• Privacy
  • Terms of Use
  • About
  • Contact

Cold War

Before, During, and After the Cold War

  • Podcast
  • Red Scare
  • Cuba
  • Iran
  • Urbanization
  • Spy
  • Afghanistan
  • Taiwan
  • Vietnam
  • Timelines

Russia vs. America

September 27, 2017 by Lisa Reynolds Wolfe

RUSSIA vs AMERICA

Stalin’s compulsion to protect Russian interests dictated his actions. He was determined to prevent foreign domination of territories contiguous to his nation’s borders. Stalin’s obsession is not difficult to understand given Soviet losses in World War II.




According to Bruce R. Kuniholm, the United States suffered 291,557 battle deaths and the British 373,372. The Soviets, on the other hand, lost in the neighborhood of 11,000,000 military personnel and 7,000,000 civilians. Seventy thousand villages and 1,710 towns were reduced to rubble.

Fearing foreign encroachment, as early as February 1946, Stalin described a ‘capitalist encirclement of the Soviet Union’ and depicted the capitalist economy as ‘setting the stage for war.’  


Stalin’s comments were analyzed by George Kennan in what became known as the “long telegram.” In this 8,000 word cable dated February 22, 1946, Kennan speaks of Russia’s insecurity and of her persistent efforts to extend her borders. He recommends that the United States adopt a “policy of containment.” Containment strategy was first used in the Iranian crisis of 1946.

In sum, while the Soviets were committed to defending themselves against potentially hostile interests in China and a resurgent Japan, American leaders were concerned with expanding their economic markets and rebuilding Japan as a thwart to Soviet expansionism.


A strong, stable China was the cornerstone of American postwar Far Eastern policy. In fact, the Americans believed that China would take Japan’s place as the West’s prime Asian commercial partner.

When the Russians abrogated their Sino-Soviet treaty obligations, and allowed arms and ammunition to fall into the hands of the CCP, President Truman attempted to help the Nationalists by moving 100,000 American troops into China. However, as LaFeber notes, it soon became apparent that “If Americans tried to save Chiang they would ‘virtually [have] to take over the Chinese government.’”

By February 1949, the Nationalists had lost nearly half their troops, mostly by defection. Eighty percent of the American equipment given Chiang had fallen into Communist hands.

In effect, Stalin held Manchuria hostage. Buhite argues that the province was “the most important area of China,” containing the country’s only “nearly developed industrial complex,” and was “the only CCP source for the machinery required for industrial development.”

So far as American interests in China were concerned, since Communist China could not achieve economic progress without Manchuria, Mao had no flexibility for a rapprochement with the United States.


The Soviets successfully influenced the Chinese Communists using material and technical aid as leverage. The pattern of assistance employed in Manchuria would be replicated repeatedly during the half century Cold War as the Soviets expertly allocated economic and military aid to the less developed world in their attempts to broaden their sphere of influence.

Importantly, with Mao’s final victory in 1949, over a million KMT government and army personnel were forced to flee their homeland, most of them settling in Taipei on the island of Formosa (Taiwan).

Meanwhile, a Western campaign for the military encirclement of the Soviet Union known as “the containment of international communism” had begun.

 

 

Filed Under: Cold War Historical Overview

Superpower Conflict in the Third World

September 12, 2017 by Lisa Reynolds Wolfe

Was the Cold War a direct result of the breakdown of World War II alliances? Not really. In actuality, it took form in the late 19th century on the plains of Northern China and Manchuria. Conflict arose when the American emphasis on business, markets, and profits clashed with the czarist emphasis on expansion and empire.

The US believed that its prosperity required an open door to trade in Manchuria. Nevertheless, when the Russians occupied the rich, industrial Chinese province in 1901, the Americans were unwilling to fight for their interests. Later, when the Japanese colonized the province in 1931, the Soviets appealed to the Americans for assistance. Still, the US opted for a policy of balanced antagonism. Only when Nazi and Japanese aggression proved overwhelming did the US enter into a reluctant — and temporary — partnership with its longterm rival, the Soviet Union.

