Still looking for Christmas presents? Maybe you can get some toy ideas for girls from the Cold War!

According to American Cold War ideology, homemakers in the United States were a bulwark against communism, fortifying the family social unit that was basic to a democratic society. In contrast, in the Soviet Union, communism drove women out of the home and put them to work, forcing children into state-run daycare centers and assaulting the family.

In response, postwar American society emphasized the importance of the “traditional” family structure which had a male wage-earner and a female housewife and mother. This placed the domesticated woman at the center of American values and viewed her domesticity as a weapon against any subversive communist influences. According to US Census data, in 1950, 23.8% of American married women had jobs outside the home; the figure climbed to 30.5% by 1960, and 39.6% by 1969.

An article in Life Magazine in 1953 tied working women to the consumer society, saying she worked “to increase her buying power as a consumer, for herself and particularly for her family.”

The bottom line was that, for most women, life was home centered. Women cared for their homes and for the emotional and nutritional needs of their families. They nursed, cooked, cleaned, decorated, and shopped. Girls and their toys mimicked the activities of their mothers.

Women’s housekeeping tasks were faithfully reproduced by their daughters who played with their own child-sized sweepers, vacuums, and pots and pans, Some of these were made by the same companies who manufactured the working appliances their moms used. Bissell Carpet Sweeper Company sold versions for real use and also the “Little Queen Carpet Sweeper” for girls, a good way to instill brand name loyalty at an early age.

The Kenner “Easy Bake” and Deluxe Topper Corporation’s “Suzy Homemaker” toy ovens were also popular. They used a light bulb as a heat source that could bake real, but tiny, cakes. Packaged cake mixes from Betty Crocker were sold especially for this use. The Easy Bake slogan promised little girls that they could make “Food as Good as Mom’s.”

Lessons in gender roles were seamlessly linked to lessons in the growing consumer economy. In the early 1950s, Americans began to spend more of their disposable income on food, not because of a rise in food prices, but because of marketing of new kinds of convenience foods. Toys reinforced the message that most food could be found packaged and processed.

The most important girl’s toy to come out of the Cold War era was the “Barbie” doll, introduced by Mattel in 1959. Barbie was sold as a fashion doll and ads promised:

Girls of all ages will thrill to the fascination of her miniature wardrobe of fine-fabric fashions . . . . Feminine magic! A veritable fashion show, and every girl can be the star!

Barbie didn’t cost very much when she was first introduced — only about $3 — but her clothes and accessory add-ons earned Mattel very healthy profits.

Barbie provided a contrast to then popular board games because some of the board games actually allowed for the possibility that women might be more than just a fashion object. She might, in fact, work outside the home, but only within a very narrow spectrum of possibilities.

The Selchow and Righter Company made a board game called What Shall I Be in two versions, one for boys and one for girls. Interestingly, there was no overlap between the careers offered to each. Girls choices in the 1966 version included the “helping” professions, like teacher or nurse, with some very glamorous options like stewardess, ballerina, actress, and model. In the 1968 version, boys could try out becoming doctors, engineers, astronauts, scientists, athletes, and statesmen. Neither of the options touched on the majority of real women’s jobs, the “pink collar ghetto” of secretaries, clerks, and waitresses.

Selchow and Righter Board Game for Girls

Selchow and Righter Board Game for Boys

It’s interesting to note that, according to a recent article in The Atlantic, the marketing of toys is more gendered today than it was 50 years ago when gender discrimination and sexism were the norm. But that’s another story.

Cover photograph by James Vaughan (Flickr).

Soon after World War II ended, American and Russia took center stage in world affairs. Both of them declared war on the colonial system, and soon the Third World was caught up in a new ideological struggle.

