor power making the first moves in a campaign that, unless unchecked, might lead on to world conquest.”
The Pelican History of the United States of America pp. 625-626
USA is concerned with Chinese nuclear development in 1950s
1950s – Increasing Tension
Tibet 1950
Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) invades
Mao considers this to be a domestic issue – whereas much of the rest of the world (especially the West), viewed this as a foreign policy issue
Chinese perspective: consolidation of CCP control over the mainland and the reunification of former Chinese territories
Reality: Brutal suppression of the people of Tibet
US will condemn China for expansionism, and horrific bloodshed
Dalai Lama will flee, calls the actions of the Maoist regime to be considered a “cultural genocide”
Dalai Lama
spiritual leader of Tibetan Buddhism and the Tibetan people
The current Dalai Lama was exiled from Tibet in 1959 after a failed Tibetan uprising against the Chinese. He led the Tibetan government-in-exile for many years but since 2011 has passed his political authority to democratic institutions
Tibetan Buddhists believe that the Dalai Lamas are the manifestation of the Buddha of Compassion and are enlightened beings, who have chosen to take rebirth (reincarnation) in order to serve humanity. The first Dalai Lama was identified in the 15th century.
The current Dalai Lama, Tenzin Gyatso, was born on July 6th 1935 in Amdo, Tibet. He was recognised as the reincarnation of the 13th Dalai Lama when he was two years old. When China invaded Tibet in 1950, he was forced to assume political power although he was still a teenager.
After fleeing to India in 1959, the Dalai Lama became the highest-profile global advocate for Tibet and a highly respected religious and moral leader. He was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1989 and continues to travel the world giving teachings on spiritual and ethical issues.
The Dalai Lama’s institution (Gaden Phodrang Labrang) and senior Tibetan Buddhist lamas identify the reincarnation of the Dalai Lama according to Tibetan Buddhist practices and tradition. The process also includes testing candidates to see if they can identify belongings of the previous Dalai Lama. Traditionally the Panchen Lama (the second highest Lama in Tibet) would be an important part of this process. In 1995, Ghedhun Choekyi Nyima, who had been identified by the Dalai Lama as the new Panchen Lama, was abducted by China and replaced with its own candidate. The Beijing-approved Panchen Lama is rejected by almost all Tibetans.
The 14th Dalai Lama has said that that the next Dalai Lama may be a woman or born outside Tibet. He has also said that that he may not be reincarnated at all, and the line of Dalai Lamas could end with him. Despite being an officially atheist regime, China's Communist government has strongly rejected his position, claiming that the appointment of Dalai Lama’s is a matter for the government in Beijing. China's appointment of their own Panchen Lama is seen by many as an attempt to take control of the selection process for the next Dalai Lama when the time comes.
China and the Dalai Lama Today
China strongly criticizes the Dalai Lama both inside and outside Tibet. It accuses him of seeking to rule Tibet and being a “splittist” who seeks Tibetan independence. His image is banned inside Tibet and Tibetans may be jailed for calling for his long life or publicly praising him. In jail, as well as in religious institutions, Tibetans are frequently ordered to denounce the Dalai Lama.
The Dalai Lama has passed all political power in the exile Tibetan community to a democratically elected parliament and prime minister. While he continues to advocate for the preservation of Tibet’s religion, culture, language and environment, he does not support Tibetan independence and has proposed a Middle Way Approach, in which Tibet remains a part of the People’s Republic of China but has greater control of its own affairs.
Because of his profile and popularity, China objects strongly to political leaders from other nations meeting him. In recent years, senior figures in the governments of the UK, France, Germany, Norway and South Africa among others have avoided meeting the Dalai Lama, although US presidents have continued to receive him.
Sino – American Relations: Korean War 1950-53
US State Department believed the invasion by North Korea in 1950 is under the direction of Stalin and Mao
Believed this was a new joint venture by the new Asian Communist bloc
Reality: Mao is not a part of the planning
More concerned with Tibet
Soviet Union is boycotting the UN over the US’s refusal to recognize the PRC
Therefore no Veto on UN vote to send troops to Korea
Mao views the US to be the aggressors, not North Korea
Zhou Enlai, Chinese foreign Minister to the UN in November 1950
“The American aggressors have gone too far. After making a five-thousand-mile journey across the Pacific they invaded the territories of China and Korea. In the language of the American imperialist that is not aggression on their part, whereas the just struggle of the Chinese in defense of their land and their people is aggression. The world knows who is right and who is wrong…”
Korean War: US and China
PRC organized mass protests in China and warned the Americans that it would be forced to intervene if there was any push into the North
There already were thousands of volunteers of the PLA fighting with the North Koreans
In October of 1950, UN troops under Douglas MacArthur crossed north over the 38th parallel
PRC launches attack when they get close to the Yalu river
Millions of Chinese fight in the war, by 1953 truce, China has suffered nearly a million casualties
Kissinger on China and the Korean War
On China p.132:
“What was most unlikely was Chinese acquiescence in an American presence at the border that was a traditional invasion route into China and specifically the base from which Japan had undertaken the occupation of Manchuria and the invasion of Northern China. China was all the less likely to be passive when such a posture involved a strategic setback on two fronts: The Taiwan Strait and Korea… The misconceptions of both sides compounded each other. The United States did not expect the invasion; China did not expect the reaction. Each side reinforced the other’s misconception by its own actions. At the end of the process stood two years of war and twenty years of alienation”
Impact of Korean War
Led to open conflict between USA and PRC
Panmunjom Armistice did not bring about improvement in the relationship
America is now committed to defending Taiwan
Mao is less in awe of American military power
China is weaken significantly by the war
Large casualties
High economic costs of conflict
Us State Department Bulletin, July 15, 1953
“On the Chinese Mainland 600 million people are ruled by the Chinese Communist Party. That party came to power by violence, and, so far, has lived by violence. It retains power not by the will of the Chinese people but by massive, forcible repression. IT fought the United Nations in Korea; it supported the Communist War in Indo-China; it took Tibet by force. It fomented the Communist Huk rebellion in the Philippines and the Communist insurrection in Malaya. It does not disguise its expansionist ambitions. It is bitterly hateful of the United States, which it considers a principal obstacle in the way of its path of conquest. As regards China, we have abstained from any act to encourage the Communist regime – morally, politically, or materially. Thus: we have not extended diplomatic recognition of to the Chinese Communist regime. We have opposed seating in the United Nations. We have not traded with Communist China or sanctioned cultural exchanges with it.”
Taiwan: 1954 and 1958
In early 1950, Truman states:
“The United States has no desire to obtain special rights or privileges or to establish military bases on Formosa (Taiwan) at this time. Nor does it have any intention of utilizing its armed forces to interfere in the present situation. The United States government will not pursue a course which will lead to involvement in the civil strife in China”
However, by 1953, Americans include Taiwan in a part of their containment perimeter.
China and Taiwan
PRC had not attempted to take Taiwan because:
Taiwan was well defended and PRC was not confident it had air power or the landing craft necessary
US Navy 7th fleet was based in the area
At the end of the Korean War, US has stated it will defend Taiwan
1954 Mao decides to test the commitment of the US – shelled the islands of Quemoy and Matsu – right off the coast of China
Eisenhower responds by suggesting Nuclear retaliation is on the table if Taiwan is directly threatened
Why did the US Respond so Forcefully?
John Lewis Gaddis:
“… when Mao began shelling the offshore islands in September 1954… Chiang claimed the psychological effects of losing them would be so severe that his own regime in Taiwan might collapse. Eisenhower and Dulles responded as they had to Rhee: Chiang got a mutual defense treaty that bound the United States to the defense of Taiwan.”
The Cold War p. 132
Taiwan
In 1958 Mao began shelling Quemoy and Matsu again, and begins building up PLA troops.
US fires upon Taiwan strait, prepares for a full scale war that does not come.
US pursues the following policies against China
US trade embargo with the PRC.
Obstruction of the PRC’s entry to the UN
Huge economic and military aid to Taiwan
An aid program for the region
Instigation of a regional containment bloc – SEATO
Bilateral defense treaties with Asian states seen as under threat from PRC
Sino- American Relations in the 1960s
McCarthyism had a significant impact on the American policies towards China during the Eisenhower administration, and these policies continued under Kennedy
Containment and isolation
US government used the failure of the Great Leap forward to highlight to the public and the rest of the West that excesses of the “Marxist-driven economic experiment and the PRC’s willingness to sacrifice millions of Chinese people in pursuit of its Communist ideology
United States, China and Vietnam
Lyrics to a Chinese children’s song:
“There is an evil spirt: His name is Johnson. His mouth is all sweetness, but he has a wolf’s heart. He bombs Vietnam cities and hates the people. Chinese and Vietnamese are all one family: we will certainly not agree to this! I wear a red scarf and join the demonstrations with Daddy. With small throat but large voice I shout: US pirates get out, get out, get out.”
PRC and decolonization
PRC is interest in supporting revolutionary/decolonization movements in the developing world was not simply a pursuit of limited ideological goals in those specific countries.
It aimed to replace the USSR as the world leader of international revolution, and to end Western imperialism by supporting anti-colonial movements.
Bandung Conference in 1955, Premier Zhou Enlai asserted that the US was the key danger to world peace
Conference is a reaction to SEATO
29 Asian and African states asserted their neutrality.
1966: USA policy towards China
Dean Rusk, Secretary of State
The USA does not seek to overthrow the PRC
USA objects to PRC involvement in the affairs of other countries: that is, encouraging revolutionary forces worldwide by providing training
Although the PRC is more violent in word than action, it still should not be underestimated
Overall, China did not have the resources to make a definitive difference in the developing world.
China had developed nuclear weapons, but did not have a delivery systems to use them in wars of decolonization
Sino-American Détente in the 1970s
“Naturally I personally regret that forces have divided and separated the American and Chinese peoples from virtually all communications during the past 15 years. Today the gulf seems broader than ever. However, I myself do not believe it will end in war and one of history’s major tragedies.”
Mao in 1965 to journalist Edgar Snow
Detente begins in 1969 when US begins to loosen trade restrictions
Major turning point: US changed its policy towards the PRC membership in the UN
Ping-Pong Diplomacy
American table tennis team was invited to compete in China and secret talks took place between Kissinger and Zhou Enlai
Nixon Visits China
1972
Joint Communique was issued
Relationship officially established between the nations
Why did the US want Détente?
Kissinger:
“Nixon did not believe that one could end a war into which his predeccessors had sent 500,000 American soldiers halfway across the world by pulling out unconditionally…. Nixon know that whatever the agony of its involvement in Vietnam, the United States remained the strongest country in alliance against Communist aggression around the world, and American credibility was critical. The Nixon Administration… therefore sought a staged withdrawal from Indochina… In this design China played a key role.”
Situation in Vietnam had led the US to believe that containment was not possible there, and it wanted the PRC’s assistance in its exit strategy
USA wanted to put pressure on the Soviet-American attempts at Détente
Nixon wants to make history
Public support for more constructive strategies
PRC had ICBM capability, now it’s the American view that its dangerous not to have contact with the Chinese
US wants to reduce Asian commitments while retaining Pacific bases
Why Did China Want Détente?
1960s and 70s PRC sees USSR as its main rival – wants to reduce tensions
China could gain concessions on key foreign policy issues
UN Membeship, Taiwan, US withdrawal from Vietnam
PRC is worried about resurgent Japan
Believed Détente would be temporary
Moderation on stance could improve PRC’s standing in developing World
What does China gain from Detente
UN Membership
1965 Adalai Stevenson outlined why PRC should not be a member state
CCP was not the legitimate government of China
It had a record of aggression
Sponsorship of revolutionary groups
Taiwan had an honorable record and should not be expelled
1970, UN General Assembly voted in favor of recognizing China, but did not reach 2/3 majority
Two China’s policy rejected by Taiwan and China
Taiwan is expelled from UN, PRC is recognized
Taiwan and China
Always the PRC view that Taiwan belonged to China
Nixon in 1972 – The ultimate relationship between Taiwan and the mainland is not a matter for the US to decide
Jimmy Carter establishes full diplomatic relations with China in 1979
Halt arms sales to Taiwan
Reagan recommits to protecting Taiwan, resuming arm sales
Today, we officially recognize one China, and do not support Taiwan independence, Taiwan remains semi-autonomous.