Memories of past contests reemerged when, in September 1945, Stalin honored a wartime agreement with the United States and invaded enemy strongholds in Manchuria, disarming the Japanese and confiscating arms and property worth between 800 and 900 million dollars.

Military and industrial equipment was dismantled and moved to the Soviet Union to aid in the rebirth of Soviet industry.

In return for early withdrawal from the territory, the Soviets demanded large-scale ownership of virtually every aspect of the Manchurian economy.

Stalin’s activities were rooted in the Soviet perception of reality. The United States and its allies were emerging from World War II with worldwide military superiority. The Soviet Union, on the other hand, was facing an urgent need to bolster national security and rebuild its wartorn economy. Since industrial capacity and manufacturing ability had been severely damaged, any and all resources that could be used in the reconstruction and restoration of the motherland were to be acquired and mobilized so as to facilitate a rapid economic recovery.

Along with the industrial buildup, Stalin was obsessed with guaranteeing his nation’s vulnerable borders. Since German armies had invaded the Soviets through Eastern Europe twice in 25 years, he decided that it was best to exert control over all countries bordering the Soviet Union — countries like Manchuria and Iran. The idea was to create a Soviet sphere of influence that would provide protection against incursions.

Stalin’s interpretation of Russian interests impelled him to intervene in China where civil war was raging between the Nationalist or KMT forces led by Chiang Kai-shek and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) under the leadership of Mao-tse-tung.

Although Stalin had treaty obligations with the Nationalists, he feared a resurgent US presence in Manchuria if the Nationalists returned. So he stepped up support for the Communists, allowing 600,000 tons of light arms and ammunition to fall into the hands of the Chinese Communist Party. This facilitated the CCP’s movement into Manchuria and enabled them to establish administrative control over much of the province.

While the Kremlin was fixated on a need to retain control over Manchuria’s raw materials and industrial resources, the United States was intent on developing a proAmerican China which would serve as a counterbalance to the Soviet Union.

The West clearly saw the implementation of Soviet policy as a communist threat. Speaking in March 1946 in President Truman’s home state of Missouri, Prime Minister Winston Churchill of Great Britain said:

the Soviets covet the fruits of war and the indefinite expansion of their power and doctrines.

Churchill’s remarks set the stage for global confrontation, and were legitimated by Truman’s presence on the platform.

Russian Soldiers in Manchuria: Photograph courtesy of Ashley Van Haeften

 

Filed Under: Cold War Historical Overview

The Second Cold War in a Nutshell

July 18, 2017 by Lisa Reynolds Wolfe

The Second Cold War: Part I

By the mid 1970s, the world had entered a Second Cold War. This coincided with a major change in the world economy.

Two inter-related developments now seemed to impact the influence of the two superpowers.

  • First, Vietnam.
  • Second, the 1973 Yom Kippur War.

Through OPEC, the Arab states of the Middle East had done what they could to impede support for Israel by cutting oil supplies and threatening oil embargoes. In doing so they discovered that they had the ability to multiply the world price of oil. There was nothing the US could do.

Vietnam and the Middle East weakened the US but did not alter the global balance of power.

Between 1974 and 1979 a new wave of revolutions surged across the globe. It was the coincidence of this third wave of world revolution with the moment of public American failure and defeat in Vietnam which produced the Second Cold War.

This phase of the conflict was waged by a combination of local wars in the Third World fought indirectly by the US and by an extraordinary acceleration of the nuclear arms race.

The Second Cold War: Part II

Detente had given Nixon and Kissinger (1968-1974) the opportunity to score two major successes: the expulsion of the Soviets from Egypt and the informal recruitment of China into the anti-Soviet alliance.

The new wave of revolutions, all of which were likely to be against conservative regimes which the US defended, gave the USSR the chance to recover the initiative.

While the Soviets had already begun to bankrupt themselves by embarking on an overly ambitious armaments program, raising defense expenditure by an annual average of 4-5% in the 20 years after 1964, the US felt threatened.