The Third World was to be torn apart by its own dogmatic civil wars, mirroring the contest of the superpowers. As Peter W. Rodman notes in his book More Precious Than Peace:

Third World societies would often find themselves split between moderates and radicals, between the middle- or upper-class elites whose dream was to be part of the civilized world (the Habib Bourguibas and Leopold Senghors) and the revolutionaries who saw the Western-dominated ‘civilized world’ as still the main enemy (the Ho Chi Minhs and Fidel Castros).

Each superpower looked for clients and proxies among the developing nations as well as within them.

A Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) assessment in September 1948 expressed great concern:

. . . The USSR is effectively exploiting the colonial issue and the economic nationalism of the underdeveloped areas as a means of dividing the non-Soviet world, weakening the Western Powers, and gaining the good will of colonial and former colonial areas.

Stalin’s behavior in Europe only reinforced the fears. He was gradually absorbing Eastern Europe, violating wartime accords.

In Western Europe, the weakness of postwar democracies heightened America’s anxiety that the Communist parties would dominate the Western half of the continent as well.

The US President, Harry S. Truman, perceived that “America had no choice but to step in with an extensive program of economic and military assistance. On March 12,1947, he spoke before a joint session of commerce stating:

I believe that it must be the policy of the United States to support free peoples who are resisting attempted subjugation by armed minorities or outside pressures.

Arguably, Truman’s statement applied globally, not just to southeastern Europe. Precedent was set when two months later (in May) Congress voted on an aid program for Greece and Turkey.

In June 1947, the Marshall Plan was announced in Secretary of State George Marshall’s commencement speech at Harvard. This was seen as a response to the advances of Communist parties and communist-led labor organizations in Western Europe.  Congress passed an initial appropriation in December 1947.

The Truman Doctrine and the Marshall Plan were the Truman Administration’s efforts to contain the Soviet threat, reinforcing the belief that economic hardship would not provide a fertile environment for rebuilding the political and economic institutions damaged during the war.

Two years later, in April 1949, the North Atlantic Treaty was signed in Washington. This was seen as the West’s response to Stalin’s brutal suppression of Eastern Europe, especially the Czechoslovakia coup of 1948. The stability and recovery of Western Europe now required American’s participation in European Defense. Financial aid was not going to be enough.

Stalin’s pressure on Europe had provoked American intervention. The danger of political collapse in Western Europe was real, and the increasing brutality of Stalin’s actions in Eastern and Central Europe heightened the growing sense of danger.

Outside of Europe, the situation was a bit murkier. Truman had articulated a doctrine that could draw us into engagements all over the world. Meanwhile, Stalin’s policy was unclear.

At the first Cominform conference in September 1947, Stalin’s politburo colleague Andrei Zdanov argued that the world was now divided into two camps, an “imperialist and anti-democratic camp” and an “anti-imperialist and democratic camp.”

So far as the Soviets were concerned, the United States and its allies formed the core of the ‘imperialist camp’, while the Soviets made up the ‘anti-imperialist camp’. Some individual countries (Egypt, India, Indonesia, Vietnam) were sympathetic to the Soviets, while most nations in the Near East and Latin America were relegated to the imperialists.

According to Stalin, only the Communist parties were reliable champions of national liberation. Nationalists were not to be trusted and the idea that states could be neutral, or a “third force” between the two sides was “a rotten idea . . . that only served the interests of imperialism.”

1949 brought two game changers. First, the Soviets exploded an atomic bomb in August. Then, the Communists achieved victory in China in October.  These events were followed by Communist North Korea’s surprise invasion of South Korea in June 1950.

The Truman Administration decided that it would be dangerous to allow the Soviets to commit aggression in the Third World. There was now a new geopolitical reality, and a US policy fixated on Europe was no longer deemed adequate.

According to Rodman:

the  military buildup that the United States undertook after the North Korean attack was the most decisive step in its emergence as a global military power.

In April 1950, Truman and his National Security Council had approved NSC 68 which expressed alarm at recent Soviet advances — Europe, the bomb, China. A follow-up report, NSC 73/4 in August 1950 warned:

 . . . the invasion of South Korea ‘should be regarded not as an isolated phenomenon but possibly as part of a general plan which might involve correlated action in other parts of the world.