1/29/2025
The Cold War and China - CHINA USSR RELATIONS
China and the Soviet Union: Background
China and Russia have a long history of troubled relationships
Shared 4,500 mile boarder
During Tsarists times there was much tension along the boarder and China lost territories to Russia
China tried to reclaim territory after the fall of the Manchu Dynasty in 1911
Bolsheviks come to power in Russia, suggests that all territory outside of Russia would be given up – this doesn’t happen
Bolsheviks seize Outer Mongolia
At the end of World War II, Soviets strip $2 Billion dollars worth of industrial equipment and machinery from Manchuria
Stalin and Mao 1945-1953
Key differences between USSR and Chinese Communists were ideological
Stalin did not like Mao’s interpretation of Marxism
Mao: peasants as the basis for revolution
Genuine Marxism: features workers leading an urban based class war
Stalin does not give support to Chinese Communists Party in Chinese Civil War
Feared Mao as a rival for leadership of the Communists World
Did not want the Cold war to spread to Asia
Knew that Chiang Kai-Shek’s Guomindan (GMD) – Nationalist Party – would recognize Soviet claims to the disputed boarder territory along frontiers in Manchuria and Xinjiang
Underestimated the CCP and believed that the GMD was the strong party. He urged the CCP to merge with the GMD, even in the late 1940s, when the CCP victory was looking inevitable
Mao became convinced that Stalin wanted a divided and weak China to leave the USSR dominant in Asia
Saw Stalin as self-interested rather than true to the revolutionary doctrine of Communism
Mao claims that Stalin refused China permission to carry out a revolution and that he told the Chinese “Do not have a Civil War: collaborate with Chiang Kai-Shek. Otherwise the Republic of China will collapse.”
Sino-Soviet Treaty of Alliance
Mao is invited to Moscow in 1950 after winning Chinese Civil War
Trip produces first treaty between the countries
USSR became more enthusiastic about the CPP after its victory
Soviet Praise of Mao
Mao later says “This was the result of struggle. Stalin did not wish to sign the treaty; he finally signed it after two months of negotiating”
Treaty offered PRC the promise of Soviet expertise and low-interest aid
Chinese however were offended by the rather “unfriendly” treatment they received
Soviets had been superior
Not bothered to entertain the Chinese guests
Mao thought the accommodations were poor
Khrushchev later “It was an insult to the Chinese people. For centuries the French, English, and Americans have been exploiting China, and now the Soviet Union was moving in.”
Sino-Soviet Treaty of Alliance
Soviet aid would be loans, the Chinese would have to repay with interest
Soviet planners and engineers initially developed 200 Chinese construction projects in the 1950s
Soviet scientific technology was prioritized over Western technology in China
Seen as best, even if it was less effective
PRC accepted Soviet military assistance was necessary, at least until they had their own nuclear program
USSR, THE PRC, and the Korean War 1950-1953
When the American forces (UN forces) came close to the Chinese border on the Yalu river, Stalin encourages PRC to send troops into Korea
Soviets gave material assistance to one million Chinese troops engaged in battle
Mao bitterly complained when the Soviets demanded that China pay for all weapons and materials the USSR had supplied
“The costs of Stalin’s trust was high: China sent a million “volunteers” to intervene in the Korean War and had to pay the entire 1.35 billion for the Soviet equipment and supplies necessary for the venture, and Mao lost a son in the war.”
Immanuel Hsu, The Rise of Modern China p. 675
Mao, Khrushchev and the “split” - 1956-1964
Despite the chance for improvement in Sino-Soviet relations during Khrushchev’s leadership, three issues undermined the potential for easing of tensions
“Secret Speech” by Khrushchev in Moscow on February 24, 1956 attacking Stalin’s crimes against the party, including comments about the “cult of personality,” which Mao saw as an attack on his own style of leadership
The crushing of the Hungarian Uprising in October/November of 1956
Mao saw problems in East Germany and Poland as failures by the USSR to contain reactionary forces
Khrushchev's doctrine of “peaceful coexistence,” which implied that global revolution could be achieved by means other than armed struggle. Mao saw this as ideological heresy
Soviets were dominated by revisionists (those straying from Marxism)
Conference of Communist Parties 1957
Mao attended this conference – second time leaving China
Hoped Yugoslavian leaser Josip Tito would appear, but he didn’t
Mao calls for USSR to abandon revisionism
International revolution could not be supported by working alongside “class enemies” (Western Capitalists)
Mao also believes that USSR was initiating détente with the west to further isolate China
Deng Xiaoping was the Chinese chief spokesperson
Put forward the Chinese ideological stance
Out argued leading soviet theorist Mikhail Suslov
Proletarian world revolution could only come through force and that Capitalism had to be crushed in violent revolution
China leaves the conference viewing themselves as the “real” leaders of international revolutionary communism
Khrushchev visits Beijing 1958
Mao goes out of his way to make Khrushchev uncomfortable
Visit is in summer – makes him stay in hotel with no AC and the hotel is infested with mosquitos
Mao arranges one round of talks in his swimming pool – Khrushchev hates swimming
Was given a too tight bathing suit and had to stay afloat using an innertube
Deng attacks Soviet policy
Soviets had betrayed the international Communist movement
Soviets were guilty of viewing themselves as the only true Marxists-Leninists
Soviets had sent spies posing as technical advisers into China
Taiwan 1958
Mao gears up to take Taiwan in 1958, without Soviet approval
Test US’s willingness to defend
Builds up forces, but does not launch attack after US begins to gear up for war.
Can’t take on US without Soviet support
Khrushchev – not prepared to go to war with the US
Accused Mao of being Trotskyist in pursuing international revolution at any cost
Soviets: Mao is fanatical
Soviets withdraw their economic advisors in China and cancelled commercial contracts with China
Great Leap forward and Sino-Soviet
Great Leap Forward was initiated by Mao in January 1958
Rapidly develop China’s agricultural and industrial sectors simultaneously
Believed sheer force and will would get around the necessity of importing heavy machinery
Focus on grain and steel production
Promotes backyard steel furnace in every commune – poor quality and strips local communities of needed fuel
Public works projects fail due to deliberate lack of experiences and expert leadership
China experiences widespread famine
Millions starving
Mao insists on exporting grain even though his people are starving
Great Leap Forward ended in 1961
Massive failure, millions of Chinese died (starvation) (estimated 45 million premature deaths)
Mao steps down as state chairman in 1959, realizing blame would be put on him, remains head of CCP
Soviets denounce GLF
1959 – Soviets call rapid industrial change aspect of GLF: faulty in design and erroneous in practice”
Mao furious, humiliated – Staff Marshall Peng had given information to the Soviets about widespread starvation
Mao is determined to strike back
Starts backing any communist country that dissented from Moscow
Albania
Soviets withdraw aid to Albania – Khrushchev Albania Communism is Stalinist and backward – Chinese take this as an insult
Chinese offer to replace Soviet aid and technical assistance
Diplomatic relations between China and Soviet Union severed
Khrushchev Mao is “Asian Hitler” and “living corpse”
Mao Khrushchev “redundant old boot”
Sino Soviet relations and the Cultural Revolution 1966-1976
Mao’s Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution launched May 1966
Wants to eliminate creeping return of liberal and bourgeois thinking and behavior
Hopes to reignite the revolutionary class strength that he thought had petered out
Historians agree this was Mao’s relaunch
Main tools of the Cultural Revolution:
The young – encouraged to denounce their elders, teachers, and parents and send them for re-education
Little Red Book
Mao declares the revolution over in 1969
Attacks on “old culture” results in nearly 500,000 deaths
Khrushchev leaves office in 1964, no reconciliation between USSR and China
Soviets denounce Mao’s Cultural Revolution as pure fanaticism
China USSR and Nuclear Weapons
Mao requests Soviet Nuclear weapons
China “If you are our friend, you should want to help us develop our own nuclear program”
Soviet Union: “As you are our friend, you do not need your own nuclear program as we will look after you”
Chinese develop their own nuclear program
Named first bomb 59/6 – date at which Soviets pulled their scientists from China
China launches their own satellite in 1970
Overall, Mao is less weary of Nuclear destruction then USA and USSR, believes it to be an effective diplomatic tool
Sino-Soviet Border War 1969
1969, according to the Chinese, Soviet Union had violated the Chinese border 4189 times in the period up to 1969
March 2nd, 1969
Chen-pao/Demansky Island in the Ussuri River – fighting breaks out
Fear of nuclear war
Mao fears Soviet invasion, digs tunnels and supplies are stored in preparation
There is no escalation, but full out war had been close
Sino-Soviet Clashes over Cambodia and Vietnam
Soviets have influence over Vietnam post Vietnam war
Chinese attempt to influence Cambodia
Cambodia turned Communist in 1975 under Pol Pot’s Khmer Rouge party
Brutal Maoist leader, 2.5 million die in cultural revolution
1978 Vietnam signed a military alliance with USSR and invades Cambodia in 1978
Goal – overthrow Pol Pot, expel Chinese in Cambodia
1979 – China invades Vietnam
Soviet increase their support for Vietnam
Vietnam wins, but China claims Victory after withdrawing
Sino-Soviet Rapprochement 1982-2000
Relaxation of tensions because
Mao dies in 1976
Overthrow of the Gang of Four in China
Adoption of new PRC leader – Deng Xiaoping, who was more tolerant of the west
Brezhnev’s death in 1982
Tiananmen Square 1989
Chinese brutally crush pro-democracy movement
Stark difference to loosening up of Communism in Soviet Union
Before Gorbachev’s visit on April 16, 1989, students began peaceful protests for more political freedom
“Down with the buracracy”
Between April 21st and 22nd: 100,000 people demonstrated
On May 13th 1989, 3000 students begin a hunger strike in the Tiananmen Square – two days before Gorbachev arrives
Protestor’s welcome Gorbachev – had instituted Perestroika and glasnost
May 19th, 1 million people protest
May 20th, Martial Law declared
June 4th, Troops disperse crowd, it is estimated that thousands died
Soviet Union Falls, China no longer has a communist competitor
1/21/2025
Vietnam - A striking failure of US containment policy
Background – How did the US Get Involved?
Indochina (Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos) was a French Colony
Occupied by the Japanese during WWII
During this time, nationalist movement grows in Vietnam – most noteworthy nationalist at the time is Communist Ho Chi Minh
Leads a movement known at the Vietminh that is actively against the Japanese, but also doesn’t want to see Vietnam return to French rule
When the Japanese are defeated in 1945, Ho Chi Minh declared the independence of the Democratic Republic of Vietnam
French intend to take the colony back, hostilities break out between French and Vietminh in 1946
President Roosevelt had tried to get the French to relinquish their claims over Vietnam
Truman administration is much more hardened towards Ho Chi Minh and the Vietminh
As Cold War tensions increase, Ho Chi Minh’s Communist credentials are emphasized over his nationalism
The assumption grows that he was being directed by Moscow
How did the US get Involved?
In March of 1950, aid was sent to help the French defeat the Vietminh
Aid is continued by Eisenhower (1954):
“You have the specific value of a locality in its production of materials that the world needs. You have the possibility that many human beings pass under a dictatorship that is inimical to the free world. You have the broader considerations that might follow what you would call the “falling domino’ principle… You have a row of dominoes set up, you knock over the first one, and what will happen to the last one is certainty that it will go over very quickly.”
Domino theory is now entrenched in US foreign policy
Although the US is funding 80% of the war by 1954, Eisenhower makes the decision not to directly intervene.
French are defeated at the Battle of Dien Bien Phu
1954 Geneva Accords
French would withdraw from Indochina
Temporary division of Vietnam at the 17th parallel – Ho Chi Minh would control the northern territory
Free elections to unite Vietnam in 1956
No foreign bases
Laos and Cambodia would be recognized as independent states
How did the US get Involved?
