Specifics of Cold War - Research Paper Example

Introduction The period of Cold War was characterised by confrontations that happened between the 1945 and the 1990. Nevertheless the two superpowers did not engage in a fight or applied weapons against each other, but the war was fought using nuclear weapons, the proxy wars, propaganda and ideological influence (Trachtenberg 132). The end of the Cold War resulted in the world structure to shift from multipolar and bipolar to unipolar which also caused in statbilities in Third World Nations through withdrawal and disengagement of superpowers, ethnic issues and terrorism. The falling of the Berlin wall in 1989 marked the end of the Cold War and as a result the world moved from a state of military multipolarity to a state of unipolarity which still exists today. There is a debate concerning whether the world has become more stable and secure after the end of the Cold War. In 1979, there was a hypothesis presented by Kenneth Waltz that stated that the world is more secure and stable if there are few dominating powers. According to him, alliances had become more diffuse in a world that is multipolar than in a world that is bipolar (Trachtenberg 132). In the world history, the era of multipolarity was characterized by six states that competed for the influence and power distribution was constantly changing. There was stability during the period of the Cold War because there was sharing of domination between two super powers. There have been a lot of changes since the presentation of the hypothesis by Waltz. The end of the Cold War resulted in an end of ‘structural elements’ in the international framework that was facing the third world nations. That means that the world competition between the superpowers and the resulting search for the allies in the developing world. However, eliminating competition meant that there was now a decisive change in the western policy towards the third world nations (Trachtenberg 134). For example, they could no longer apply their strategic position in mineral resources or their political support in the regional conflict as bargaining points with the superpowers. The end of the Cold War resulted in changes in the world structure of the system which had a great effect on Third World nations. Prior to the Cold War During the WWI and WWII a system of multipolarity raises conflict in the politics of the world, as many states of the same strength compete for influence and power. The states are not sure of the intentions of their rivals, which increase the possibility of a military action. Also, there is a constant change of power balance in this type of system. Multipolarity indicates that a key power structure in a system that is internationally dominated by a number of large powers and there is antagonism between the powers. The classical period of power was as a result of organized big power politics. The Napoleonic wars had promoted the great powers wanting to prevent the same events from happening in future. Following France defeat, the Vienna Congress determined that the world politics should be dominated by five states. These states are Russia, Great Britain, Russia, Austria-Hungary and France. The power sharing was working well until there were other powers that came into play and tried to take over politics. The system’s instability became manifest in the Crimean War following the invading of the Ottoman Empire by Russia and the France, and Britain joined forces to fight back the Russians. However, the greatest blow to peace came when the German ambitions, which came to an end in the First World War. This was the end of Austria-Hungary. The end of the era of multipolarity meant that a new challenge was to come into the politics of the world power. The United States and the Soviet Union was to dominate the world arena for the subsequent half century. The bipolarity denoted the basic structure of the international system when it was dominated by two superpowers. Thus, the other nations had to ally themselves with one of the main powers, which limited their power to manoeuvre and therefore, resulting in international politics that is more stable. The period of the Cold War is considered to have been relatively peaceful, considering the absence of War between the major super powers. The bipolar power was also a rivalry of the superpowers between the East and the West, where the relationship between the two superpowers was characterized by fear and suspicion, and confrontation was common. The superpowers took different sides in confrontations during the period of the Cold War, especially in Asia and Africa, which were usually the battleground for the rivalry between the two superpowers. The Cold War ended following the stagnation of the Soviet after they took part in an arms race with the United States, and as a result of decreasing prices of oil in the 1980s. Subsequent efforts of introducing a market economy did not yield fruit; the communist party power was looked down upon.The East European nations declared independence, there was the dissolution of the Warsaw, and at last the world witnessed the falling of the Berlin Wall in 1989. Following the resignation of Mikhail Gorbachew in 1991, the bipolar era came to an end. The world structure after the Cold War The ending of Cold War came together with the ending of the superpower rivalry of the previous decade. There was now no “typical” East vs. West conflict. The United States came out as the only dominating power in the politics of the world since there were no real powers to challenge their hegemonic position.This gave more room for the superpower to get involved and manoeuvre the international affairs that not necessarily coincided with those of the national interest. These new political situation is what is referred to as being unipolar. The unipolar structure of power is where there is one superpower that is dominating alone. The structural realists argue that the unipolar power structure is unstable since it is heading towards multipolarity, and the other powers will attempt to break the hegemony of the superpower. According to Jean-Jacques Rousseau, “the strongest is never enough to be the master.” It is argued that, even though, this superpower will maintain its position, at least for a while, its power will finally be weakened as a result of dominating the other states. For example, the USA has attempted to clinch hegemonic power by stationing 100,000 troops in Asia and Europe. Through assuring of its allies safety, the United States has been able to subdue the security need for other nations. This action has made the other states not to participate in the armed race. Nevertheless, the dominance is expensive and has limited the economic growth of the United States. In the log last this will lower the power of the United