THE ORIGINS OF THE COLD WAR The Origins

THE ORIGINS OF THE COLD WAR

The Origins of the Cold War Long–Term Causes: 1. The Great Contest 1917 -1928 - The global contest between communism and capitalism started with the Bolshevik rise to power in 1917 * USSR: feared invasion by the West * West: feared the spread of communism 2. Long History of Fear and Mistrust - Because of this fear and mistrust, both sides adopted a realpolitik approach to foreign-policy with the other - Both sides determined to protect their global interests from threat of revolution or invasion (this increased with Stalin in 1929) Lenin, insisted that the worldwide victory of the proletariat workers was the only basis for a peaceful world. Western assistance to anti-communist forces during the Bolshevik Revolution only heightened Soviet suspicions regarding the hostility of the capitalist countries toward them.

The Origins of the Cold War Short–Term Causes: 1. Second Front - Stalin wanted the Allies to open a second front in Western Europe to take pressure of the USSR as they faced the Nazi army – took too long 2. Tehran Conference (1943) - Division of Poland (USSR could restore its original 1918 border) and an agreement that there would be no Central European alliance created during the war 3. Percentages Agreement (1944) - Outlined ‘spheres of influence’ throughout Eastern and Central Europe 4. Desire for Security (1944 -1945) 5. Breakdown of Grand Alliance (1944 -1945)

The Origins of the Cold War The Yalta Conference (Feb. 1945, Crimean coast) is often considered the starting point of Cold War tensions between the US and the Soviet Union. ‘Big Three’ – Roosevelt, Churchill, Stalin were present. Soviet Union: • had complete control of Poland at this point • had the largest army in Europe (12 million), knew he was in a position of power because Allies needed Soviet help to win WWII • wanted postwar economic assistance for Russia, recognition of a Soviet sphere of influence in Eastern Europe

The Origins of the Cold War Allies: • wanted clarification of the postwar status of Germany • Agreement on the establishment of the United Nations • Needed Soviet entry to help defeat Japan following a German surrender None of the leaders left the conference satisfied with the outcome. The only real agreement made was that the Soviets would help fight against Japan. Many in the US were upset with the plan and Roosevelt was accused of being weak and naïve, but he said it was the best he could do at the time. FDR was seemingly in ill health at the conference and then died 2 months later of a brain hemorrhage.

Orthodox Viewpoint This view places the blame for the Cold War on the Soviet Union and Stalin’s Eastern European expansion following WWII, claiming that their mistrust of the West Makes the argument that: - Stalin blatantly broke promises made at Potsdam and Yalta - Occupied and imposed Soviet control on Eastern European populations - Conspired to spread communism worldwide If this is the case, then historians claim that the US was left with little choice but to issue the Truman Doctrine and Marshall Plan as a response to such Soviet aggression. Prominent ‘Orthodox’ Historians: 1. Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. ‘The Origins of the Cold War’ 2. W. H. Mc. Neill ‘America, Britain and Russia: Their Remarkable Conflict’ 3. Herbert Feis ‘Roosevelt, Churchill and Stalin’

Revisionist Viewpoint The revisionist viewpoint places the blame for the Cold War on the United States and claims that as ‘empire-builders’ the US focused on an “open-door” policy centered around maintaining and creating new markets, capitalism and democracy. This school of thought emerged in the early 1970 s as a result of the failing US intervention in Vietnam and SE Asia. (basically an extension of US ‘dollar diplomacy’ – the US was reflexively anticommunist simply because it was a challenge to their hegemony) The “New Left” revisionists claim that: 1. The Soviets were simply acting defensively in order to avoid being cornered by the US 2. That these tensions are from the late 19 th c. and arguments over East Asian markets 3. Bombs (and nuclear weapons) were used primarily to intimidate the Soviets 4. Had FDR and Churchill had been more understanding of Stalin’s position things

Post-Revisionist Viewpoint The post-revisionist viewpoint place the blame for the Cold War on BOTH the United States and the Soviet Union. ■ This viewpoint was interested less in the question of who started the conflict than in offering insight into U. S. and Soviet actions and perspectives. From this perspective, the Cold War was not so much the responsibility of either side, but ■ the result of predictable tensions between two world powers that had been suspicious of one another for nearly a century. ■ examines how those in the Cold War perceived various events, ■ Examines the degree of misperception involved in the failure of the two sides to reach common understandings of their wartime alliance and their disputes. Historians agreed at this time that misperceptions played an important part at the beginning of the Cold War. Both superpowers overestimated the strength and threat of the other, and the growing tension of the 1940 s was a result of a pattern of "action and reaction. " Both sides were "improvising, " rather than following a well-defined plan of action. Stalin's search for national security was not initially deterred by strong opposition from the US, while the West did not fully recognize the Soviets' motives.

Post-Cold War (“New”) Viewpoint ■ With the fall of the Soviet Union in 1989− 90, new Soviet sources were made available. Russian historians were also now free to write their own accounts of the Cold War without Communist Party censorship. ■ John Lewis Gaddis, who had formerly been a 'Post-revisionist, ' also had access to the new material and the initial writings of the post-Soviet era Russian historians. He used this material to revise his Post-revisionist view, now putting even more focus on the role of Stalin and the origins of the Cold War. ■ He suggests that it was – Stalin's policies along with the Soviet totalitarian/authoritarian government that drew the West into an escalation of a protracted arms race. – Gaddis considered the role of all other key leaders and players in the early stages of the Cold War, and concludes that if Stalin (rather than any of the others, from President Truman to Secretary of State John Foster Dulles) is removed from the equation, the Cold War was UNLIKELY to have developed. ■ This essentially means that individuals and their actions, rather than the policies of whole governments, are essential to explaining key events in the Cold War.

‘Balance of Power’ v. ‘Ideology’ Balance of Power Ideology These historians view the US and Soviets as expansionist powers. Therefore, the hostility that followed 1945 was a continuation of policies they had respectively pursued since the 19 th century. Those historians that see the origins of the Cold War being initiated by the ideological struggle between Capitalism and Communism identify the starting point of the conflict as 1917 with the Bolshevik Revolution. Many argue that the aggressive foreign policy of the USSR were dictated by its Communist ideology. Many Western revisionists also claim that the ideological nature of U. S. foreign policy was a catalyst for conflict. Ideology in the US can also be seen as increasingly important in the origins of the Cold War (Mc. Carthyism in the 1950 s) Former U. S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, writing in the 1980 s, also claimed that the USSR's motives were not based on ideology, but considers them as a continuation of the long history of Tsarist empire building.