The USA does not sign the Geneva Accords
Instead, USA tries to strengthen the area south of the 17th parallel
Supporting a non-communist government that would be able to resist invasion
Establish SEATO – signed by Australia, Britain, France, New Zealand, Pakistan, Philippines, Thailand
Countries agreed to meet together if there was an attack, and if the vote was unanimous, to take action
In violation of the Geneva Accords, SEATO included South Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia as its “protected area”
This is the legal basis for the US action in Vietnam
US backs Ngo Dinh Diem to lead South Vietnam
Catholic, US educated
1955, declares the Republic of Vietnam
US starts sending aid to the country, by 1960, almost 1000 Americans were serving as military advisors to the country
How does the US Get Involved
In 1956, Diem, with US support, refuses to hold elections
He claimed that he was not bound by the Geneva Accord
Reasoning – Communists could not be trusted to hold fair elections
Reality: Diem would have lost. It is estimated that elections would have resulted in a united, Communist, Vietnam
Ho Chi Minh likely would have received roughly 80% of the vote
With no elections, military opposition to Diem became the only viable alternative in the South
Groups of Communist, known as the Vietcong or VC, formed themselves into military units with a political arm known as the National Liberation Front (NLF)
North Vietnam supported the VC, as did much of the local population in the South
USA grows concerned with its ally Diem, and doubted his ability to maintain its preferred option of the “two Vietnam” policy
Kennedy Escalates the Conflict
Kennedy is elected in 1960
Policy towards communism is “Flexible Response”
Expansion of fighting communism:
Increasing the number of US military advisors in the South – 17,000 at his death
Starting counter-insurgency operations against Communist Guerrillas in the South
Search and destroy missions against the Vietcong, spraying defoliants, such as Agent Orange, to destroy the jungle that gave them cover
Strategic Hamlets Program: resettlement of villagers into fortified villages where they could be “kept safe” from Communists
Introducing a new US counter-insurgency force, the Green Berets, who were trained in guerrilla fighting
Encouraging Diem to introduce social and political reforms
None of this limits the growing success of the Vietcong
In fact, many of the policies alienate the local peasant population further
Diem Becomes increasingly Unpopular
1963: laws passed banning the celebration of Buddha’s birthday
Buddhists organized mass protest
Included rallies, hunger strikes, and self-immolations
First lady (Diem’s sister-in-law)
“Let them burn and we shall clap our hands”
International negative reaction
Kennedy starts to cut off aid to Diem’s regime
Diem and his brother are killed in a coup that US intelligence knew about in advance
Lyndon Johnson and Vietnam
Kennedy is assassinated in 1963, Lyndon Johnson becomes President
Inherited a situation where there no longer was a stable government situated in South Vietnam
Johnson is committed to win “war against Communism”
Johnson needs to increase the US commitment in South Vietnam, but also needs justification to obtain the support of the US public and Congress
“Excuse” – Gulf of Tonkin Incident
On the night of August 2nd, 1964, the American naval destroyer Maddox was fired on by North Vietnamese patrol boats while gathering intelligence in the Gulf of Tonkin, off the North Vietnamese coast.
Two days later, on August 4th, 1964 the destroyers Maddox and Turner Joy were allegedly fired on.
Ship radar showed that they were under attack, but there was much confusion, and no physical evidence of an assault was found
Johnson called this attack “open aggression on the high seas”
United States immediately bombed North Vietnamese installations
Gulf of Tonkin Resolution
Authorized the President to “take all necessary measures to repel any armed attack against the forces of the United States and to prevent further aggression”
The is the legal basis for intervention in Vietnam
Post passing of Gulf of Tonkin, USA response in Vietnam:
Launching a sustained campaign bombing of North Vietnam: Operation Rolling Thunder
Sending 100,000 ground forces to South Vietnam in 1965 led by General William C. Westmoreland
US carried out search and destroy missions
By 1968, there were 520,000 troops in Vietnam
Bombing of targets in South Vietnam also took place
Goal of attacking enemy supply lines
Large numbers of rockets, bombs and napalm were dropped on South Vietnam – devastating effects on local population
The Tet Offensive
Johnson in 1967 – “light at the end of the tunnel”
January 30th, 1968 – on the Vietnamese New Year (Tet), 70,000 Communists launched a surprise attack
Communists attacked more than 100 cities, including Saigon
Hue – half the city was destroyed, 5800 civilians were killed
It takes 11 days for the US and ARVN forces to regain control of Saigon
Overall Tet was a military failure for the Vietcong
It does not trigger a popular uprising as they had hoped
They fail to hold on to any of the cities captured and lose more than 40,000
However, public opinion within the United States turned decisively against the war
People are sickened by the images broadcasted by the news – this is the first televised war
See US embassy being attacked by VC, saw a South Vietnamese police chief execute a VC in the street
Anti-War protesting increases
Bombing of North Vietnam stops, peace talks initiated
Johnson shocks the nation by announcing he would not seek re-election in 1968
Nixon and Vietnam
Nixon is elected in November of 1968
Wants to withdraw, but was not prepared to accept peace at any price
Wanted “peace with honor”
No way the US could withdraw – did not want the appearance of defeat
Nixon pushes for settlement that would give South Vietnam a chance at surviving
Would take 4 more years, result in the loss of 300,000 Vietnamese lives and 20,000 American lives
Nixon selected Henry Kissinger as his key foreign policy advisor
Starts “covert” 14 month bombing campaign along the Ho Chi Minh trail inside of neutral Cambodia
Does not force the north to agree to peace
Vietnamization
Gradual withdrawal of US troops, and handing over the war to the South Vietnamese
From 1969-1973 US troops numbers were scaled down
Nixon Doctrine
Moving away from Truman Doctrine – nations were responsible for their own defense:
“The nations of Asia can and must increasingly should the responsibility for achieving peace and progress in the area with whatever cooperation we can provide. Asian countries must seek their own destiny for if domination by the aggressor can destroy the freedom of a nation, too much dependence on a protector can eventually erode its own dignity. But it is not just a matter of dignity for dependence on foreign aid destroys the incentive to mobilize domestic resources – human, financial and material – in the absence of which no government is capable of dealing effectively with its problems and adversaries”
Paris Peace Talks
Opened on May 13th, 1972, ended January 1973
Kissinger negotiated with the North Vietnamese
Neither side is willing to compromise
North demanded representation in the government of the South
Both sides try to win an advantage at the negotiating table by achieving an upper hand on the battlefield
Americans use their airpower to put pressure on the Communists – even bombing targets that had previously deemed too sensitive (civilian danger)
Americans attempt to détente with the Soviet Union and China – try to get them to pressure North Vietnam into reaching a peace agreement
Peace settlement signed on January 27th 1973
All American troops would withdraw from Vietnam
North and South Vietnam would respect the 17th parallel as a dividing line
US troops withdrawn two weeks after the signing of the agreement
North Vietnam advances on the South, takes Saigon by April 1975 – country falls to Communism
Cambodia and Laos would also fall to communism
Conclusions on US Policy of Containment in Asia
Up to 1949, US policy of containment in Europe had been successful
Communism made no gains after 1947, Berlin Airlift had thwarted an attempt at expansion
Marshall plan stopped the Communist Party from growing in other countries
Containment in Asia – less successful
Mao in China
North Korea, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia
However Thailand, Malaysia and other countries did not fall to Communism
Though the US had tried to stop Soviet expansion, these revolutions in Asia had a much more nationalistic feel, and as a result, the US ended up fighting more local movements
Thus the US never could be as successful as it had been in Europe
12/19/2024
Cold War - Peaceful Co-existence: new Leaders, new Ideas?
Eisenhower and Dulles
Dwight D. Eisenhower was elected US President in 1952
Distinguished military background – commanded Allies in Normandy in 1944
After WWII served as US Army Chief of Staff, Commander-in-Chief of NATO
He and Secretary of State John Foster Dulles are strongly anti-communist
Dulles: “Soviet Communism believes that human beings are nothing more than… superior animals … and that the best kind of world is that world which is organized as a well managed farm is organized, where certain animals are taken out to pasture, and they are fed and brought back and milked, and they are given a barn as shelter over their heads… I do not see how, as long as Soviet Communism holds those views… there can be any permanent reconciliation… This is an irreconcilable conflict”
Dulles wants a “roll back” of communism in Eastern Europe – no attempt is made under Eisenhower to do so.
US quietly supports uprisings in Eastern Europe in 1953 and 1956 but the Soviets stomped these out.
New Look: changes to Containment
Preventing the extension of Soviet Communism outside of areas it was already established by:
Setting up alliances to encircle the Soviet Union – NATO, SEATO
Using military power to protect vulnerable areas – West Berlin
Assisting forces that were fighting Communism: Diem’s government in Vietnam
Using the CIA for covert operations more extensively then ever before: spies, sabotage, resistance
Initiating an increased reliance on nuclear weapons – 1953 national security document “conventional weapons would thus play a smaller role”
Brinksmanship: Massive Retaliation – policy of threatening Nuclear war if attacked
Khrushchev and Co-Existence
Stalin dies in 1953
Georgy Malenkov, Nikolai Bulganin, and Nikita Khrushchev rise to power as the top replacements – Khrushchev won the struggle
Peaceful Coexistence:
Capitalism and Communism should accept the continuing existence of one another rather than use force to destroy each other
Claimed capitalism would die out anyway due to its own inherent weaknesses
East West Relations in the 1950s
Agreement over Austria
Austrian State Treaty ended the four power occupation of Austria, created a neutral and independent country
An example of improving relations in 1950s
1955: Geneva Summit
Soviet Proposals
Mutual disbandment of NATO and Warsaw Pact
Withdrawal of all foreign troops from Europe followed by the drawing up of a European Security Treaty
Free elections to be carried out for a reunified German government
US Proposals
An Open Skies proposal. This meant that each side would exchange plans of military installations and allow aerial surveillance of each other’s installations
US Reaction
Hostile. These ideas were unacceptable to the West European Governments, and no agreement was reach on any of these proposals
Soviet Reaction
Hostile. The Soviets did no even bother to make a formal reply. They dismissed it as “nothing more than a bold espionage plot” and Khrushchev said it would be like seeing into our bedrooms. However, the US went ahead and used the U-2 reconnaissance plane.
Geneva a Failure?
Failure to achieve concrete progress – Yes
No reunited Germany or disarmament
Still discussions were carried out in a cordial manner
East West-Tension Increases after 1955
Khrushchev: de-Stalinization speech – loosening of Moscow control in some satellite states
Suez Crisis
Raised fears of growing Soviet influence in the Middle East:
Leads to Eisenhower Doctrine in 1957 – United States would help any country in the Middle East to fight against Communism
The Technology Race
On October 4, 1957 Soviets launched the world’s first artificial Satellite – Sputnik
Followed by Sputnik II a month later
Americans sent into a state of panic – became convinced of Soviet superiority in missile technology
Khrushchev makes the most of this situation
Used every opportunity to insist he could wipe out any American or European city
The Missile Gap
US Congress and media promoted the idea of a “missile gap”
Confirmed by the Gaither Report – findings of a top-secret investigation committee
Recommendations:
Vast increase in offensive defense power, especially missile development
Build up of conventional forces capable of fighting a limited war
A massive building program of fallout shelters to protect US citizens during nuclear attack
US Air Force U-2 planes flying over Soviet Russia had revealed that despite Khrushchev’s threats, there was no missile gap
To calm US anxiety, Eisenhower supported the creation of NASA in 1958 and provides federal aid to promote science education in schools
Events of 1958-1960
1958, Eisenhower was confident about US nuclear superiority – wants to ban atmospheric testing of nuclear weapons
US stops this form of testing in October of 1958
Soviet Union also stops preforming this type of test
Hope of formal test-ban treaty
Khrushchev then issues ultimatum for the West to leave Berlin in 1959 within 6 months
Khrushchev has to back down
Khrushchev accepted an invitation to visit the United States in September of 1959, would be the first Soviet Leader to visit and arranged for Eisenhower to meet with him in Paris, May of 1960
The U-2 Incident
Meeting between Eisenhower and Khrushchev had been a success of generating a positive atmosphere – nothing concrete was produced
A few days before the scheduled meeting in Paris, the Soviets announced that an American plane had been shot down over the Soviet Union on May 1st 1960
Americans tried to claim it was a weather plane
Soviets realized it was a high altitude photo-reconnaissance plane
Pilot Gary Powers had been captured and confessed to the spying nature of his work
Eisenhower admits the existence of the U-2 planes and accepts responsibility
Does NOT apologize – at Paris calls it a “distasteful but vital necessity”
Khrushchev cancels Eisenhower's planned visit to the Soviet Union
Tensions once again are high, “thawing” of relations is over
12/17/2024
The Cold War Goes Global - The Korean War
USA Foreign Policy: 1949-1950
Reminder: NATO Established: April 1949
USA is optimistic that Communists had been contained in Europe
Truman Doctrine
NATO is a cheap option: why?
Power rests in the atomic bomb, no need to invest huge sums of money into developing conventional forces to match the Soviets
But USA has little choice but to rely on nuclear threat, as it had demobilized its army following WWII – the Soviets had not
Fall of 1949 – two key events shift the balance of power in favor of USSR:
Soviet Union becomes an atomic power
Its not that the US didn’t think that USSR would never have the bomb, but that they had anticipated it taking roughly ten more years of development.