Moreover, the USSR had moved into Afghanistan convincing the US that western supremacy would end if not reasserted by a show of power.

Washington was not realistic.

In real terms, US power, as distinct from US prestige, remained much greater than Soviet power.

The hysteria had the effect of convincing the Soviets that a pre-emptive nuclear attack by the West on the USSR was possible or impending.

The policies of Ronald Reagan, elected US President in 1980, can only be understood as an attempt to wipe out American feelings of humiliation by demonstrating supremacy.

Actions included the invasion of Grenada, a massive air and naval attack on Libya, and the invasion of Panama.

Reagan and the Evil Empire

Reagan crusaded against the “Evil Empire” abroad and the memory of FDR at home. The enemy was liberalism and the welfare state as much as communism.

There is no sign that the US government expected the collapse of the Soviet Union.

Reagan actually believed in coexistence, albeit in a world without nuclear arms.

The Cold War ended when one or both superpowers recognized the absurdity of the nuclear arms race and when one or both accepted the other’s sincerity in wishing it to end.

Gorbachev took the first step.

Did the end of the Cold War mean the end of the Soviet system?

The Soviet type of socialism had claimed to be a global alternative to the capitalist world system. Since capitalism had not collapsed, the prospects for socialism depended on its ability to compete. It was evident that after 1960 the USSR was falling rapidly behind. It was no longer competitive.

Both superpowers overstretched and distorted their economies by the arms race, but the world capitalist system could absorb the cost.

By the end of the 1970s, the European Community and Japan together were 60% larger than the US economy. They were not a drain.

On the other hand, the USSR’s allies and dependents remained a constant and vast annual drain of billions of dollars.

Geographically and demographically, the underdeveloped countries of the world whose revolutionary mobilizations Moscow supported, represented 89% of the world.

It was the interaction of Soviet-type economies with the capitalist world economy from the 1960s on that made socialism vulnerable.

What defeated — and in the end wrecked — the USSR was not confrontation but detente.

The real Cold War ended at the Washington summit of 1987, but it could not be recognized as being at an end until the USSR had visibly ceased to be a superpower.

In the early 1990s, the collapse of the Soviet Empire in 1989 and the dissolution of the USSR in 1989-1991 made it impossible to pretend that nothing had changed. Still, the outcome was not cast in stone.

Photograph by Steffen Zahn (Flickr)

Filed Under: Cold War Historical Overview

The Early Cold War in a Nutshell

July 5, 2017 by Lisa Reynolds Wolfe

HOW DID THE COLD WAR START?

Lines of demarcation between the Soviets and the West were drawn at Yalta. Animosity escalated with the partition of Germany, the withdrawal of all ex-belligerents from Austria, and the unilateral US occupation of Japan.

More friction surrounded the new post colonial states in what was then called The Third World. This was the zone in which the 2 superpowers continued, throughout the Cold War, to compete for support and inflluence. This was the area where armed conflict was most likely to break out.

Even though most of the new post colonial states were hostile to the US and its camp, they were not communist. They were mostly anti-communist in their domestic politics, and they were outside the Soviet military block — non-aligned — in international affairs.

Despite post WWII differences between the West and the Soviets, the world situation soon became reasonably stable, and the communist camp showed no signs of significant expansion. The period between the Chinese Revolution in 1949 and the mid 1970s has been called the Cold Peace.

CAUSES OF THE COLD WAR

While the US was worried about the danger of Soviet world supremacy at some time in the future, Moscow was worried about the actual hegemony of the US all over the globe. Only areas that were occupied by the Red Army were risk free.

Americans believed that their country represented an ideology that should be a model for the rest of the world. The US believed in world capitalism and thought that their liberal society was in danger. But, in fact, the postwar plans of the US government had more to do with preventing another Great Depression than with preventing another war.

Washington expected that postwar challenges were likely to weaken both capitalism and the US. They were worried that the USSR would become stronger even though the Soviets demobilized their troops, reducing the Red Army from a 1945 peak strength of 12 million to 3 million by 1948.