States since the other states do not incur similar costs. Since 1989 until today, the question of what the international structure will be following the end of the Cold War has been discussed widely but there has been no consensus reached. Some scholars, who thought on the issue argued that the 21st century international system made one pole, which is the United states, whereas other scholars stated that Russia, EU, India, China and Japan would be able to balance the power of the United States and therefore, there may arise a multipolar world (Bose and Rosanna 201).There being no strategic order and basic values resulted in more increase of the discussion. Whereas there were discussions going on where there is a situation of one polarity created by the new system on behalf of the United States, the United States went into Iraq with an excuse that Kuwait had been invaded by Iraq, as it was seeking to answer the discussion. This campaign was viewed as an attempt by the United States to show that it was the only leader in the system that is changing. The United States president at that time, George Bush stated that his campaign was a start of a new system of the world and he defined the new system of the world as a system which was characterized by state cooperation, where conflicts were solved peacefully, the attacker was faced with solidarity, the number of weapons was lowered and controlled and people were received with a fair treatment.Nonetheless, the expectations of the world from this definition could not be met, and thus it created disappointments. The reason for the disappointment is explainedby the fact that the changes that happened between 1989 and 1991 were more than those that happened between 1945 and 1989. It is also arguedthat it was difficult to hold a basic notion of the gap that happened in the policies. It is argued by Bose and Rosanna (211) that the spread of the current power of the United States is unique and it has placed its military power in the Eastern and Western ends of the Eurasia and the controlled Gulf of Basra and that the United States economic dynamism fulfilled the prerequisite of establishing its supremacy in the world.It is also stated that the areas that determine the supremacy of the United States are its ability to have extraordinary world access in the military aspect, it is the key engine of the world growth, its leadership in the process of reformation and its unrivaled charm for the global youth. Therefore, with the emergence of a unipolar world order the withdrawal and disengagement of the superpowers was evident. The superpowers now had no interest to guage the third world states since the capitalism-communism tug of war was no more an issue. The Soviet Union broke up into various separate nations, and the re-emergence of Russia was a huge challenge of its own. The regional dynamics of Eastern Europe were now destabilized and thus, Russia was engaged in countering the threats surrounding the region at the time. In this context, various other issues now came to surface like the climate change threats and nuclear terrorism. However, these issues were not now crucially a concern of the states which were earlier the superpowers. That is, the third world was either helpless in dealing with the issues or forums like United Nations Organization were now addressing the issues. Therefore, in the aftermath of the end of the cold war era, the superpowers i.e. USA and Russia were now disengaged and atleast for a while, with the issues solely concerning the third world (Layne 41). For this reason, when civil wars broke in the era in various regions including the Eastern Europe, neither Soviet Union nor USA was willing to take reponsibility and send troops. Though UN did have an arrangement to deal with such crisis, but the superpowers weren`t directly engaged as they had now withdrawn from all such engagements. Therefore, the trends of disengagement and withdrawal led towards a shift in the nature of conflict resolution paradigms in the third world. This aspect needs to be understood in the context that once the cold war ended, the new global political sphere was comparately nuetralized as far as the communism-capitalism rift is concerned. In this context, the former Soviety army was demoralized after the debacle that had resulted there, and a power vaccuum had emerged. Yet, since ideological war had now ended, neither Soviet nor the US felt obligated to intervene. However, since US had emerged as the victor out of the cold war, their narrative was dominant and thus, capitalism was naturally seeking allied not as an engagement pattern, rather as a general reaction to the cold war victory. Therefore, China-US relationship now improved and Europe was also inclined towards maintaining better relations with the capitalistic USA. In such a scenario, neither USA nor Russia had any interest in wooing the third world countries as allied (Layne 58). Yet, states like Pakistan and Afghanistan were bound to be allied with USA atleast till the extent that they approved of the capitalistic narrative and believed in its influence in the post cold war world. Another narrative which now had gained popularity was that of civil liberties, political freedom, human rights and other democtratic ideals. US claimed to be the champion of such values and ideals, and therefore, by virtue of softpower, it managed to dominante the global politics while otherwise being disengaged with the conflicts emerging in the third world. As mentioned above as well, another point of concern related to the post-cold war era is the emergence of ethnic conflicts. With the collapse of the Soviet Union, Eastern Europe was turned into an ethnic conflict war zone, where various groups were claiming self governance rights and seperate states. Therefore, the vaccum that was left after the collapse of the Soviet Union was being filled with these ethnic irregularities, and neither Russia nor USA had any stakes in directly being involved with the conflicts. Eventually, these conflicts were escalated into civil wars in various areas of the region. For instance, the seccesionist movements predominant in former communist states turned into civil war in Yugoslavia, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia and other states. Furthermore, another aspect which gained momentum during the era was that of a separate nation-state of various ethnic/sectarian groups which implied that by the time the cold war ended, the membership of the UN had increased drastically (Ciociari 73). For this reason, concepts like self determination gained immense significance, therefore, the minority groups in various states around the globe started seeking significance. In this context, especially in the third world states where democratic transition was underway, various power sectors