Korea provoked a response. America committed to a global role, including outside of Europe.

Total defense spending more than tripled in the first year of the Korean War.

The Cold War in the Third World had begun.

Conversation Starters: Here are a couple of questions to consider. Feel free to add your opinion in the comments.

How important are America’s alliances — are they still relevant in our world today?

Was it important for America to project military power around the world? Is it still important today?

Source: Peter Rodman, More Precious Than Peace (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1994) pp.43-51. Please note that this is an affiliate link.

More Information: For more information on the early Cold War, be sure to listen to our podcasts.

The Truman Doctrine and the Marshall Plan

NSC 68

Photograph by Juandev 

LISTEN TO OUR NEW PODCAST: THE TRUMAN DOCTRINE AND THE MARSHALL PLAN (TWO HALVES OF THE SAME WALNUT)

Cold War Studies is excited to bring you our most recent podcast, the third in a series based on AMERICA, RUSSIA, AND THE COLD WAR  by Walter LaFeber. The podcast begins on March 12, 1947, when US President Harry Truman finally issues his own Declaration of Cold War. It ends with the implementation of the Marshall Plan and European calls for the protection of a US dominated military alliance.

Timeline

February 21, 1947: The British notify the US that, because of their own economic crisis, they cannot provide the military and economic support needed by Greece and Turkey.

March 12, 1947: President Truman issues his own declaration of cold war, the Truman Doctrine. He asks Americans to join in a global commitment against communism. This doctrine becomes the guiding spirit of America’s post World War 2 foreign policy. The speech requests $400 million in Greek and Turkish aid.

July 1947: A “long telegram” written by George Kennan (Mr. X) explains Soviet behavior. Mr. X argues that Soviet aggression will need to be contained.

July 1947: Truman pushes the National Security Act through Congress, providing for a single Department of Defense to replace three independently run services. It establishes a Joint Chiefs of Staff, a National Security Council to advise the President, and a Central Intelligence Agency to correlate and evaluate intelligence activities.

July 1947: The Russians begin to concentrate on Germany. Rebuilding Europe threatened Stalin. A series of moves tightens Soviet control of the Eastern bloc. A program of bilateral trade agreements (Molotov Plan) begins to link the bloc countries and Russia.

Late Summer 1947: American nations convene in Rio de Janeiro to initiate steps toward a collective security arrangement.

September 2, 1947: The US and Latin America sign the Rio Treaty whereby an attack against one American nation will be considered an attack against all.

Late 1947: American officials perceive that the “one world” of the UN is no longer valid, and economic development cannot occur until security is established. There is increasing concern with things military.

1947-1948: The quest for military security transforms US policy in Asia. The State Department reverses its post 1945 policy and decides to rebuild Japanese industry and develop a sound export economy. At the same time, American military bases on the island will be expanded and maintained.

March 1948: The Ninth Inter-American Conference convenes in Bogota, Columbia. Out of this meeting comes the Charter of the Organization of American States which establishes administrative machinery for hemispheric consultation and an Advisory Defense Committee for military strategy. The charter is ratified by the US Senate.

April 3, 1948: The Foreign Assistance Plan (known as the Marshall Plan), concentrating efforts on Europe, becomes effective. The plan revolves around establishing a rebuilt and autonomous Germany. It also offers large sums to nations like France. The plan marks the last phase in the administration’s use of economic tactics as a primary means of tying together the Western World.

January 1949: COMECON (the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance) is established. This is the Soviet response to the Marshall Plan, a centralized agency for stimulating and controlling bloc development. Also, the Cominform, the Communist Information Bureau, is formed as an instrument for increasing Stalin’s control.