Both superpowers adopted policies of no compromise.

In 1946, the American diplomat George Kennan formulated the “containment” policy that became the framework for America’s Cold War strategy. His policy was not based on fear of communism. Rather, it was centered on the threat of Russian expansionism.

The issue was not really the threat of communist world domination, but the maintenance of a real US supremacy.

“Containment” was everyone’s policy, the destruction of communism was not.

THE ARMS RACE

In 1954, the US announced an aggressive strategy of massive retaliation. Potential aggressors were to be threatened with attack by nuclear weapons, even in the case of a limited conventional attack.

Both the US and the Soviets became committed to an insane arms race and to a “military-industrial complex,” an increasingly vast agglomeration of men and resources living by preparation for war.

After the 1960s, there was a period of slackening tensions known as detente. In 1963, a hot line was installed linking the White House with the Kremlin.

The 1960s and 1970s saw significant steps to control and limit nuclear arms: test-ban treaties, attempts to stop nuclear proliferation, a Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty (SALT), and some agreement about each side’s Anti-Balllistic Missiles (ABMs).

In practice the two superpowers retained a nuclear monopoly. But, over the course of the 1970s and 1980s, some other countries — Israel, South Africa, India — acquired the capacity to make nuclear weapons.

Still, nuclear proliferation did not become a serious international problem until after 1989.

The most obvious face of the Cold War was military confrontation and a frenetic nuclear arms race.

Nuclear powers were involved in 3 major wars — Korea, Vietnam, and Afghanistan. But they did not fight each other.

EUROPE AND THE MARSHALL PLAN

The political consequences of the Cold War on Europe were important.

The world was polarized into two camps.

Direct Soviet control was firmly clamped on all of Eastern Europe except Finland. Stalin was also unable to impose Soviet control on Tito’s Yugoslavia which broke with Moscow in 1948 without joining the other side.

Europe was important. The Western European situation in 1946-1947 was so tense that Washington felt that the development of a strong European (and soon a strong Japanese) economy was the most urgent priority.

The Marshall Plan, a massive design for European recovery, was launched in June 1947 in the form of grants rather than loans. So far as the US was concerned, this project depended on a strong Germany.

The US soon dominated the international behavior of Europe. Still, as the Cold War lengthened, there was a growing gap between the overwheming military and political domination of the Western alliance by Washington, and the gradually weakening economic predominance of the US. The dollar, the keystone of the post WWII economy, grew weaker.

One effect of the Cold War on the international politics of Europe was to create the European Community, a permanent arrangement to integrate the economies and to some extent the legal systems of a number of independent nation-states: France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Belgium, and Luxemburg. The community was created both by and against the United States.

Filed Under: Cold War Historical Overview

N is for Nonaligned Movement

May 23, 2017 by Lisa Reynolds Wolfe

Nations who refused to closely associate themselves with either the Soviets or the US were known as
neutral or nonaligned.

The very concept of nonalignment was a problem for US Secretary of State John Foster Dulles. At the same time, he acknowledged the vitality of nationalism in the Third World. He also understood the moral as well as the strategic arguments for assisting the new nations whether they were members of our anti-Communist alliance system or not.

The issue of foreign aid was central. Third World leaders were masters at playing the two camps off against each other. They operated according to strategic calculations of how to maximize their own national interest.

Less aligned nations weren’t making any kind of judgment as to the rightness of the two superpowers. Julius Nyerere, leader of Tanzania (then Tanganyika) summed things up saying:

Our desire is to be friendly to every country in the world, but we have no desire to have a friendly country choosing our enemies for us.
The Soviets understood this game better than the US did, and the nonaligned nations usually soft-pedaled Soviet misdeeds, especially if they feared a Soviet reprisal for complaining. However, both superpowers saw the nonaligned nations in terms of “winning the battle for men’s minds.”
President Kennedy may have summed the issue up best when he stated:
people are more interested in development than in doctrine. They are more interested in achieving a decent standard of living than following the standards of either East or West.
Kennedy thought the US could court the emerging nations with kindness, decency, and demonstrations of the success of the American free-market economy and open society.

