Why the Cold War Ended

How the Cold War ended

Introduction In order to understand the vulnerability of a particular country’s political portfolio, crises are one key factor that is being analyzed. Once a crisis develops, the government’s job is to contain and resolve it. For successful resolution of a crisis, it is important for the government to understand the nature of the crisis and to have a clear vision about the new system it wishes to build from the collapsed system. Militarism is defined as the practice of glorification of the military. The United States and the USSR were in great competition for military might. Each of these two countries was increasing its military spending. This is sometimes referred to as the arms race. These improvements of armies and navies had caused a lot of fear and suspicion among nations. This was not helped by the outbursts of leaders challenging rival countries to flex their military muscles. Of important notice, here is when the U.S and the Soviet decided to spread their sphere of influence. This resulted to a hostile relationship between the two countries. Due to their inclination to indulge in military action, these two countries were on the brink of starting another world war. One communist and the other democratic, hence the cold war, also known as the war of ideologies. The cold war was a war between two super powers that had whole world in disarray.

Policy of Containment The policy of "containment" has suffered a complete defeat. Pretentious title of the policy was meant for something to distract the attention of world public opinion from the real objectives of U.S. ruling circles. This technique is not new. In 1914, Lenin, denouncing the imperialist desire to cover up the euphonious phrase aggressive creature of its policy, wrote that the way the bourgeoisie is trying to "assure that it tends to defeat the enemy, not for plunder and land-grabbing, but for the" freedom "of all other peoples, but their own.” More "dynamic" U.S. policy was the so-called policy of "freedom." (Acheson, 1969, 67) in this regard, said: "There is a difference of opinion as to whether, on what we need to focus their hopes for a significant decrease in the power of the Soviets and their effects: the action is internal forces in the Soviet Union, or by applying external pressure. This is - the question of "freedom." Secondly, the question arises of how to stop the further spread of Soviet expansion. This is - the question of "containment". Further, Kennan stressed that "these concepts are not an alternative." "I do not know who of us would not want to reduce the area of Soviet power and Soviet influence - Kennan wrote. - So we 're all for the "freedom". I do not know as a person who would consider it desirable to further the spread of Soviet expansion. Therefore, we are for "deterrence." Our differences are only a means to achieve each of these goals. Year by year, socialism was gaining strength. Authors failed bid policy of "containment" to "physical and mental exhaustion" of the Soviet people as a result of hard years of war. The Soviet people with great enthusiasm took over peace-building. Having concluded as soon as possible the tasks of the restoration period, the Soviet Union was firmly on the path of rapid development of its economy. However, even in those years for many U.S. politicians was obvious futility of the calculations for "exhaustion" of the Soviet people. Visited in 1959, the Soviet Union a major financier and politician (Ambrose, 1984, 68) recalls the first post-war years: "When I was in the Soviet Union, the American ambassador in 1946 - he writes in his book" Peace with Russia? "- A large part of the Soviet Union from western borders to Stalingrad lay in ruins. But the Russian people with their remarkable energy again seeded with wheat steppe. They re-built village and reconstructed the industry. After my departure from the USSR, I watched the reports that the Soviet economic power surpassed prewar levels and that the standard of living of the people is higher than ever after the revolution. Sputnik - concludes Harriman - demonstrated the genius of its scientists and engineers of their art. " Together with the Soviet Union Progress is expensive and the People 's Democracy. The family of socialist states in 1949 enriched the largest country in the world - China, whose people have been expelled from the borders of their country 's Kuomintang reactionary clique which has successfully completed the national-freedom revolution. In Western Europe and other parts of the world shirilos democratic movement of the working masses. In France, Italy and other capitalist countries, communist parties have become a powerful force. The first decisive successes in the struggle for national freedom won the peoples of Asia and Africa. The general crisis of capitalism has entered a new phase. "There was a definite shift in the balance of world forces - was forced to admit in 1950 AD Dulles and this shift prorzoshel in favor of Soviet communism. “And two years later he summed up as follows the first phase of American policy and strategy of "containment": "Deterrence does not substantially restrained Soviet communism. It contained the spread across the continent, the moral influence of the American nation. " The essence of the new policy was that by organizing counter-revolutionary coup to restore the capitalist regimes in the countries of popular democracy. As a logical extension of "containment" policy of "freedom" was different from the previous course openly aggressive. The authors of the doctrine argue that the primary task the U.S. is "liberating" all socialist countries from socialism, from the national government, from national independence. In January 1956, a White House statement declared: "liberating" the people 's democracy and those they develop the capitalist system "was, is and will remain - until then, until a success - the main goal of U.S. foreign policy."