________________________________________________

A PDF of the podcast is provided. You can access the text of  THE TRUMAN DOCTRINE AND THE MARSHALL PLAN (TWO HALVES OF THE SAME WALNUT) here.

There is also a downloadable Glossary of Terms.

Here are the links to the first two podcasts:

CAUSES OF THE COLD WAR

MORE CAUSES OF THE COLD WAR

Photograph By Υπουργείο Εξωτερικών – Φωτογραφική έκθεση υπηρεσίας Διπλωματικού και Ιστορικού Αρχείου. Photo exhibition of the Diplomatic and Historical Archive Department, CC BY-SA 2.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=26282553

Under Herbert Hoover, America’s president from 1929-1933, the U.S. was converted to the view that intervention in other nation’s affairs was no longer respectable. He said:

True democracy is not and cannot be imperialistic.

However, a decisive shift in American colonial policy came with his successor, Franklin D. Roosevelt.

In a 1928 article in Foreign Affairs (the year Hoover was elected president), Roosevelt deplored U.S. intervention in Latin America, whether by Republican or Democratic administrations. He thought that the ill will garnered by interventionism would ultimately harm our trading relations. Consequently, in his own first inaugural address on March 4, 1933, Roosevelt announced his Good Neighbor Policy.

In 1933 and 1934, Roosevelt refused to get involved in a civil war in Cuba. He also completed the withdrawal of the marines from Haiti. Outside of Latin America, he promoted and signed legislation setting a date for Philippine independence, and he authorized the State Department to negotiate with China on terminating American extraterritorial rights.

The Atlantic Charter (which Roosevelt and Winston Churchill signed in August 1941) included a joint renunciation of ambitions for acquiring territory. Soon, however, the language of the charter was in dispute with Churchill arguing that the language applied only to liberated Europe. Roosevelt, on the other hand, made a special point of repeatedly urging Churchill to speed independence for India.

American militancy on the subject of colonialism had many sources.

One argument was economic, with Roosevelt, an outspoken free trader, objecting to colonialism as a form of protectionism. There was no way that colonialism would fit into a postwar world that was to be governed by the Open Door.

Also, Roosevelt believed that the competition among colonial powers for raw materials and markets impoverished local peoples and was a dangerous source of war. He commented:

The thing is the colonial system means war. Exploit the resources of an India, a Burma, a Java; take all the wealth out of those countries, but never put anything back into them, things like education, decent standards of living, minimum health requirements — all you’re doing is storing up the kind of trouble that leads to war . . . .

Third, American leaders were convinced that the colonial peoples’ liberation was inevitable and they thought it was essential for the West not to be the target of their antagonism. Roosevelt explained:

. . . there are 1,100,000,000 brown people. In many Eastern countries, they are ruled by a handful of whites and they resent it. Our goal must be to help them achieve independence — 1,100,000,000 potential enemies are dangerous. (He included 450,000,000 Chinese in this number.)

Roosevelt then added, “Curchill doesn’t understand this.”

A fourth source of anticolonialist passion in American policy was the American vision of postwar world alignments. According to Peter Rodman in his book, More Precious Than Peace:

It was the vision of a world in which Britain’s and France’s struggle to recover their empires would be a bigger problem for U.S. foreign policy than Stalin’s Soviet Union.

Fifth, and perhaps most important, was the powerful anticolonialist feeling of the American public. Added to this was Roosevelt’s perception that what he knew and saw of colonialism was exploitation and, therefore, the sooner it ended, the better.

Unfortunately, Roosevelt’s successor, Harry S. Truman, didn’t share the anticolonialist passion to the same degree. Moreover, any continuity with Roosevelt’s policy was shattered when the Cold War disrupted any remaining illusions of postwar international harmony. Soon, the Soviet challenge would come to dominate.

For more information on colonization read the Cold War Studies post on the History of Colonization in the Middle East and North Africa.