In actuality, the Cold War overlay inevitably imposed itself. When the Cold War ended, Third World countries found they had lost much of their leverage over the West.

Nonalignment lost its meaning when there were no two sides to “align” with or against. Moreover, much of the West’s resources and attention were now drawn to the plight of the newly liberated countries of Central and Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union.

The collapse of the Soviets left most of the Third World alone with the West and with the necessity of redefining their relationship with the technically advanced societies.

Filed Under: Cold War Historical Overview

Start of the Cold War: A Timeline

April 7, 2017 by Lisa Reynolds Wolfe

Was the Cold War a direct result of the breakdown of World War II alliances? Not really. In actuality, it took form in the late 19th century on the plains of Northern China and Manchuria. Conflict arose when the American emphasis on business, markets, and profits clashed with the czarist emphasis on expansion and empire. So that’s where our timeline begins. NOTE: If you can’t see the timeline (below), just reload your page.

 

Our timeline ends in December 1949 when Chiang Kai-shek Chiang evacuates over a million KMT government and army personnel to the island of Taiwan, establishing Taipei as the  ‘wartime’ capital of the Nationalist Chinese.

____________________________

Have you ever thought of using a timeline for a project? Or just to organize your thoughts in a way that enables you to grasp the “big picture?” If so, you’ll want to download our Timeline Checklist. It takes you through all the steps involved in creating an eye-catching interactive timeline that you can embed online. And it’s absolutely free. Just follow this link and we’ll deliver it right to your inbox.

Filed Under: Cold War Historical Overview

M is for Marshall Plan

April 3, 2017 by Lisa Reynolds Wolfe

The Marshall Plan for the recovery of Europe was formally unveiled in a speech given by US Secretary of State, General George C. Marshall, at Harvard University on June 5, 1947. The speech was a natural outgrowth of the Truman Doctrine.  Suffice it to say, the Truman administration used the American fear of communism both at home and abroad to convince Americans they must embark upon a Cold War foreign policy. Most importantly, Truman and Marshall used this fear to justify a gigantic aid program designed to prevent a collapse of the European and American economies. Later such programs were expanded globally.

The question of Russian participation in the plan was uppermost in many minds. Although the Soviet bloc was invited, the State Department made Russian acceptance improbable by demanding that the economic records of each nation be open for scrutiny. It was also suggested that, despite their devastated economy, the Soviet Union should ship goods to Europe. The Russians, on the other hand, wanted to extract reparations from Germany. Still, the Russians gave the plan serious consideration. They even ordered their East European satellites to be prepared to join the plan. Eventually, though, the Russians revolted, warning that the plan would undermine national sovereignty, revive Germany, allow America to control Europe, and divide Europe into two groups of states. They saw the plan as a way for the US to infiltrate the Soviet Union and its sphere of influence in order to destroy it.

In the end, 16 European nations designed a program for US Secretary of State George Marshall to consider, and the US embarked on a controversial program to quickly revive Germany.

The Europeans proposed a 4 year program of $17 billion of American aid. At Soviet insistence, no Eastern European nations were participants. Poland, Romania, Yugoslavia, Bulgaria, Albania, Hungary, and even Finland rejected the invitation. ( In retrospect, this has been defined as the moment when the Soviet boot crushed the face of Eastern Europe.)

The Marshall Plan soon evolved into military alliances.

Want to learn more? Check out our podcast on The Truman Doctrine and the Marshall Plan.

Filed Under: Cold War Historical Overview

L is for Linkage

March 27, 2017 by Lisa Reynolds Wolfe

Cold War linkage theorized that the various issues on which the United States and the Soviet Union interacted should be viewed as interconnected.

For example, Nixon and Kissinger did not believe that arms control negotiations could or should be able to proceed in isolation from other issues reflecting political sources of tension such as Berlin or Third World conflicts in Vietnam or the Middle East. More positively, it was believed that an improvement in US-Soviet relations would be more durable if it proceeded on a broad front, embracing progress on regional conflicts as well as on more central issues.