The largest operation of psychological warfare of this period was the so-called "campaign of truth", accompanied by a flourish of trumpets "peacefulness" of the U.S. and their aspiration for a "healthy international community of nations." However, as was evident from the plan approved by then Secretary of State Acheson, in fact, the U.S. government has involved conducting sabotage operations in support of U.S. policy of "containment" of communism. One of the goals of the "campaign of truth” says the American anti-Communist, E. Barrett, was to "reduce the influence of the Soviet Union by weakening the will of the country 's leadership and the promotion of non-Communist forces beyond its borders." To the organizers of the campaign had the following objectives: "to weaken the will of the Soviet Army officer, to cause discontent among the population of the socialist states, and in the adjacent countries" to promote and strengthen non-Communist forces, including non-communist trade unions ' propaganda waged by the Voice of America and its affiliate radio station in the American sector of Berlin, RIAS, Radio Free Europe "and" Freedom ". On the campaign ("campaign of truth") has been allocated 121 million dollars. In June 1951, President Truman established the Office of the so-called psychological warfare as part of the Under Secretary of Defense, Deputy Secretary of State, Director of the Central Intelligence Agency and a representative of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Now any U.S. propaganda campaign directed from one centre was the result of collective efforts of politicians, ideologues, leaders of the military authorities and intelligence. "Psychological operations," along with the means of military, economic, diplomatic became officially recognized as a weapon of the Cold War. Already from the above factors, it is clear direct and explicit involvement of American intelligence to the conduct of the Cold War. And yet there is reason to talk about this some more. First of all, because of the notorious "politics of cloak and dagger" was found in the U.S. particularly zealous fans. Their zeal in no small measure injected tension between two social systems, which, in turn, are reflected in the ideological struggle. Espionage, sabotage, assassinations and other such activities of the imperialist state purchased in the U.S. The enormous scale carries out all these evil actions in the first place by the CIA.

Conclusion To prepare America to join in the 21st century, we must learn to control the forces, which predetermine the change in the world, to ensure strength and reliability of American leadership in a long time. 50 years ago America, showing foresight, oversaw the creation of institutions that secured victory in the Cold War and managed to remove many obstacles and barriers that divided the world in which our parents lived.
References

Acheson, Dean. 1969 Present at the Creation: My Years in the State Department. New York,. Disputes Kennan on NATO and the Korean War. Pp 67-90
Ambrose, Stephen E. Eisenhower. 1984 Vol. 2. The President. New York,pp 45-68
Arnson, Cynthia. 1993 Crossroads: Congress, the President, and Central America, 1976–1993. 2d ed. University Park, Pa., pp 90-110
Bell, Coral. 1977 The Diplomacy of Detente: The Kissinger Era. London, pp 23-45
Berman, Larry. 2001 No Peace, No Honor: Nixon, Kissinger, and Betrayal in Vietnam. New York,pp 35-67
Bernstein, Barton J. 1983 "The H-Bomb Decisions: Were They Inevitable?" In Bernard Brodie et al., eds. National Security and International Stability. Cambridge, Mass.,pp 90-112
Bernstein, Barton J., 1970. ed. The Politics and Policies of the Truman Administration. Chicago, Relevant revisionist volume on the Cold War. Pp 89-95
Costigliola, Frank. (March 1997) " 'Unceasing Pressure for Penetration ': Gender, Pathology, and Emotion in George Kennan 's Formation of the Cold War." Journal of American History. Pp 67-89
Cumings, Bruce. 1981 The Origins of the Cold War: Liberation and the Emergence of Separate Regimes.Princeton, N.J., pp 54-67
Gati, Charles, 1974 ed. Caging the Bear: Containment and the Cold War. Indianapolis, pp 23-35
Kolko, Gabriel, and Joyce Kolko 1972. The Limits of Power: The World and United States Foreign Policy, 1945–1954. New York, Relevant revisionist volume on the Cold War.pp 89-90
Kuniholm, Bruce. 1980 The Origins of the Cold War in the Near East: Great Power Conflict and Diplomacy in Iran, Turkey, and Greece. Princeton, N.J., pp 112-115
Miscamble, Wilson. George F. Kennan 1992 the Making of American Foreign Policy, 1947–1950. Princeton, N.J., pp 78-90
Ulam, Adam. 1992 The Communists: The Story of Power and Lost Illusions, 1948–1991. New York, pp 89-110
Williams, William A 1972. The Tragedy of American Diplomacy. 2d rev. ed. Cleveland,. Relevant revisionist volume on the Cold War. Pp 89-112

References: Acheson, Dean. 1969 Present at the Creation: My Years in the State Department. New York,. Disputes Kennan on NATO and the Korean War. Pp 67-90 Ambrose, Stephen E Arnson, Cynthia. 1993 Crossroads: Congress, the President, and Central America, 1976–1993. 2d ed. University Park, Pa., pp 90-110 Bell, Coral Berman, Larry. 2001 No Peace, No Honor: Nixon, Kissinger, and Betrayal in Vietnam. New York,pp 35-67 Bernstein, Barton J Bernstein, Barton J., 1970. ed. The Politics and Policies of the Truman Administration. Chicago, Relevant revisionist volume on the Cold War. Pp 89-95 Costigliola, Frank Cumings, Bruce. 1981 The Origins of the Cold War: Liberation and the Emergence of Separate Regimes.Princeton, N.J., pp 54-67 Gati, Charles, 1974 ed Kolko, Gabriel, and Joyce Kolko 1972. The Limits of Power: The World and United States Foreign Policy, 1945–1954. New York, Relevant revisionist volume on the Cold War.pp 89-90 Kuniholm, Bruce Miscamble, Wilson. George F. Kennan 1992 the Making of American Foreign Policy, 1947–1950. Princeton, N.J., pp 78-90 Ulam, Adam