_________________________________

Good Neighbor Policy

Atlantic Charter

Open Door Policy

Featured Photo: Unknown

Map: Aris Katsaris

 

At the first Cominform conference in September 1947, Andrei Zdanov, Stalin’s Politburo colleague, articulated the Soviet response to Mr. X. He surveyed the Russian view of the global situation as it had emerged from World War II.

In what has become known as the Two Camp Speech, Zdanov announced that American economic power was organizing Western Europe and “countries politically and economically dependent on the United States, such as the Near-Eastern and South-American countries and China” into an anticommunist bloc.

The Russians and the “new democracies” in Eastern Europe, Finland, Indonesia, and Vietnam meanwhile formed another bloc which “has the sympathy of India, Egypt and Syria.”

Zdanov argued that the world was now divided into two camps, the “imperialist and anti-democratic camp” and the “anti-imperialist and democratic camp.” This two-camp view of the world had previously dominated Russian policy between 1927 and 1934 when Stalin bitterly opposed the West. Post WWII, it became known as the Zdanov Doctrine.

________________________________________

As you can tell, this ends our series on the Cold War A to Z.  (CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD COLD WAR UNVEILED! IT’S FREE!!)

COLD WAR UNVEILED lets you learn about the Cold War while you’re on the go!

Ever wished you had an easy and FUN way to learn about Cold War History and Politics?

Are you a student? A history buff? An erudite conversationalist?

Do you want to WOW your friends and colleagues with your Cold War expertise? Or do you just want to pass a test?

Whatever your reason, the COLD WAR UNVEILED E-BOOK  is just right for you. Designed and written in A to Z format, it’s an easy and enjoyable way to learn the facts and make them stick.

COLD WAR UNVEILED takes you through the events and happenings of the half century confrontation between the United States and the Soviet Union known as the COLD WAR. That conflict still shapes our lives today.

You’ll learn the language that you need to know to discuss Cold War History and Politics knowledgeably and intelligently.

You’ll learn about the facts, concepts, and occurrences that have influenced our 21st century world.

Here’s a little background:

From the end of World War II in 1945 until the ultimate collapse of the Soviet Union in 1990, the world was polarized by a global rivalry between two wartime allies, the Soviet Union and the United States. The Cold War’s impact was global in scope and created divisions based on free world orientation, socialist orientation, or nonalignment. The legacy of this conflict continues to shape the geopolitics at work in our world today.

COLD WAR UNVEILED: ARMS RACE to ZDANOV DOCTRINE is meant to provide a quick, easy to read, introduction to the complex Cold War concepts dominating the last half of the 20th century.

Here’s a sample:

The legacy of the Cold War is still with us as we confront the problems of today’s world: the complex relationship between Russia and the United States; the residue from wars in Afghanistan and Iraq; the continuing American embargo and travel restrictions in place regarding Cuba; the nuclear stalemate with Iran; the drain of military expenditures on strained economies; the sway of the defense establishment on public policy decision-making. Whether you want to shine at a cocktail party or pass an exam, Cold War Unveiled is the illustrated primer you need to achieve your goal.

 

BE SURE TO DOWNLOAD YOUR COPY OF COLD WAR UNVEILED: ARMS RACE T0 ZDANOV DOCTRINE
TODAY!

 

 

 

The “Big Three” — Britain, Russia, and the United States — met at Yalta, a resort on the Russian Black Sea, in February 1945. Their purpose was to shape the post World War II world. During the conference, the Western Allies (to their regret) acknowledged that the enormous Soviet sacrifices and successes in the war entitled the Soviet Union to a preeminent role in Eastern Europe. This understanding was reflected in a number of key decisions that — during the Cold War — became known as “the treason of Yalta” or the “Yalta agreements.”

Photograph by Dave Proffer (Flickr)

In a previous post, I mentioned that America had just dropped the atomic bomb on Hiroshima, and that the Soviets were responding by pushing forward with an effort to produce their own atomic weapon. In other words, the arms race was on. In this post we’ll be focusing more on the threat of conventional military confrontation.