China fell to the Communist forces of Mao
China Falls to the Communists: Chinese Civil War: 1945-1949
Nationalists: Led by Chiang Kai-shek
US had given limited support to the nationalists
Communist Guerilla Forces: Led by Mao Zedong
The White Paper
During the summer of 1949, the state department, headed by Dean Acheson, produced a study of Sino-American relations.
The document known officially as United States Relations with China with Special Reference to the Period 1944–1949, which later was simply called the China White Paper, attempted to dismiss any misinterpretations of Chinese and American diplomacy toward each other.
Published during the height of Mao Zedong's takeover, the 1,054 page document argued that American intervention in China was doomed to failure.
Although Acheson and Truman had hoped that the study would dispel rumors and conjecture, the paper helped to convince many critics that the administration had indeed failed to check the spread of communism in China.
Ultimately it suggests that Chiang Kai-shek and his forces were too unpopular with the Chinese people – it had been more of a case of Nationalist collapse than a Communist “victory”
The White Paper
“The reasons for the failure of the Chinese National Government appear … not to stem from any inadequacy of American aid. Our military observers on the spot have reported that the Nationalists armies did not lose a single battle during the crucial ear of 1948 through lack of arms or ammunition. The fact was that the decay which our observers had detected in Chongqing early in the war had fatally sapped the powers of resistance of the Guomindang. Its leaders had proved incapable of meeting the crisis, confronting them, its troops had lost the will to fight and its government had lost popular support. The Communists on the other had, through a ruthless discipline and fanatical zeal, attempted to sell themselves as guardians and liberators of the people. The Nationalist armies did not have to be defeated; they disintegrated. History has proved again and again that a regime without faith in itself and an army without morale cannot survive the test of battle.”
To sum it up: American experts believed they had done what they could
The Red Scare: McCarthyism and the Anti-Communist crusade in America
Senator Joseph McCarthy of Wisconsin
Soviet Union had a conspiracy to place Communist sympathizers in key positions in American life
Accusations led to “purges: and show trials of those accused of “Un-American behavior”
Trials affected every level of US society, no group, institution or individual was safe from suspicion
The Anti-Communist Crusade in America
1950s – Anti-Red crusade reaches its peak
McCarthy goes as far as to call for a purge of “comsymps”
Claims Truman administration was under Communist influence, and that all American Liberals were Communist sympathizers
Acheson was forced to make a speech appeasing McCarthyites
Goes back on the White Papers, says that Mao was “completely subservient to the Moscow regime (it wasn’t).”
Two state department advisers on China who said the Nationalists were not worth saving lost their jobs
This is the impact of McCarthy
Truman refuses to recognize the legitimacy of the new Chinese government
The Anti-Communist Crusade in America
Most infamous trial: Julius and Ethel Rosenberg
Convicted of spying for the Soviets, executed in 1953
They were instrumental in the transmission of information about top-secret military technology and prototypes of mechanisms related to the atomic bomb, which were of value to the Soviet nuclear weapons program and also provided top-secret radar, sonar, and jet propulsion engines to the Soviet Union.
NSC-68: Total Commitment
NSC-68 was a report of the US National Security Council produced in 1950
Warned how all Communist activity EVERYWHERE could be traced back to Moscow.
Recent developments had a global theme and that they indicated the growing strength and influence of the USSR
Monolithic view of Communism – all communism fed back to the nerve center in Moscow
Report warned of an indefinite period of tension and danger
Advises the US government to be ready to meet each and every challenge promptly.
Suggested an immediate increase in military strength and spending 35-55 billion
Encouraged military and economic aid to be given to any country perceived by the USA to be resisting Communism
NSC-68
“Secret statement in National Security Council Report 68, State and Defense Department, Washington, April, 1950:
[We advocate] an immediate and large scale build-up in our military and general strength and that of our allies with the intention of righting the power balance and in the hope that through means other than all-out war we could induce a change in the nature of the socialist system…
The United States … can strike out on bold and massive program of rebuilding the West’s defensive potential to surpass that of the Soviet world, and of meeting each fresh challenge promptly and unequivocally… This means virtual abandonment by the United States of trying to distinguish between national and global security. It also means the end of subordinating security needs to the traditional budget restrictions; of asking “how much security can we afford?” In other words, security must henceforth become the dominant element in the national budget, and other elements must be accommodated to it…
The new concept of the security needs of the nation calls for annual appropriations of 50 Billion, or note much below the former wartime levels.”
North Korea Invades South Korea: 1950
Truman’s Democratic Party faced difficult congressional elections in 1950
Truman needs to shelve the issues of recognizing China, commitment in Asia, and recommendations of NSC-68 until after the election
However, North Korea launches an invasion of South Korea June 25th, 1950
90,000 soldiers
Truman does not have time now to balance whether total commitment on a global scale was a wise policy to follow
North Korean attack is seen as an example of Soviet Expansion
North Korea seen as following the orders of Stalin
The fear: failure to take action would undermine the credibility of the USA in its determination to resist Communism
North Korea Invades: Domino theory
Domino effect Truman “If we let Korea down, the Soviets will keep right on going and swallow up one piece of Asia after another … If we were to let Asia go, the Near East would collapse and no telling what would happen in Europe… Korea is like Greece of the Far East. If we are tough enough now, if we stand up to them like we did in Greece three years ago, they won’t take any more steps”
US response to Korea: containment
USA aids Korea
USA sponsored a resolution in the United Nations, calling for military action against North Korea
If the UN ignored the North Korean Invasion, it would be making the same mistake as its predecessor the League of Nations – that is, not standing up to aggressor states
USSR was boycotting the Security Council, in protest at the refusal of the USA to allow Communist China a seat on the Council, the resolution was passed on June 27th, 1950
July 1st, US troops arrive in Korea, soon to be joined by 15 other nations under a UN commander – General Douglas MacArthur
Background to Korea
Japan Annexed Korea in 1910
Was occupying when WWII ended
Korean Nationalists, who had led a revolution in 1945, and who included many communists, were not allowed to decide the fate of Korea in 1945
USA and USSR agree the two superpowers would take joint responsibility for repatriating the Japanese forces there
38th parallel line of latitude was taken as the dividing point, with the USSR occupying Korea north of the line, USA occupying South
This was supposed to be temporary
Council of Foreign Minister’s Moscow Conference in December 1945, USA and USSR agreed on the creation of a Korean provisional government, followed by a short period of international trusteeship or supervision, leading eventually to independence
This was difficult to achieve
USA and USSR relationship is deteriorating
Despite Moscow Agreement: separate administrations develop on either side
South: Syngman Rhee – rebel who had spent much of his life in exile
North: Kim Il-Sung – Russian trained Korean Communist who had been a guerilla fighter
Both are nationalists and want to unite Korea
Korean War
1947: US persuades the UN to establish a commission to supervise Korean elections
Commission is refused entry into North Korea, but observes a separate election in South Korea in May of 1948
Although most Koreans opposed partition, the Republic of Korea (ROK) was established in May of 1948
Undemocratic, strongly Anti-Communist administration, UN recognizes it as legitimate
Response: Democratic People’s Republic of Korea
Founded by Kim Il Sung in September of 1948
Immediately recognized by Communist Bloc
USA supports ROK with economic and military aid, but US does not expect to station troops there long term – had left by mid 1949
Soviets had left North Korea in 1948
Acheson – Perimeter Speech – 1950 (Jan) – both South Korea and Taiwan were publically excluded from the American defensive perimeter in the Western Pacific
Why Did the Superpowers Get Involved?
Remember, both USSR and USA have withdrawn troops
Orthodox view of History, follows the US views of the 1950s
This is an attack initiated by Stalin
Revisionist History later claimed that Stalin had no role in the invasion, and that the North was possibly responding to attacks from the South
Historian Bill Cumings, 1981, claims that Soviet control over the DPRK was flimsy at best, and Kim Il Sung could have acted independently of the Soviets, since DPRK was not solely reliant on Soviet Arms
Opening of Soviet Archives Clarifies this – Kim Il Sung pushes for the war and Stalin give approval.
Role of Kim Il Sung in Starting the War
Kim Il Sung is key to explaining the war
Both he and Synman Rhee want to unify the country, a civil war was inevitable
But both sides are not strong enough to unify the country alone
Kim Il Sung put a huge amount of effort into lobbying Stalin to back an attack on the South
Stalin initially is not interested in the slightest
Thus Pyongyang is really pushing for war, not Moscow
Thus Truman administration is wrong in its assumption that Stalin initiated the war, but his support of Il Sung was key in allowing the war to move forward
Role of Stalin in starting the War
Reasons Stalin may have changed his mind on Korea
Stalin may have been more hopeful about the chances of world revolution. Communists had won the Chinese Civil War, Soviets now have the bomb, and the West has economic difficulties – time to push forward in spreading Soviet influence in Asia
United States larger role in Japan – Soviets can try to match this in Korea
Stalin’s general opportunism
Historian John Lewis Gaddis – Stalin had a tendency to advance himself in situations where he thought he could do so without provoking too strong of a response. Acheson’s “Perimeter Speech” could have provided Stalin with a “tempting opportunity”
Despite changing his mind, Stalin was cautious about Korea, warned the DPRK not to expect great assistance because it had more important challenges to meet than the Korean problem
Made it clear that Kim Il Sung needed to get support from Mao too
“If you get kicked in the teeth, I will not lift a finger. You have to ask Mao for all the help.”
Despite this, Soviet commanders were involved in all aspects of the preparation and execution of the attack
The Role of Mao in the Outbreak of the War
Kim Il Sung visits Mao to convince him to help with the invasion
Mao is skeptical about the success of the invasion, but Kim Il Sung gives off the impression that Stalin was more enthusiastic about it then he actually was
Mao wants to invade Taiwan and knows he needs Soviet support
Worries that if he is against North Korean plan, that Stalin wouldn’t back his Taiwan invasion
Mao asks Kim if he needs troops stationed on the Korean boarder in case the Americans intervene, but Kim says this isn’t necessary
Mao doesn’t pay much attention to the actual preparations for the invasion
When North Korea attacks, it surprise South Korea, America and Mao
The Course of the War
There were several dramatic changes in the course of war over the first few months, followed by a stalemate situation, which lasted until the armistice in 1953
Technically the two countries are still at war today
The initial push by the North Koreans took them deep into South Korea, leaving only a small corner of the peninsula under the control of South Korea.
South Korea and American troops are pushed back to Pusan (Busan)
General MacArthur led the UN forces in an amphibious landing at Inchon, cutting off the North Koreans. Within a month, MacArthur has retaken Seoul and driven the North Koreans back to the 38th parallel
The Course of the War
A stalemate develops around the 38th parallel
Truman realizes that US needs to go back to the policy of containment
MacArthur disagrees, claiming “here in Asia is where the Communist conspirators have elected to make their play for global conquest. Here we fight Europe’s war with arms while the diplomats there still fight it with words.”
MacArthur is relieved of command.
Peace talks started in 1951, with a focus on the repatriation of POWs
The war continued for another two years
40% of American casualties happen during this time
US puts pressure on China by threatening to use atomic weapons
Armistice is signed at Panmunjun in July 1943
Results of the Korean War: Europe
Actions of the United States
NSC-68’s recommendation to triple the defense budget was implemented
US land forces in Europe were greatly strengthened
NATO was strengthened
Greece and Turkey added
Military bases set up in Turkey (boarders USSR)
The need to integrate West Germany into NATO and arm the country was given top priority
Most of these policies were under consideration before the Korean conflict but the timetable for these was accelerated
Actions of the US in Asia
Treaty of San Francisco with Japan 1952
US maintains military bases in Japan
US focused on building up Japan’s economy
Taiwan had to be defended as well
7th fleet had already been sent to the Taiwan strait to defend the island against possible invasion
Continued to send Chiang Kai-Shek military and economic aid, US recognizes Taiwan as the only official Chinese state until the 1970s (Nixon visits China)
China was isolated by the United States, condemned by the UN as an aggressor, and prevented from taking a seat at the UN security council
US was committed to supporting other regimes in Asia believed to be resisting communism.
Led to involvement in Philippines and Vietnam
SEATO – Southeast Asia Treaty Organization was formed as an anti-communist bloc
What did the War mean for Korea?
Cost of human lives and property was vast
No hope of reunification
No longer a local issue but a Superpower issue
Ceasefire line turned into a heavily armed Cold War frontier
North Korea is still communist today
South Korea has become a model Capitalist success story, with the help of heavy American and Japanese investment
What did the Korea War mean for China?