Filed Under: Cold War Historical Overview

  • « Previous Page
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • …
  • 11
  • Next Page »

Follow Us On Twitter

Cold War Studies Follow

A Cold War historian, Lisa holds a Ph.D. in Politics from New York University and a MS in Policy Analysis and Public Management from SUNY Stony Brook.

Avatar
Avatar Cold War Studies @coldwarstudies ·
2 Feb

https://hyperallergic.com/794974/soheila-sokhanvari-honors-iran-feminist-rebels/?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=D020223&utm_content=D020223+CID_1268eb65e911b86d63e38651e133b202&utm_source=hn&utm_term=Soheila+Sokhanvari+Honors+Irans+Feminist+Rebels

Reply on Twitter 1621120886408617984 Retweet on Twitter 1621120886408617984 Like on Twitter 1621120886408617984 Twitter 1621120886408617984
Avatar Cold War Studies @coldwarstudies ·
29 Jan

11 Places to Explore Spycraft @atlasobscura https://www.atlasobscura.com/lists/history-of-spies

Reply on Twitter 1619760825916604417 Retweet on Twitter 1619760825916604417 Like on Twitter 1619760825916604417 Twitter 1619760825916604417
Avatar Cold War Studies @coldwarstudies ·
29 Jan

Inside Cold War spy Kim Philby's life - sex, deception and double-dealing https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/inside-cold-war-spy-kim-29074870?utm_source=twitter.com&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=sharebar

Reply on Twitter 1619760444658565120 Retweet on Twitter 1619760444658565120 Like on Twitter 1619760444658565120 Twitter 1619760444658565120
Avatar Cold War Studies @coldwarstudies ·
28 Jan

Check out this article from @nytimes. Because I'm a subscriber, you can read it through this gift link without a subscription. https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/27/opinion/sunday/knitting-fabric-michelle-obama.html?unlocked_article_code=1ew_IOkoQKL6pwCvaRQwqw7kaWYxQwBmX4RM8ZwtFdZYqpOghTnXUxbK7NmSwILpgVkTsehpl3Au4GhqUs1-dQP4onemJRdEVXYlONemCl8eqaGxUhfyGFeV0mwhRgrGJBllB6l7bc09s40JuyYDCn-Pzj_QRnzJRPcBVqRfaOwmRVceyoxIxg3hjSG4aJC0jFK7rVqZ3d-HPGkCAInMKNtJNaRye6_h-msXKJWjY1ipfpuF4gvQQjACg6r618EQKLx4kY3mXwdfk4DYZAbtqtAoHTE9btePy6OljFN7QC_ZDdcEA_0JCp2Cqwlnrht_EQUuLBsVhjEs-doVEvBw0WJ9hFHqwu9kVp9GTguk1Q&smid=tw-share

Reply on Twitter 1619318960922714113 Retweet on Twitter 1619318960922714113 Like on Twitter 1619318960922714113 Twitter 1619318960922714113
Load More

Affiliate Disclosure

Cold War Studies is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn a small commission by advertising and linking to amazon.com. You never pay more if you puchase your Amazon product from one of our links. Thanks for supporting Cold War Studies!

 

How Much Do You Know About the Cold War?

Want to find out how much you really know about the Cold War. Click here to take our quiz. 

 

Most Popular Posts

Cold War Fashion: The Early Years (1950s-1960s)

History of Colonization in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA): Precursor to Cold War Conflict

Cold War Chile

The Rise of Fast Fashion: Globalization and Waste

The Red Scare

10 Little Known Facts About the Peace Sign

Immigration to the US During the Cold War

The First Red Scare: A Timeline

Korean War Music

Cold War Argentina: The Dirty War

The Cold War: Decolonization and Conflict in the Third World

Check Out Our Red Scare White Paper

Read all about the Red Scare. Just click on the cover below.

Copyright © 2023 · Metro Pro Theme on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in