You can listen to Cold War Studies podcast on “More Causes of the Cold War” here. But you may want to take a look at the Timeline first.

1946: Churchill and Stalin Declare Cold War – Truman Hesitates

End of WW2: The communists control one-fifth of China and more than 105 million people. The Nationalist President, Chiang Kai-Shek squanders more than a billion dollars of American aid.

1945: Stalin demands a partnership with the Turks to control the strategic Dardanelles Straits.

1945: Russian armies move into Manchuria to disarm the Japanese. They remain to loot industrial machinery for the rebuilding of Russian industrial capacity. Mao and Chiang race to control Manchuria.

August 1945:  Chiang Kai-Shek’s Nationalist Chinese government and Stalin agree to a Treaty of Friendship and Alliance.

October 1945: A plebiscite is held in Outer Mongolia. Voting under Soviet supervision, the country decides to become independent of China and to move closer to Russia. The vote count is 483,291 to 0.

1946: American and Russian military forces confront each other in Manchuria, Iran, Turkey, and Europe. The situation in China is critical.

Early 1946: Most British and American forces have withdrawn from Iran. The Russians refuse to leave, demanding oil concessions. Washington takes the Iranian case to the UN Security Council.

February 1946: Stalin brings charges in the UN Security Council against the British repression of the Greek rebellion and British and Dutch attempts to suppress revolution in Indonesia.

February 9, 1946: In an appearance at the Boshoi Theater, Stalin announces that war is inevitable as long as capitalism exists.

March 1946: The US releases a plan for the control of the atom called the Acheson-Lilienthal Proposal.

March 5, 1946:  In a speech in Fulton, Missouri, Britain’s Prime Minister Churchill claims that “an iron curtain has descended across the continent” allowing a “police government” to rule Eastern Europe.  What the Soviets want, he says, is “the indefinite expansion of their power and doctrine.” The speech is not well received.

Late March 1946: Iran and Russia announce that the Red Army will leave Iran.

March and April 1946: Soviet occupation troops suddenly withdraw from Manchuria and Mao’s troops move in.

April 1946: Bernard Baruch is named the first American delegate to a new UN Atomic Energy Commission. He distrusts the Acheson-Lilienthal Proposal and comes up with his own plan, the Baruch Plan. His plan focuses on eliminating any Soviet power to veto inspections or sanctions. This is unacceptable to the Russians.

Summer 1946: Europe is in the limelight. Germany, and the control of atomic weapons, emerge as the central issues.

June 1, 1946: The American Congress establishes a US Atomic Energy Commission under the Atomic Energy Act of 1946. The act prohibits any exchange of information on the use of atomic energy with any nation.

July 1946: Bikini Atoll. You can read more about it here.

August 1946: Stalin sends a note to Turkey which the US interprets as a Soviet attempt to dominate that nation, threaten Greece, and intimidate the rest of the Middle East.

Autumn 1946:   Truman’s task now centers on the rebuilding of wartorn Western Europe. The West isn’t threatened by the Red Army, but by internal collapse.

If you haven’t already done so, be sure to listen to Cold War Studies podcast on “More Causes of the Cold War.” You’ll find a lot more information there about early Cold War events. (Unfortunately, the text of the podcast is no longer available)

Photograph by Andrew Milligan sumo (Flickr)

___________________________________________________________

Terms You Should Know

TREATY OF FRIENDSHIP AND ALLIANCE: A treaty between the Soviet government and (Nationalist or ‘Old’) China signed in August 1945. According to the terms of this treaty,  Stalin received substantial territorial concessions in return for his agreement to deal with Chiang Kai-shek, not Mao Ze-dong. You can read the Treaty of Friendship and Alliance here.