Isolated by the US
China’s reputation grew greatly, becoming a major power in the region
Preserved its own revolution and took on America – saved North Korea
Mao’s reputation is increased, and the Chinese revolution is strengthened
However, resources were diverted from recovery to the war effort
Also made China’s aim of uniting Taiwan and China more difficult
Stalin’s reluctance throughout the war to help Mao with substantial military commitments also meant that Mao would be less likely to rely on Soviet help, and would be less concerned with following Moscow’s lead
What did the Korean War Mean For USSR?
USSR had kept out of direct conflict with the US
But results are not good for USSR
USA has decided to triple its defense budget, rearm West Germany, maintain troops in Europe, and fight Communism in Asia
Soviet Union was now facing an even more intense and broader Cold War standoff than had existed in 1950
Any advantages that Soviets once held were being matched by the US
What did the Korean War mean for Southeast Asia?
USA perception of monolithic communist movement meant it would continue to intervene wherever it saw the threat of Communism on the move
Southeast Asia is now involved in the Cold War
This made it harder for nationalist groups in the region to triumph over the remaining vestiges of imperialism and colonialism
Forces nationalist groups, which may not have been very communist, into increasing their dependency on China and the USSR
Vietnam is the only instance though where the USA, USSR and China are directly involved in the fighting
Effects of the Korean War on the Cold War
The Korean War caused the globalization of the superpower rivalry and confrontation
Asia and Europe, later spreading to other parts of the developing world – Latin America
US defense spending increases dramatically, running around 10% of GDP in the 1950s
European military spending increases, boosting economic prosperity
Soviet Union increases troop levels from 2.8 million troops in 1950 to around 6 million by 1955
Stalin’s successors would cut military spending sharply after 1955, but continued nuclear developments
Warren I Cohn on Korea
America in the Age of Soviet Power 1945-1991 p. 66
“ Arming the North Koreans and agreeing to the invasion of South Korea proved to be Stalin’s most disastrous Cold War gamble. It postponed a thaw in relations with the United States for twenty years. It intensified a confrontation that continued for forty years at enormous cost to the major antagonists. The war shifted the balance of forces within the United States, allowing them to divert the attention and energies of the American people from needed reform to the hunt of Communists at home and abroad. It allowed the creation of a military-industrial complex that consumed the productive power of the American economy and fueled conflict all over the world. The Korean War altered the nature of the Soviet-American confrontation, changing it from a systematic political competition into an ideologically driven, militarized conflict that threatened the very survival of the globe
11/12/2024
The Cold War; The Breakdown of the Grand Alliance
Key Developments: 1946-1947
Soviet moves for consolidating influence
Salami Tactics
Term coined by Hungarian Communist leader, Matyas Rakosi – When commenting on how the USSR secured Communist control in Eastern Europe stated “like slicing off salami – piece by piece
Stage 1: the Soviets supervised the organization of governments in the Eastern European states, initially establishing a broad alliance of anti-fascists
Stage 2: each of the parties was sliced off, one after another
the communist core was left, and then ultimately the local Communists were replaced, if needed, with Moscow trained people
Baggage Train Leaders
Baggage Train Leaders
Men who had spent much of the war in Moscow, and were considered by the Soviets to be “trustworthy”
Bolesław Bierut was a Polish Communist leader, NKVD agent, and a hardline Stalinist who became President of Poland after the Soviet takeover of the country in the aftermath of World War II.
Vasil Petrov Kolarov was a Bulgarian communist political leader and leading functionary in the Communist International (Comintern)
Ana Pauker was a Romanian communist leader and served as the country's foreign minister in the late 1940s and early 1950s. Ana Pauker became the world's first female foreign minister when entering office in December 1947. She was also the unofficial leader of the Romanian Communist Party right after World War II.
Mátyás Rákosi was a Jewish Hungarian communist politician. Froom 1949 to 1956, he was the de facto ruler of Communist Hungary. An ardent Stalinist, his government was a satellite of the Soviet Union.
These leaders made sure that the post war governments of their prospective countries would be backed by Moscow – backed “Stalinist” communists
Free elections promised by Stalin at Yalta – to occur in a matter of weeks – were not held until January 19, 1947.
Prior to these elections, there was a campaign of murder, censorship, and intimidation.
An estimated 50,000 people were deported to Siberia prior to elections
Case Study: Poland
During the election in Poland in January of 1947:
Stanisław Mikołajczyk, Prime Minister of the Polish government in exile during World War II and leader of the Polish Peasant Party, saw his party have:
246 candidates disqualified from the election
149 candidates and members arrested
18 candidates/ members murdered
1 million voters were taken off of the electoral register
Desmond Donnelly, Struggle for the World, “ in these appalling circumstances of intimidation, it was not surprising that Bierut’s Communists secured complete control in Poland” (1965)
Soviet Perspective on these elections was quite different from that of the West – who saw this as a breach of Yalta – Soviets saw this as a victory over “Western expansionism”
Nikita Khrushchev, Krushchev Remembers (Little, Brown and Co. 1970) vol. 2, p. 166
“The political goals set by Mikolajczyk in cahoots with Churchill required that Warsaw be liberated by (British and American) forces before the Soviet army reached the city. That way a pro- Western government supported by Mikolajczyk would already be in control of the city by the time that Soviets arrived. But it didn’t work out that way. Our troops under Rokossovsky got there first”
Overall a pattern emerges similar to that in Poland in Bulgaria, Romania, and Hungary, all had been occupied by the Red Army. Only Czechoslovakia and Finland had a semblance of democracy
Soviet Pressure on Iran
USSR tried to increase its political control in Iran in the aftermath of WWII
At Tehran, it had been agreed that both the British and Soviets would withdraw their troops from Iran after the war.
British remove their troops
Stalin left 30,000 troops in the northern part of the country, claiming that they were needed to help put down internal rebellion
Unsurprising, these troops encouraged a Communist uprising
Iran asks US and Britain for help, seeing this as a breach of the wartime agreements
On January 1, 1946, Stalin refuses – wants access to Iranian oil
Four days later, in a letter to Secretary of State James Byrnes, Truman reveals that he thinks the Soviet Union will invade Turkey and the Black Sea Straits
“unless Russia is faced with an Iron Fist and strong language, war is in the making”
Iran had to make a formal protest to the UN concerning the continued presences of Soviet forces. This was the first crisis faced by the UN
Moscow agrees to pull its troops out
Instability and Communist Parties Elsewhere in Europe
Instability in Greece and Turkey
Post WWII, anti-imperialist, nationalist, and somewhat Pro-Communist rebellions in these countries
British, and to a slightly lesser degree the US, believed that these rebellions were being directed and supported by the Soviets.
Stalin does assert that he wants Soviet control of the Straits of Constantinople, rather than Turkish control of the area
Communist Parties in Italy and France
Grew stronger in post war Europe.
Membership increasing due to the economic hardships experience at the end of the war
Americans and British are worried that these parties are receiving encouragement from Moscow (not nearly as much as in Eastern Europe), and are worried that these countries could be weak links in anti-Communist Western Europe
Kennan’s Long Telegram
February of 1946, US diplomat in Moscow, George F. Kennan, sent a telegram to the US State Department on the nature of Soviet foreign policy and conduct
His views in this telegram, on the motives behind Soviet foreign policy, will have lasting influence on the State Department
Key idea: the Soviet system is buoyed by the “threat” of a “hostile” world outside its borders, and that the USSR was “fanatically and implacably hostile to the West: Impervious to the logic of reason Moscow [is] highly sensitive to the logic of force. For this reason it can easily withdraw – and usually does – when strong resistance is encountered at any point.”
Kennan is arguing:
The USSR’s view of the world was a traditional one of insecurity
The Soviets want to advances Muscovite Stalinist ideology (not simply Marxism)
The Soviet regime was cruel and repressive and justified this by perceiving nothing but evil in the outside world. That view of a hostile outside environment would sustain the internal Stalinist system
The USSR was fanatically hostile to the West – but it was not suicidal
Kennan’s logic of force argument helped harden attitudes in the US and helped play a key role in the development of the policy of containment
NV Novikov, Soviet Ambassador to the US
Sends telegram to Stalin in 1946, after the Kennan telegram
Set out concerns about US actions he saw as imperialist and thus a threat to Russia:
“The foreign policy of the United States, which reflects the imperialist tendencies of American monopolist capital, is characterized in the postwar period by a striving for world supremacy. This is the real meaning of the many statements by President Truman and other representatives of American ruling circles; that the United States has the right to lead the world. All the forces of American diplomacy – the army, the air force, the navy, industry, and science – are enlisted in the service of this foreign policy. For this purpose broad plans for expansion have been developed and are being implemented through diplomacy and the establishment of a system of naval and air bases stretching far beyond the boundaries of the United States, through the arms race, and through the creation of ever newer types of weapons.”
Kennan and Novikov’s telegrams indicate the suspicion that was emerging in both the United States and Soviet Russia
Basis for Iron Curtain Speech
By 1946, Soviet dominated governments in:
Poland, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria
This was in spite of hopes at Yalta that there would be free and democratic elections in Eastern Europe post WWII
Communist regimes not tied to Moscow had also been established:
Albania, Yugoslavia
By 1949, communism had expanded to include:
East Germany and Czechoslovakia
Red army is still occupying much of Eastern Europe, and thus a cloak of secrecy descends upon Eastern Europe soon after the war
Soviet Reaction to Churchill’s Speech
Swift response: Outrage
Within a week, Stalin compares Churchill to Hitler
Saw the speech as racist and a call to war with the Soviet Union
USSR takes the following steps within 3 weeks of the speech:
They withdrew from the International Monetary Fund (IMF)
They stepped up the tone and intensity of anti-Western propaganda
They initiated a new five-year economic pan of self-strengthening
The iron curtain speech led to a further hardening of opinions on both sides. Churchill had publically defined the new front line in what was now being seen as a new war
The Truman Doctrine
Truman makes a key speech to the US Congress on March 12th, 1947.
Put forward the belief that the US had obligations to “support free peoples who are resisting attempted subjugation by armed minorities or by outside pressures”
This becomes known as the “Truman Doctrine”
Culmination of shift in US foreign policy: isolationist to interventionist
Woodrow Wilson WWI – ran in 1914 on “he kept us out of war” then enters WWI on promise to “make the world safe for democracy”
Roosevelt – WWII lend-lease program
Truman doctrine is a response to unstable situations in Turkey and especially Greece
British had restored the Greek monarchy following WWII, but communist guerillas continued to resist in the countryside.
British could no longer support Greek government and army financially, as its own economy had been devastated by the war, and is roughly 3 billion pounds in debt
The Truman Doctrine
In February of 1947, British told the US that they could no longer maintain tropps in Greece
US cannot afford a potential Communist takeover
Greece is at a strategic location in Europe – gateway to Western Europe
US aid sent to Greece
Roughly 400 million dollars in financial aid
Military advisors are sent to Greece to help combat communists
Soviet perspective
Evidence of the determination of US to expand its sphere of influence
Soviets believe US involvement in Europe is not legitimate
Both the long telegram and iron curtain speech influence Truman before making his “doctrine”
Correct perception of expansionist threat of Soviets
Beginning of the policy of containment of Communism – will draw the US into the affairs of nations well beyond Europe
Political Historian Walter LaFeber
On the longer-term significance of the Truman Doctrine
“The Truman Doctrine was a milestone in American History … the doctrine became an ideological shield behind which the United States marched to rebuild the Western political and economic system and counter the radical left. From 1947 on, therefore, any threats to that Western system could be easily explained as Communist inspired, not as problems which arose from difficulties within the system itself. That was the most lasting and tragic result of the Truman Doctrine.”
America, Russia, and the Cold War, 5th ed. (Knopf, 1985) pp. 57-58
Directly for Greece and Turket, expansion into the Marshall plan and containment
The Marshall Plan
In January of 1947, Secretary of State James Byrnes resigned, and was replaced by General George Marshall.
Marshall believes that the economies of Western Europe needed immediate help from the USA
“Patient is sinking while the doctors deliberate”
Marshall plan – an economic extension of the ideas outline in the Truman Doctrine
The Marshall plan – Dollar Imperialism?
