The Origins of Cold War - Essay Example

The Origins of Cold War The development of antipathy between the relations of the Soviet Union and the United States as well as with other once strong allies such as Britain and France materialized during the rise of the Cold War in 1945-1949. The conflict between the Soviet Union and the United States has been looming since 1917, when the former embraced communism thus becoming a threat to industrialized countries (Cox and Stokes 2008). Even if the two countries teamed up against Germany in the Second World War, certain events led the nations into hostility and enmity. Different schools of interpretation were established to trace the roots of such hostility between the powerful nations, pointing the blame to either of them as the cause of the longstanding war. Traditionalists believe that the Soviet Union is solely accountable for the war while revisionists held the United States accountable for the misunderstanding. On the other hand, post-revisionists claim that both the two superpower countries are responsible for the fallout (Lundestad 2005). It is vital to take in consideration that the antagonistic relations of the Soviet Union and the United States can be traced way back from the Russian Revolution in 1917 and the Second World War. The once allies felt the tension brought about by political paths and choices of each countries. Traditional historians or the traditionalists maintain that the Cold War can be traced to Russia’s attempt of expansionism. According to Schlesinger (1967), “Geopoliticians traced the Cold War to imperial Russian strategic ambitions which in the nineteenth century led to the Crimean War, to Russian penetration of the Balkans and the Middle East and to Russian pressure to Brittains’ ‘lifeline’ to India”. Some ideologists suggest that the Communist Manifesto of 1848 is another strong point of reference that provoked the West as well as the Russian plans of domination as manifested in Russian imperialism, Pan-Slavism and Lennist messianism (Schlesinger, 1967). In addition, traditionalists sees the United States as championing passivity and has exercised full cooperation and mutual aid with international bodies in order to pacify strains between warring countries with the help of the United Nations. The U.S. only changed its tactics as the Soviet Union furthered its expansion in Eastern Europe as they felt that they need to preserve the safety of its own territory as well as the rest of Western Europe. When the security of a nation has been compromised, then issues on democratic rights will soon follow. Hence, new policies namely the Truman Doctrine and the Marshall Plan were created as response to the Soviets (Lundestad 2005). Revisionists had a very different view of the roots of the Cold War. These historians take into account the death of Franklin Roosevelt and the end of the Second World War as the turning point of the United States’ relations to the Soviet Union. In fact, they have been already trying to control or limit the authority of the Soviet Union in different parts of the world even before the Second World War ended. As early as 1918, the United States has been actively participating in Russian issues such as fighting with Great Britain against the Bolsheviks. Still, the Soviets have growing suspicions of the Americans after the latter recognized the Soviet Union as a diplomatic ally in 1933 (Schlesinger 1999). Furthermore, being a powerful nation itself, the United States had also ambitions of influencing the East. Various schemes and strategies were created in preparation to amass great power. Wartime policy of collaboration was ceased right after the Second World War, atomic bombs were developed and different forms of economic support were reinforced with other countries to uphold their interest. However, these measures are said to be driven solely by their hostility to the Soviet Union. Revisionists believe that ‘the idea that Soviet policy in Eastern Europe can be considered a result of U.S. ambitions.” (Lundestad 2005, p. 9). Moreover, revisionists claim that the United States’ underlying goals to promote capitalism and dissolve communism influence in the world have been known to its allies. As Schlesinger (1967) explains it, “this radically new American policy- or rather this resumption by Truman of the pre-Roosevelt policy of insensate anticommunism- left Moscow no alternative but to take measures in defence of its own borders. The result was the Cold War.” Post-revisionists come to an agreement with some of the revisionists’ beliefs, however maintained that both the United States and the Soviet Union have a mutual accountability with the beginnings of the Cold War. This school of interpretation believes that the conflict between the United States and Russia is inevitable given that both of the nations are powerful and ambitious, thus eyeing the fall of the Germans as a great opportunity to build up their supremacy and influence with the other countries. Besides, the atmosphere of international relations is very vulnerable after the war, leaving the others exposed and helpless against giant nations. There is also this notion that both Russia and the United States secretly regard each other as rivals for the longest time, obliterating economic conditions at the time as an important factor of the hostility. Views and opinion on the motivating forces behind the Cold War emerges differ based from the perception of the different schools. Nevertheless, traditionalists remark the policies of the Soviet Union to be encouraged by ideology and expansionism. Hungry for power and control to nearby territories, the Soviets fuelled the need to magnify its grounds by taking advantage by the after effects of the Second World War. On the other hand, the revisionists perceive that security has been essential to the Soviet Union, thus leading them to motivate their policies (Cox and Stokes 2008). As years go by, the issue of the origins of the Cold War shifted to different trends and direction. Changes in perception and structures of the different schools of traditionalists, revisionists and post-revisionists became evident as the Russian side of the story has been renewed in recent years. The traditionalist perception became more apparent as reports of Stalin and other Russian leaders acknowledging the same ideological terms specifically on the revolutionary-imperial paradigm. The emergence of new viewpoints has also emphasized the important part of Great Britain in the evolution of the Cold War, taking the sole accountability from the United States and the Soviet Union. Correspondingly, other countries provided different insights on the roots of the war based from their national perspectives (Young and Kent 2004). The development of the Cold War has been a long standing issue that historians analyze as a result of political and economic motivations. As Lundestad (2005, p. 10-11) mentioned in his book, “According to the theory of political science realism, conflicts are inevitable in the international system. The normal state is rivalry than harmony. The international community differs from the domestic situation within individual nations in that there is no effective central power having more or less a monopoly of the use of force”. As powerful countries join in international intervention, the threat of its increased influence over the others is imminent. However, the tension brought by this kind of situation can be lowered as embodied by the dissolution of the alliance of the United States, Great Britain and Soviet Union after the defeat of Germany and Japan in the Second World War. Indeed, the origins of the Cold War cannot be simply constructed in linear and absolute structure since there are various elements of driving force among the superpowers involved and other countries that need to be considered. The traditionalist, revisionist, post-revisionist and recent interpretations of the reasons behind the war must be fully weighed and understood as well as the history of the United States and Soviet Union relations. Policies aren’t created overnight; hence the hostility of the two nations can be accounted from long standing issues of resentment of another, which built up as the opportunity to increase influence opened its doors after the Second World War ceases. Bibliography Cox, M. & Stokes, D. (2008) US foreign policy. New York, Oxford. Lundestad, G. (2005) East, west, north, south: Major developments in IR since 1945. London, SAGE. Schlesinger, A. (1999) Communist ideology. In: R. McMahon and T. Paterson. The origins of the Cold War. Houghton Mifflin. Schlesinger, A. (1967) Origins of the Cold War. Foreign Affairs (46). Available from: http://minotb52ufo.com/pdf/Schlesinger-Origins-1967.pdf Young, J. & Kent, J. (2004) International relations since 1945: A global history. New York, Oxford. Read More