DOMINO THEORY: In 1946, the theory was based on the assumption that Stalin, like Hitler, was intent on unlimited conquest. The theory was (later) formally defined by President Eisenhower who said:

You have a row of dominoes set up, you knock over the first one, and what will happen to the last one is the certainty that it will go over very quickly. So you could have the beginning of a disintegration that would have the most profound influences.

ACHESON-LILIENTHAL PROPOSAL: Released in March 1946 as a plan for the control of the atom. The report suggested a series of stages through which the world could pass to international control of atomic weapons. It outlines a plan for international control of atomic energy. You can read the full report here.

The report represented an attempt by the United States to maintain its superiority in the field of atomic weapons while also trying to avoid a costly and dangerous arms race with the Soviet Union.

BARUCH PLAN: Presented to the United Nations on June 15, 1946, the Baruch Plan proposed that atomic energy be controlled through international management of the necessary raw materials and inspection by international agencies. The Russians were opposed, and the plan failed to gain acceptance, setting the stage for the Cold War arms race.

ATOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY: As part of his plan, Baruch proposed the establishment of an international atomic development authority.  This group would control all activities dangerous to world security and possess the power to license and inspect all  nuclear projects. Once such an authority was established, no more bombs should be built and existing bombs should be destroyed. The authority was unacceptable to the Russians and was not established.

US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION: The United States Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) was an agency of the United States government established by the US Congress to foster and control the peace time development of atomic science and technology.

ATOMIC ENERGY ACT OF 1946: President Truman signed the McMahon/Atomic Energy Act on August 1, 1946, transferring the control of atomic energy from military to civilian hands, effective January 1, 1947. The agency was abolished by the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974.

You can listen to our first podcast here: CAUSES OF THE COLD WAR.

An Introduction

Toward the end of the Cold War, from 1979 to 1989, the general public first came to a broad understanding of the causes and dangers of climate change. Scientists and government officials had been aware of the problem for many years.

Now we know that the world has warmed more than one degree Celcius since the Industrial Revolution. But did you know that in the decade from 1979 to 1989 we could have prevented the looming crisis? During that ten year period, the world’s major powers came close to endorsing a binding, global framework to reduce carbon emissions — closer than we’ve come since.

Nearly everything we now know about global warming was understood in 1979. At that time, even some of the largest oil companies like Exxon and Shell made efforts to understand what was happening, and they grappled with possible solutions.

During the 1980s, Republicans and Democrats joined in bipartisan support for immediate and far-reaching climate policy. But their endeavors all unraveled.

What happened? Why didn’t we act?

Hopefully, the following selected timeline will provide insight.

1957 – 1978

1957: Hans Suess And Roger Revelle write a paper concluding that

human beings are now carrying out a large-scale geophysical experiment of a kind that could not have happened in the past nor be reproduced in the future.

Revelle helps the Weather Bureau establish a continuous measurement of atmospheric carbon dioxide on the Big Island of Hawaii. A young geochemist, Charles David Keeling, charts the data. His graph comes to be known as the Keeling curve.

1963: Two weeks after his inauguration, in a special message to Congress, President Johnson explains that his generation “had altered the composition of the atmosphere on a global scale” through the burning of fossil fuels.

The Johnson administration commissions a study of the subject by his Science Advisory Committee.

1965: President Johnson’s Science Advisory Committee releases its executive report on carbon dioxide, warning of the rapid melting of Antarctica, rising seas, and increased acidity of fresh waters.

The report notes that these changes will require a coordinated global effort to forestall.

1968: An essay titled “How to Wreck the Environment” by Gordon MacDonald, the science adviser to Lyndon Johnson, is published. MacDonald predicts a near future in which

nuclear weapons were effectively banned and the weapons of mass destruction were those of environmental catastrophe.

One of the most potentially devastating of the weapons is carbon dioxide.

Spring 1977 – Summer 1978: The Jasons, a group of elite scientists, meet to determine what will happen once the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere doubles from pre-Industrial Revolution levels.