Designed to give immediate economic help to Europe
Set down strict criteria to qualify for American economic aid
Involved allowing the US to investigate the financial records of applicant counties
Stated aims of the Marshall Plan:
Revive European Economics so that political and social stability could ensue
Safeguard the future of the US economy
US wants to avoid the interpretation that they were coercing European governments to accept the plan, so it was made clear that the initiative had to come from Europe
The bill allocating the money did not pass Congress until March 1948
17 Billion dollars
Successfully passed after the Czech Coup in February of 1948
Marshall Plan Money
Yugoslavia 109 Million
Turkey 221 Million
Denmark 271 Million
Austria 677 Million
Netherlands 1.079 Billion
Italy 1.474 Billion
United Kingdom 3.176 Billion
France 2.706 Billion
West Germany 1.389 Billion
Greece 694 Million
Belgium/Luxembourg 556 Million
Norway 254 Million
Ireland 146 Million
Sweden 107 Million
Soviet Reaction and Response
Soviet Union Rejects the Marshall Plan – because Americans had asked to see recipients financial records
This is an example of American dollar imperials in Soviet minds
Marshall plan soon evolved into military alliances – LaFeber
Soviet Response
Molotov Plan
Series of bilateral trade agreements that aimed to ties the economies of Easter Europe to the USSR
Creation of COMECON in January of 1949 (Council for Mutual Economic Assistance)
Designed to stimulate and control their economic development and support the collectivization of agriculture and development of heavy industry
Cominform and the “two camps”
Cominform
Communist Information Bureau is created in 1947
Created as an instrument to increase Stalin’s control over the Communist parties of other countries
Initially comprised of communists in USSR, Yugoslavia, France, Italy, Poland, Bulgaria, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, and Romania
West is concerned that the organization would spread communism (thus destabilizing the democratic governments) in its own backyard (think France, Italy)
Stalin’s two camps doctrine
Idea developed by Stalin in 20s and 30s – dividing up Europe into opposing camps
The aftermath of WWII makes this a reality.
Stalin gives “two camps” speech in 1946 before Churchill’s Iron Curtain speech.
Two Camps idea is discussed at first Cominform meeting
One Camp: American organized “anti-Soviet” bloc which was influencing from Europe to Latin America to Asia
The other: USSR and “new democracies” in Eastern Europe
Also included countries the Soviets deemed sympathetic at the time: Indonesia, Vietnam, India, Egypt, and Syria
Red Army Occupation of Eastern Europe 1945-1947
Soviets control Eastern Europe by creating what is known as a “satellite empire.”
Countries keep their separate legal identities, keeping them technically separate from each other and Russia
However, they were tied to following Moscow by the following factors:
Soviet Military Power (eventually formalized in Warsaw Pact in 1955)
Salami tactics, which transferred the machinery of government into the hands of obedient, pro-Soviet Communists
State police and spy networks
COMECON
One Eastern European Country where salami tactics are slow going: Czechoslovakia
Stalin opts to set a coup in motion to speed up the process
By the end of 1948, the satellite states were economically and militarily controlled by the USSR
Western Allies saw the “occupation” of Eastern Europe as a direct breach fo the agreements made at Yalta and Potsdam, and as clear evidence of Soviet expansionist policies in action
The Czechoslovakian Coup, February 1948
Stalin is worried about Czechoslovakia receiving Marshall Plan aid
Country is considering it
The west, perhaps feeling guilty after the Munich Agreements in 1938, doesn’t want to abandon the Czechs again
Stalin organizes for pressure to be put on the Czech coalition government
12 non communist members are forced to resign
Communists Party leader demands the formation of a communist government
Under heavy pressure from Moscow, and loosely veiled threats of armed intervention, Czech President Edvard Benes agrees to terms
Two weeks later, independent Czech foreign Minister Jan Masaryk was found dead under suspicious circumstances
This is used as evidence by Truman against the Soviets, becomes the final push to get the Marshall Plan through congress
The X Article -- 1947
Written by George Kennan, under the pseudonym, Mr. X
Argued that the long-term policy of the United States towards the Soviet Union had to be that of containment of Soviet Expansion
The US should regard the Soviet Union as a “rival” not partner
Kennan was a strong influence on Truman and his reputation as the United States key expert on Soviet Policy gave him a tremendous amount of influence over the American public
Czech Coup happens months after publishing, shows evidence of dangers of Soviet Union
The Berlin Crisis of 1948 (THERE ARE TWO BERLIN CRISIS, THIS LEADS TO BERLIN AIRLIFT, THE ONE IN 1960 LEADS TO BERLIN WALL)
Post War Germany
Germany had been invaded on two major fronts, making it extremely difficult to leave it undivided during occupation at the conclusion of the war
Germany split into for zones, administered by the Allied Control Council (ACC)
Berlin, in the eastern portion of the country, was governed by the Allied Kommandantur, made up of four military governors
All of this was supposed to be temporary
It was the intention that all of Germany be treated as one economically, and that a German state would once again emerge as a state
By 1949, German was permanently divided into two separate states (eventually reunified)
Why did the post-war powers fail to unify Germany?
Germany’s key strategic position and the differing aims of the main powers
Center of Europe
Potential economic strength – had been an industrial power
USSR does not want to see a resurgent united Germany that would pose a security threat
But it does want to get as much reparations as possible out of Germany
France feared a united Germany rising again on its eastern boarder
USA thinks rapid economic recovery of Germany would be best for health of western Europe
Would contain spread of communism
British backed this view, although they were bankrupt post war
Why did the post-war powers fail to unify Germany?
The increasing lack of trust between East and West as the Cold war developed
The differences in aims and attitudes of the allied powers had in 1945 would have been enough on their own to delay any permanent peace settlement for Germany
But mutual suspicions between the USSR and the West began to harden, making it more difficult
Both sides worry about Germany joining the “other side” and tipping the fragile balance of power
James Byrnes gives “Speech of Hope” promising that Germany would be rebuilt and would not be divided economically, and that Germans would be allowed to govern themselves democratically
He also commits US troops to Germany as long as there is an occupation
“to win the German people … it was a battle between us and Russia over minds…”
Why did the post-war powers fail to unify Germany?
Specific Disputes between the post-war powers within Germany itself
Economic conflict
Reparations are key
USSR was to take 25% of German industrial equipment from the Western Zones in return for supplying those zones with food and raw materials
This did not work
Food was a huge problem in war-torn Germany
Compounded by a swell of refugees from Eastern Europe
USSR was not delivering enough food to the Western zone
Also increasingly secretive about what is going on in their zone
USA and UK stopped supplying the Soviet zone
German coal was another area of disagreement
Soviets want western coal, Americans want to use this coal to assist in the economic recovery of Western Europe
25 million tons exported to Europe, not Soviets
In early 1947, British and US zones are merged into a new unit called Bizonia
Why did the post-war powers fail to unify Germany?
Specific Disputes between the post-war powers within Germany itself
Political Conflict
Stalin is planning as early as June 1945 to reunify Germany and incorporate it into Russia’s sphere of influence
Red army controlled Soviet zone, and Communist Party of Germany (KDP) would attempt to get popular support
First step, merge the Social Democrats in Soviet zone with KDP, creating the Socialist United Party (SED)
Party did not win over West Germans however
The London Conference of Ministers 1947
Should have considered the German peace treaty, ends in Soviets and the West throwing accusations at each other, showing that agreement was far from happening
London Conference 1948
France, Britain, US draw up a constitution for a new West Germany
Also establish a new currency
The Berlin Blockade, 1948
Stalin’s response to establishing a West German state and new currency
Berlin is 100 miles within the Soviet zone, sealed off from the rest of Germany
Thus West Germans in the zone received their food and energy supplies from the Western zone, delivered on road, rail and air corridors
Stalin begins a total blockade of these routes
Roads, railways and waterways linking West Berlin with West Germany were closed, cut supply of electricity from west German to West Berlin, and the USSR left the Berlin Kommandantur, having left the ACC in March of 48
West defeats the blockade by air not by direct military confrontation
British and American planes flew more than 200,000 flights in 320 days, delivering vital supplies of food and coal to 2.2 million West Berliner
By 1949, its clear this is working, Soviets end the blockade
Results of the Berlin Blockade
First time since 1945 that war had been a possibility
Blockade has significant impact on the development of the Cold War
Any agreement would be extremely difficult to come by
Three major outcomes
Germany is divided
West, 1948, Federal Republic of Germany (FRG)
East, 1949, German Democratic Republic (GDR)
For the West, a divided Germany protected by the US was preferable to a neutral united Germany
Continuation of four-power control in Berlin
Berlin remained a divided city
The formation of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO)
April 1949,
USA, Canada, Brussels Pact Powers (1948 -- Britain, France, Belgium, the Netherlands, and Luxembourg,), Norway, Denmark, Iceland, Italy, Portugal
Defensive alliance
In Paris Pact, West Germany is added to NATO in 1955
Soviets respond w/ Warsaw Pact
Brings all of Eastern Europe under one military command
Conclusions that can be drawn: Europe 1949
Europe was now clearly divided along political, economic, and military lines
Germany was not to be reunited as had been an original aim of the Allies at the end of World War II. There were now two clear states, although neither side was prepared to recognize the existence of the other (until the 1970s)
The USA had abandoned its peacetime policy of avoiding commitments and was now involved economically (Marshall Plan) and militarily (NATO)No peace treaty had actually been signed with Germany, which meant that the boarders of central Europe were not formalized. This was particularly worrying for Poland, as it now included territory taken from Germany in 1945 (not resolved until 1975)
Western countries had developed a greater sense of unity due to the Soviet threat
International Relations Beyond Europe?
From this time on, many conflicts, wherever they were in the world, would be seen as part of the struggle between Communism and Capitalism
The USA’s policy of containment, which had been developed to fight Communism in Europe, was to lead the USA into resisting Communism anywhere in the world that it perceived Communism was a threat. This would involve the USA fighting in both the Korean and Vietnam War
The United Nations was never to play the role envisioned in the original discussions between Roosevelt and Churchill at the time of its foundation. With the USA and the USSR now opposing each other and able to use their respective vetoes, the UN could not act effectively to resolve international conflicts.
11/8/2024
Breakdown of the Grand Alliance - Steps to the political, economic and Military Division of Europe
Causation and Change
In 1945, American and Soviet Soldiers met at the River Elbe
Signified the final defeat of Germany, due to the successful collaboration between the USA and the Allies in the Grand Alliance
By 1949 however, Europe has been divided into two separate “spheres of influence”
In September of 1949, following the Berlin Blockade, the Federal Republic of Germany (FRG) or West Germany was established
By October of 1949, the German Democratic Republic (GDR), or East Germany is established
This physical divide of Germany was a symbol of the divide in Europe to come
Breakdown of the Grand Alliance
When Germany attacked Russia in June of 1941, both British Prime Minister Winston Churchill and American President Franklin D. Roosevelt sent aid to the Soviets
Marks beginning of Grand Alliance
Churchill and the British, despite sending aid, still have highly unfavorable views of the Soviet State
“If Hitler invaded Hell, I would make at least favorable reference to the Devil in the House of Commons”
Still mutual suspicion
“an enemy of my enemy is my friend” applies to the relationship
Stalin wants more than the aid he is receiving – demands that the allies open up a second front to the war to deflect some of the pressure the Soviets are under
Allies agreed to this in principle, after all France was under occupation and the British were under bombardment, but said they were waiting for the right opportunity
This increases Stalin’s suspicion of the Allies – believes they are allowing Germany to weaken the USSR permanently
The Wartime Conferences
During the war, the decisions of the Grand Alliance determined the territorial and political structure of post war Europe.
Three major conferences: Tehran, Yalta, Potsdam
Key issues discussed at these Conferences
The state of the war
The status of Germany, Poland, Eastern Europe, and Japan
The United nations
The Tehran Conference
First Major Conference, held in Tehran Iran – November 1943
Leaders present: Joseph Stalin, Franklin Roosevelt, Winston Churchill
The State of the War
Allies were beginning turn the fight around, pushing the Germans back from North Africa and had invaded Italy
Soviets were pushing the Germans into retreat on the Eastern front
British and Americans had not launched a second front yet in Stalin’s eyes
Continues to press that the allies invade northwestern Europe
Early discussions on Japan start, US has begun its Island hopping strategy
The Tehran Conference: Germany
Question is raised – what to do with Germany post defeat
Divide between Stalin and Allies
Allies are looking to learn from Treaty of Versailles failures
Too punishing of Germany – leading to Hitler’s rise
Stalin is less forgiving
One major agreement: “unconditional surrender” of Germany was the objective
Roosevelt does believe that Operation Overlord – the allied invasion of northern France that would eventually begin June 6th 1944– was a priority
Tehran Conference: Poland
Stalin’s main concern: “security” – which influences his demands over the future of Germany, but also thus shapes his concerns over the shape of Poland’s post war boarders.
Stalin wants to secure his western boarder by taking land from Poland
Wants a pro-soviet government installed in Poland
Claims that historically, Poland had been a launching pad to the invasion of Russia
Thus it was agreed to that USSR was to keep territory seized in 1939 and Poland would be given territory on its western boarder with Germany
No independent Poland would agree to this – ensuring hostilities in the future between Poland and Germany
Made it likely that a puppet regime would have to be installed, and it would have to look to the USSR for security
Tensions between Pole and Soviets increased in 1943, when a mass grave of 10,000 Polish officers was discovered in the Katyn Forest. Though the Soviets blamed the Germans, many Poles rightly suspected that this had been committed by the Soviets
Tehran Conference: Eastern Europe
Soviets demanded the right to keep the territories that they had seized between 1939 and 1940, giving them control of the Baltic States and parts of Finland and Romania
Americans and British reluctantly agreed to allow it
Goes against the Atlantic Charter agreement between the United States and Britain
The Charter they drafted included eight “common principles” that the United States and Great Britain would be committed to supporting in the postwar world. Both countries agreed not to seek territorial expansion; to seek the liberalization of international trade; to establish freedom of the seas, and international labor, economic, and welfare standards.
Tehran Conference: Japan and UN
Japan
United States and Britain pressed the USSR to enter the war with Japan
Stalin says no until Germany has been stopped
The United Nations
British and Soviets give general approval of the idea of such an organization
Settle international disputes though collect security
Tehran overall:
Agreement on a new international organization
Agreement on the need weak post-war Germany
Roosevelt: “I got along fine with Marshal Stalin… I believe that we are going to get along very well with him and the Russian People…”
However, there is a growing gap between Soviet post war goals and Churchill
Roosevelt even assures Polish that Stalin is not imperialist
The Yalta Conference
By the time of February 1945 Yalta Conference on the Black Sea in Russia Stalin’s diplomatic position is greatly strengthened
Red Armies control most of Eastern Europe
Stalin, Roosevelt, Churchill represent the big powers
Yalta: the State of the War
Germany is on the verge of defeat
Normandy landings in 1944 – second war front has been opened
British and Americans had forced the Germans from France, poised to cross the Rhine and invade Germany from the West
Soviets are ready to invade Germany from the East
Japan
Still fighting on, but are under heavy aerial bombardment from the Americans
USA is in control or Air and Sea in the Pacific
Japan is preparing for final defense of the homeland
Yalta Conference: Germany
Allies decide that Germany would be disarmed, demilitarized, de-Nazified, and divided
Four Zones of Occupation: USA, USSR, Britain, France would each control a portion
Divisions would be temporary and Germany was to be run as one country
Allied Control Council (ACC) would be set up to govern Germany
Stalin demands reparations
It was agreed Germany would pay 20 Billion, with half going to USSR
Yalta Conference: Poland
Biggest issue: boarders of Poland
Boarder between USSR and Poland would be drawn at the Curzon Line
Puts boundary to what it had been before the Russo-Polish War of 1921.
Poland would be compensated by gaining back territory taken by Germany
Land east of the Oder-Neisse Line
Thus Stalin gets what he wants in terms of boundaries
Establishment of Polish Government
British support the London Poles, pre-war government that had fled in 1939
Soviets want Communist Lublin Committee in Poland to form the new government
Katyn Forrest massacre and failure of Soviets to back Polish in Warsaw Uprising – specifically those who followed the London Poles
Yalta Conference: Eastern Europe and Japan
There is agreement over the future nature of governments in Eastern Europe
Stalin agrees that Eastern Europe would be able to have free elections
Perceived at the time as a major victory for Britain and US
Japan
Stalin promised to enter the war against Japan as soon as the war in Europe drew to a close
Demanded territory as a reward: South Sakhalin and Kuril Islands.
Terms accepted by Roosevelt and Stalin
Yalta Conference: United Nations
Stalin agreed that the Soviet Union would join the UN organization
Allies agree to five permanent members of the Security Council, each with veto power: China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States
Stalin wants all 16 Soviet Republics to have seats in the UN General Assembly
British and USA agreed in the end to only Russia, Ukraine and Belarus
Three main positive outcomes of Yalta:
Agreement on UN
Soviet agreement to join the war with Japan
The Big Three signing a “Declaration on Liberated Europe” pledging for free elections in all European Countries, including those in Eastern Europe
Crucial Developments between Yalta and Potsdam Conferences
President Roosevelt died in April 1945, and was replaced by Truman, who was to adopt a more hardline approach towards the Soviets
Germany finally surrendered unconditionally on May 7th, 1945
Winston Churchill’s conservative party lost the July 1945 general election, and Churchill was succeeded as prime minister by Labour Party leader, Clement Attlee
As the war in Europe ended, the Soviet Red Army occupied territory as far west as deep inside Germany
On July 17, 1945, the day after Potsdam begins, the US successfully tested its first atomic bomb
Potsdam Conference
State of the War
May of 1945 Germany surrendered unconditionally
America is poised to invade Japan, planning on using its new Atomic Weapon
Germany
Yalta plans being put into effect
Economy was run as a “whole” but this was limited to domestic industry and agriculture (74% of 1936 capacity)
Soviets received 25% of their reparation bill from Western zones, Eastern Germany would trade them food
Poland
Truman is not happy with Yalta agreement, tried to challenge the Oder-Neisse Line
Truman wants government re-organized
Unhappy with Lublin-Dominated government, does not think that Stalin including London Poles in elections is satisfactory enough
Eastern Europe
US unhappy with British and Soviet Percentages Agreement
Percentages gave spheres of influence power in fate of Eastern European Europe and Southern Europe: EX: Romania – Russia 90% influence, 10% other, Greece UK 90%, Russia 10%, Yugoslavia 50-50, Hungary 50-50, Bulgaria Russia 75, others 25
Did not like control Russia got over Bulgaria and Romania
However, the Red Army control Eastern Europe, so it was hard to get Stalin to budge here
Japan
Others told of the bomb, which was first used on Hiroshima on August 6th, 1945.
Three days later, second bomb is dropped on Nagasaki
Unconditional surrender is announced on September 2nd.
Truman hid details of the super weapon from Stalin
Americans did not encourage Soviet participation in war against Japanese
United Nations
Created, became a reality when chartered in San Francisco in 1945
Stalin would use veto power on anything not deemed to be in Soviet Interest
11/6/2024
PAPER TWO UNITS START The Cold War - Signifcance and Causation
The Emergence of Superpowers
Following the defeat of Nazi Germany in 1945 at the end of World War II, two competing Superpowers emerge:
United States
Union of Soviet Socialists Republics (USSR)
In 1945, many expected this to evolve into a traditional rivalry, one that could lead to an armed conflict.
Instead, rapid escalation of nuclear armament by both countries makes the results of direct conflict unthinkable.
This leads to 45 years of ideological conflict, a conventional and nuclear arms race, and wars fought by proxy on the battlefields of Asia, Africa and Latin America
Leads to economic rivalry, and the development of huge spy networks as each side tried to discover the other’s military and strategic secrets
The Cold War
Fun Fact: American Journalist Walter Lippman, writing for the New York Herald Tribune in 1947 who popularized the term “Cold War”
Harry Truman preferred the phrase “the war of nerves”
Opposing Ideologies
Part of what made the Cold War so intense was that both of these Superpowers had fundamental differences in ideology
Made for natural, if not inevitable enemies.
The Bolshevek Revolution in Russia in 1917, saw Vladimir Lenin and the Bolshevik Party establish the world’s first Communist State, based on the ideas of 19th century economic philosopher Karl Marx
These ideas seemed to threaten basis of American and Western Society
America (and the “West”)
Economic Differences
Individuals should be able to compete with each other with a minimum of state interference and make as much money as they wish
Capitalism
Individuals are thus encouraged to work hard with the promise of individual reward
Political Differences
Individuals choose the government through voting. There is a range of political parties to choose from
Individuals have certain rights, such as freedom of the press
Liberal Democracy
USSR
Economic Differences
Capitalism creates divisions between rich and poor. Thus all businesses and farms should be owned by the state on behalf of the people
Communism
Goods will be distributed to individuals by the state. Everyone will thus get what is needed and everyone will be working for the collective good
Political Differences
There is no need for a range of political parties, as the Communist Party truly represents the views of all of the workers and rules on behalf of the people.
Individual freedoms valued by the west are not necessary
This is a one party state
Increasing Hostility Leading into World War II
There is mutual suspicion between the West and the USSR that manifests itself in various ways between the Bolshevik Revolution and the start of World War II
Russian Civil War 1918-1922
Estimated 7,000,000–12,000,000 casualties during the war, mostly civilians.
Red army is triumphant (Bolshevism – Russian form of Communism)
West had given support to the Conservative forces – the white army – which was a hodge-podge of anti-communist beliefs (favoring monarchism, capitalism and alternative forms of socialism, each with democratic and antidemocratic variants)
rival militant socialists and nonideological Green armies fought against both the Bolsheviks and the Whites
Eight nations – mainly Allies from WWI, and pro- German forces, helped against the Red Army, but without success
USSR does not receive diplomatic recognition or join the League of Nations until 1934
Hilter is appeased leading into World War II in part because of fear of Soviet Communism, which at the time was more feared than German Facism
The Non-Aggression Pact (Soviet-Nazi Pact) between USSR and Nazi Germany, signed in 1939, allowed Hitler to concentrate on attacking the West, increases tension between USSR and the rest of the West
Idealism v. Self Interest: What ideals underpinned the view of each country/ How was this achieved by each country?
USA
Idealism of Presidents Woodrow Wilson and Franklin D. Roosevelt
Struggle for a better world based on collective security, political self-determination, and economic integration
Peace freedom, justice and plenty
Achieved by democracy/Capitalism and international co-operation
USSR
Marxist idealism and Stalinism
Struggle for a better world based on international socialism
Peace, freedom, justice, and plenty
Achieved by spreading Soviet- style communism
Idealism v. Self-Interest: Which Elements of self-interest lay behind each country’s ideals
USA
The need to establish markets and open doors to FREE TRADE
The desire to avoid another economic crisis of the magnitude of 1929
President Truman and most of the post war US administration’s belief that what was good for America was good for the world
USSR
The need to secure boarders
The need to recover from the effects of World War II
The need to regain strength as the nursery of Communism
Stalin’s belief that what was good for the USSR was good for the workers of the world
Significance of Stalinism
Stalin takes over leadership of the Soviet Union after the death of Lenin
Becomes the sole leader by the late 1920s
Stalin’s Policies
Collectivization of all farms
Leads to the death of millions of agricultural workers
Five-year plans
Industry: dramatically increase production, put USSR in a position to defeat the Nazi’s by 1945
Great Terror
Purges of all political opponents as well as millions of ordinary people
Gulag’s – slave labor camps
Executions
By 1945, Stalinism means:
Dominance of Stalin over the party, and the party over state institutions
A powerful state machinery
The ruthless maintenance of power by the elimination of opposing leaders, groups or entire sections of the population
The development of a regime associate with paranoia and violence
Stalin’s role in World War II
Stalin had hoped that engagement with Hitler could be delayed by the Nazi-Soviet Pact in 1939
Nazi Germany, which had not yet defeated the British in 1941, decided they can no longer wait to engage the Soviet Union
Operation Barbarossa
Red Army is ill prepared for war, many military leaders had not survived Stalin’s purges
Ukraine is quickly overrun
German Army besieged Leningrad and reached the outskirts of Moscow
Winter in Russia devastates the underprepared Germans
Soviet’s win at Stalingrad, start pushing Nazi’s back to Germany
Overall, Stalin plays a key role in defeating the Nazis
Made him more secure and powerful in the Soviet Union, and also puts the Soviet Union in a strong position to emerge as one of the leading powers of the post war world
General Costs of World War II
20 Million people were displaced in World War II
Europe: 23% of farmland could not be used for food production, severe crisis in 1946-47
USSR: 1,700 towns, 31,000 factories, 100,000 state farms destroyed
USSR: 25-27 Million Deaths
China: 10 million deaths
Japan: 2 Million deaths
Australia and New Zealand Deaths: roughly 50,000
Poland: 6 million deaths
Germany: 7 million deaths
France: 600,000 deaths
Great Britain: 357,000 deaths
Italy: 500,000 deaths
USA: GDP Doubles by 1944
400,000 deaths
Why Does the USA and USSR Emerge as Superpowers after 1945: Military Reasons
To defeat Germany, USA had become the number one air force power in the world
To defeat Germany, USSR had become the number one land force power in the world
France’s and Britain’s inability to defeat Germany had changed the balance of power – they are now “second tier”
The USSR now lacked any strong military neighbors. This made it the regional power
Why Does the USA and USSR Emerge as Superpowers after 1945: Economic Reason
The USA’s economy was strengthened by the war. It was now able to out-produce the other powers put together
The USA was committed to more “open trade” Its politicians and businesspeople wanted to ensure liberal trade, and market competition flourished. The United States was willing to play an active role in avoiding the re-emergence of the disastrous pre-war pattern of trade blocs and tariffs
The USA had the economic strength to prevent a return to instability in Europe
The small Eastern European countries that had been created after World War One were not economically viable on their own, so they needed the support of a stronger neighbor, and the USSR could replace Germany in this role
Why Does the USA and USSR Emerge as Superpowers after 1945: Political Reasons
For the West, the outcome of World War Two showed that the ideals of democracy and international collaboration had triumphed over fascism. Thus the political system of the USA was the right path for the future
For the Soviet Union, it was Communism that had triumphed over fascism. Indeed Communism had gained widespread respect in Europe because of its part in resisting the Germans
The USSR had huge losses, and the role of the Red Army in defeating the Nazis, gave Stalin a claim to great influence in forming the post-war world.