The Jason report to the Department of Energy titled “The Long-Term Impact of Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide on Climate” includes nightmarish findings. You can find an abstract of the report here. 

1977: The US Energy Department establishes an Office of Carbon Dioxide Effects at MacDonald’s urging.

1978: Page 66 of a technical report on coal notes that

the continued use of fossil fuels might, within two or three decades, bring about ‘significant and damaging’ changes to the global atmosphere.

The report summarizes results of a study of the environmental aspects of 14 of the most prominent coal liquefaction systems, in terms of background, process description, major operations, input and output streams, status, and schedule of system development. You can find out how to obtain the report here.

1979 – 1982

1979: President Jimmy Carter Installs 32 solar panels on the roof of the White House in the wake of the Arab oil embargo. However, he also promotes the production of synthetic fuels — gas and liquid fuel extracted from shale and tar sands.

February 1979: The first World Climate Conference is held in Geneva. Scientists from 50 nations agree that it is “urgently necessary” to act.

Spring 1979: Gordon MacDonald and Rafe Pomerance (deputy legislative director of Friends of the Earth) arrange informal briefings with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the National Security  Council, The New York Times, the Council on Environmental Quality, and the Energy Department. They also visit President Carter’s top scientist, Frank Press.

May 22, 1979: Press writes a letter to the president of the National Academy of Sciences requesting a full assessment of the carbon-dioxide issue.

Jules Charney, the father of modern meteorology, gathers the nation’s top oceanographers, atmospheric scientists, and climate modelers to judge if the world is, in fact, headed toward impending disaster.

June 1979: At the Group of 7 Meeting in Tokyo, the leaders of the world’s seven wealthiest nations sign a statement resolving to reduce carbon emissions.

1989

April 1989: John Sununu, chief of staff to newly elected President George H. W. Bush, questions the scientific merits of climate change.

Later in the year, Sununu meets with a staff member from the Energy Department and asks:

Why in the world would you need to reduce fossil-fuel use?

The reply:

Because of climate change.

I don’t want anyone in this administration without a scientific background using ‘climate change’ or “global warming” ever again, said Sununu.

Bush defers to Sununu, and his campaign stance on dealing with climate change is reversed.

September 1989: A report tracking global greenhouse-gas emissions is published by the World Resources Institute. It reports that the United States produces nearly a quarter of the world’s carbon emissions, the largest contributor by far. Moreover, its contribution is growing faster than that of every other country.

November 1989: Delegates from more than 60 nations meet in the Netherlands for the first diplomatic meeting to approve the framework for a binding climate treaty. The goal is to establish a global summit meeting to be held about a year later.

Activists  lower the Japanese, American, and Soviet flags, accusing the three nations of conspiring to block the action needed to save the planet.

An initial conclusion: action has to be taken and the United States needs to lead. This doesn’t happen.

Instead, Sununu, with the acquiescence of Britain, Japan, and the Soviet Union, forces the conference to abandon the commitment to freeze emissions.

The final statement notes only that “many” nations support stabilizing emissions.

Epilogue

According to Ken Caldeira, a climate scientist at the Carnegie Institution for Science in Stanford, California, there has been no breakthrough in climate physics since 1979, there is only refinement.

According to The New York Times in August, 2018:

More carbon has been released into the atmosphere since the final day of the Noordwijk conference, November 7, 1989, than in the entire history of civilization preceding it.

The political situation hasn’t changed much either.

A good question: Could it have been any other way?

(The information in this post was derived from an article in The New York Times Magazine published on August 5, 1918. You can read the full article, “Losing Earth: The Decade We Almost Stopped Climate Change,” here.

Postscript

On a positive note, The New York Times has published an article titled “Blamed for Climate Change, Oil Companies invest in carbon renewal (April 9, 2019). Read the article here. Then leave a comment here to tell us what you think.

 

Image by Jody Davis from Pixabay.