The USSR had the political and military strength to prevent a return to instability in Eastern Europe. Communism could fill the political vacuum
The alliance that existed between the United States and the USSR to defeat Germany completely collapses by 1949.
Key Political Definitions
Liberalism
Liberals put their main emphasis on the freedom of the individual
Economically they believe in minimal interference by the state.
Foreign policy: promote the ideas of free trade and cooperation
Strong beliefs in:
Civil liberties (freedom of conscience, freedom of speech)
Universal suffrage
Parliamentary constitutional government
An independent judiciary
Diplomacy rather than force in relations between states
Fascism
This ideology is rooted in ideas that are the very opposite of liberalism
Limiting individual freedoms in the interest of the state
Extreme nationalism
Use of violence to achieve ends
Keeping power in the hands of an elite group or leader
An aggressive foreign policy
Socialism
Ideology developed in the early 19th century in the context of the Industrial Revolution
Socialists believe:
A more egalitarian social system
Governments providing for the more needy members of society
International cooperation and solidarity
Conservatism
The general implication is a belief in maintaining the existing or traditional order
Respect for traditional institutions
Limiting government intervention in people’s lives
Gradual and/or limited changes in the established order
Right Wing v. Left Wing
Right: describes groups who favor free-market capitalism and place an emphasis on law and order, limited state interference and traditional societal values
Left: describes those groups who favor more equality in society, and thus more government intervention in the economy to secure this situation
Essay Draft Shit
1. Evaluate the role of the policies of the United States in the origins of the Cold War between 1945 and 1949.
Economic Policies: The USA’s implementation of the Marshall Plan in 1947 was crucial in revitalizing Western European economies post-World War II. This plan provided over $13 billion in aid to help rebuild European nations, thereby limiting the appeal of communist ideologies. The USSR, viewing this as an act of economic imperialism, saw the establishment of a capitalist bloc as a direct threat to its influence.
Military Policies: The establishment of NATO in April 1949 formalized military alliances among Western nations to counter perceived Soviet aggression. This military pact signaled a commitment among the U.S. and its allies to confront communism collectively, which further entrenched divisions between East and West.
Diplomatic Policies: The formulation of the Truman Doctrine in March 1947 was a critical assertion of U.S. intent to prevent the spread of communism. Truman stated that the USA would support nations resisting communism, specifically referencing the geopolitical situations in Greece and Turkey, where communist movements threatened the governments.
Result: These U.S. policies effectively created a dichotomy in Europe, with the Soviet Union tightening its grip on Eastern Europe while the USA championed democratic and capitalist values in the West, thus laying the groundwork for the Cold War.
2. (a) Why did the end of the Second World War lead to the development of two superpowers?
Military Power: The U.S. emerged as a dominant force with an unprecedented nuclear arsenal and a strong economic base, while the USSR expanded its influence over Eastern Europe through occupation and the establishment of communist governments.
Political Ideologies: The ideological battle between capitalism (U.S.) and communism (USSR) deepened. The U.S. presented itself as the bastion of democracy and free enterprise, while the USSR promoted itself as the protector of global communism.
(b) How did this development help to cause the Cold War?
Expansionism and Conflict: The U.S. perceived Soviet actions in Eastern Europe as aggressive expansionism, prompting a response of containment, which was codified in policies like the Truman Doctrine. This reciprocal suspicion and hostility between two ideologies set the stage for an ongoing conflict.
3. Compare and contrast the roles of Korea and Vietnam in the Cold War.
Korea: The Korean War (1950-1953) saw the U.S. and UN forces supporting South Korea against the invading North Korea, backed by the USSR and China. This conflict was a direct military confrontation of Cold War ideologies, leading to a stalemate at the 38th parallel and the establishment of a demilitarized zone.
Vietnam: U.S. involvement escalated from advisory roles in the late 1950s to full military engagement by the mid-1960s in response to the Viet Cong insurgency in South Vietnam. Unlike Korea, Vietnam was marked by a strong anti-colonial sentiment and domestically fractured U.S. public opinion.
Comparison: Both conflicts represent Cold War proxy wars, but Korea involved a UN-sanctioned military intervention while Vietnam was characterized more by unilateral U.S. decisions without UN support, fueled by fears of a domino effect in Southeast Asia.
4. For what reasons, and with what results, did the Truman Doctrine and the Marshall Plan affect Cold War development?
Truman Doctrine: Established in 1947, it aimed to contain communism by providing economic and military aid to countries resisting Soviet influence; this policy is exemplified by the support given to Greece and Turkey. The doctrine marked a significant shift in U.S. foreign policy, escalating the ideological confrontation with the USSR.
Results: It intensified U.S. involvement in global conflicts where communism was perceived to be spreading, effectively embedding the containment strategy into American foreign policy.
Marshall Plan: Launched in 1948, it aimed at the economic recovery of war-torn European nations. The U.S. invested over $13 billion into 16 European countries to rebuild their economies.
Results: It fostered economic stability in Western Europe, helped prevent the spread of communism, and hardened the divisions between East and West, as the USSR rejected the plan and countered with the Molotov Plan for its satellite states.
5. For what reasons and with what success, did the United States adopt a policy of Containment between 1947 and 1962?
Reasons: In response to the perceived threat from the USSR, U.S. policymakers sought to prevent the spread of communism globally. The ideological nature of the Cold War, combined with events such as the Berlin Blockade, underlined the need for a robust strategy.
Success: The policy was marked by successes in Western Europe and Korea, where communism was effectively contained, and strengthened NATO. However, it faced significant challenges, particularly in Vietnam, where the U.S. did not prevent the rise of a communist government after the war ended in 1975.
6. To what extent was the Cold War caused by superpower economic interests?
U.S. Economic Interests: The Marshall Plan aimed to stabilize Europe economically to prevent communism from gaining traction. U.S. interests dictated that a strong capitalist Europe would benefit American trade and investment.
Soviet Economic Interests: The USSR sought to expand its influence over Eastern Europe to secure resources and maintain a buffer zone against Western aggression.
Extent: Economic motives were significant; however, they were intertwined with ideological and strategic considerations that defined superpower relations, emphasizing that the Cold War was as much about competing ideologies as it was about economics.
7. Examine the results of two Cold War crises.
Cuban Missile Crisis (1962): This brought the U.S. and USSR to the brink of nuclear war over the presence of Soviet missiles in Cuba, leading to the establishment of a direct communication line (the "hotline") between Washington and Moscow and a subsequent partial nuclear test ban treaty.
Berlin Crisis (1961): Resulted in the construction of the Berlin Wall, symbolizing the division of East and West, and solidifying Cold War tensions. It established a physical and ideological barrier that defined Europe for decades.
8. Discuss the significance of one Cold War Crisis for Soviet foreign policy.
Cuban Missile Crisis: The intense standoff forced the Soviet leadership to recognize the limits of aggressive expansion concerning U.S. resolve and military capabilities. This incident contributed to a strategic rethink and an emphasis on diplomacy and arms control to avoid direct confrontations in the future.
9. Evaluate the effectiveness of US foreign policy in achieving its goals in the Cold War from 1950-1961.
Successes: The U.S. effectively contained communism in Western Europe post-World War II, maintained the defense of South Korea during the Korean War, and began solidifying NATO as a military alliance.
Challenges: The U.S. faced setbacks in regions like Southeast Asia, where escalation in Vietnam began to emerge after the French defeat, indicating a limitation in effective policy implementation regarding Asian communist movements.
10. China’s relationship with the USSR and US were largely shaped by increasing mistrust and suspicion. Discuss with reference to the period between 1947-1979.
USSR: Initially allied post-World War II, tensions grew due to differing ideological views, especially after the Great Leap Forward (1958) and the fallout from the Sino-Soviet split. Mao’s perception of Sino-Soviet cooperation as a dependency on Soviet support led to increasing resentment.
US: Relations evolved from outright hostility to tentative diplomacy beginning in the 1970s, highlighted by Nixon’s visit in 1972. However, the fundamental suspicion and competing interests shaped the interactions between both China and the US throughout this period.
11. To what extent were the decisions of Ronald Reagan the main cause of the end of the Cold War?
Military Strategies: Reagan increased defense spending significantly and enacted the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI), signaling a strong anti-communist stance that pressured the Soviet economy.
Diplomacy: His later negotiations with Gorbachev demonstrated a willingness to engage diplomatically, which paralleled Gorbachev’s reforms in the USSR.
Extent: Reagan’s decisive confrontational stance played a crucial role, but it required Gorbachev’s willingness to reform for any conclusive end to the Cold War.
12. Compare and contrast the roles of Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev in ending the Cold War.
Reagan: Early in his presidency, he adopted aggressive rhetoric and policies aimed at crippling the Soviet economy while increasing military spending. Later, he embraced negotiations and diplomacy, especially during summits with Gorbachev.
Gorbachev: Implemented reforms like glasnost and perestroika that aimed to open Soviet society and economy, allowing for more interaction with the West, which directly contributed to the easing of tensions.
Comparison: Both leaders significantly altered their respective countries' approaches. Reagan focused on military pressure early on, while Gorbachev emphasized reform and openness, ultimately forging a successful bilateral dialogue to end the Cold War.
13. Examine the Social and Cultural impact of the Cold War on Two Countries, each chosen from a different region.
USA: The rise of McCarthyism led to widespread paranoia about communism, affecting civil liberties as loyalty oaths and blacklisting became prevalent, culminating in a culture of fear surrounding perceived communist sympathies.
Cuba: Following the 1959 revolution, Fidel Castro's regime installed a repressive government that curtailed freedoms, tightened control over media, and promoted a culture of conformity aligned with Soviet ideals.
Conclusion: The Cold War produced profound social changes in both countries, marked by repression in Cuba and civil restrictions in the U.S., showcasing how ideological battles manifested in social and cultural contexts.
14. With reference to two leaders, each from a different region, evaluate their impact on the development of the Cold War.
Harry Truman (USA): His introduction of the Truman Doctrine and support for the Marshall Plan set a precedent for proactive U.S. involvement in global affairs to contain communism. His leadership thus shaped early Cold War dynamics and policies.
Nikita Khrushchev (USSR): Implemented de-Stalinization and sought to engage with the West, yet through crises like the Cuban Missile Crisis illustrated the inherent tensions of the Cold War; his leadership marked the contradictions of Soviet policy as it oscillated between confrontation and cooperation.
Evaluation: Both leaders significantly impacted their nations' approaches to the Cold War, influencing not only domestic policy but also international relations as the global landscape evolved amidst their leadership.
15. Cold War crises were mainly caused by superpower aggression. Discuss, with reference to two crises, each chosen from a different region.
Korean War (1950-1953): Initiated by the North Korean invasion of South Korea, perceived by the U.S. as a clear act of Soviet aggression. The U.S. intervention on behalf of South Korea marked a significant military confrontation that exacerbated tensions in the Cold War framework.
Cuban Missile Crisis (1962): Stemmed from the U.S. discovery of Soviet missiles in Cuba, which sparked a tense standoff that brought both superpowers close to nuclear war. This crisis exemplified the aggressiveness of both sides in asserting dominance and power over their respective spheres.
Discussion: These crises illustrate how superpower actions and reactions fueled escalating tensions, confirming that aggression from either side was pivotal in driving the Cold War narrative forward.