emerged (for instance, in various African states). These power sectors were in a direct conflict which then escalated into civil wars, and therefore ethinic conflicts turned into conflicts of violent nature in various developing states (Ciociari 81). Thus, it wouldn`t be wrong to conclude that in the post cold war era where the superpowers withdrew themselves from engaging directly into the states, ethnic conflicts started emerging which then became a threat to regional stability in the name of secession, national liberation, or ethno-nationalistic disputes. Another perspective to understand these ethnic conflicts in the after math of cold war is the post colonial transition which the third world was going through. In light of such a transition, the presence of global powers is deemed necessary since these troubled states were looking for economic as well as millitary assistance. Therefore, when the superpowers were no more interested in extending their help to such third world states in transition, such post colonial conflicts were bound to be escalated into bloody wars. For this reason, it could be argued that the withdrawal strategy of the superpowers after the cold war led to destabilization of the third world states. However, another fact to be considered here is that USA and the Soviet Union were the states who had managed to infilterate conflicts into a few third world states as an extension of their cold war ideological wars. Thus, once these conflicts had ended, such instabilities which were initiated by the superpowers went out of hands, and were converted into ethnic wars and conflicts of severe nature. Terrorism was yet another issue in the post-cold war era which contributed immensely towards spreading instability in the third world. The regional power struggle in middle east emerged with Saddam Hussein influencing the peace of the region with an attack on Kuwait in 1991. As a response, the unipolar world with US having no countering superpower single-handedly responded to the issue by organization a coalition to invade Iraq on direct orders from President Bush. As a result, Saddam Hussain managed to infiltrate terrorism and insurgency in Iraq for several years following the Iraq invasion. There was immense criticism from the inside quarters of USA, for instance scholars like Zbigniew Brzazniski wrote vehemently against the misadventures of USA foreign policy formulators, yet the absence of another super-power to counter these ill-moves of the Bush administration resulted in chaos in the entire globe. Eventually organizations like Al-Qaeda gained momentum in the region, which spread its roots to the third world states. Similarly, the end of cold war was characterized by the Afghanistan debacle where USA ended up equipping the rebels with armed ammunition. These millitant groups were trained and encouraged to fight against the Soviets, yet, eventually they became a threat for South Asian regional security as well. This misadventure paved way for terrorist organizations like Taliban. Therefore, in the absence of a multipolar or a bipolar world order, USA single-handedly engaged itself into various power centres around the globe, which resulted in the infiltration of terrorist factions around the globe. Therefore, USA is the perpetrator of violence related to terrorism in third world states which can be attributed to its unchecked power due to the fall of mulitpolar world order. (Vasquez 568) In this context, it is worth mentioning that transnational terrorism is also a product of the end of cold war era. With the end of cold war era and the fall of soviet union, the regional as well as global dynamics changed. With the Iraq interventions and the misadventures in Afghanistan, various ethnic and religious populations were discontent with the US interventionist policies. In addition, with the 9/11 incident of terrorism, USA was shaken from the core and the pre-emptive measures undertaken by US foreign policy formulators ended up creating vaccuum for transnational terrorism factions. By using soft powers, these terrorist group, though distinct in ideologies, managed to create violence and threaten the world community. By engaging in regional politics of ethnically and religiously extremist states, USA was stuck into a struggle where the terrorism networks only became stronger. In addition, as one of the muslim states, i.e. Pakistan acquired nuclear weapons, the situation was worse, since there was now a threat of terrorists acquiring these weapons to create havoc in the world. Therefore, the unipolar world only left these religious millitant factions with only power to counter i.e. USA. Had USSR still been on the power center, these groups may have had an ally to support which could have naturally kept the system in check. In conclusion, it would be safe to argue that transnational terrorism is a product of the misadventures of US as the sole superpower in the world in the after math of post cold war era. (Enders & Todd 146-147) Therefore, conclusively, by the end of the Cold War the world structure had been modified in such a direction that there was a shift away from a multipolar and bipolar power structure to a unipolar which also caused instatbilities in Third World Nations. These instabilities were apparent after a complete withdrawal and disengagement of superpowers which then paves way for various ethnic issues and terrorism related violent conflicts. In this context, the paper argued over the shift away from bipolar political paradigm in the world in the presence of two superpowers, i.e. USA and USSR, both of which had immense ideological differences. Therefore, both superpowers were actively engaged in seeking assistance from states and guaging them so as to ensure them as allies. The capitalism and communism tug of war led towards years of struggle while throughout the cold war era, both states never experienced a direct confrontation. However, after the cold war ended, USA emerged as the sole superpower and thus, the world now had only one power center. This paved way for various trends. For instance, the superpowers who were once actively engaged in the third world now withdrew from these issues. Also, various issues of ethnic nature emerged which also escalated in civil wars. In addition, issues related to terrorism were also apparent which added to the instability of world politics. Thus, the end of cold war era was a beginning to a new unipolar world with immense instabilities for the third world. Work Cited Bose, Meenekshi, and Rosanna Perotti. From Cold War to New World Order: The Foreign Policy of George Bush. Westport, Conn: Greenwood Press, 2002. Electronic source. Ciorciari, John D. The Limits of Alignment: Southeast Asia and the Great Powers Since 1975. Washington, D.C: Georgetown University Press, 2010. Internet resource. Ellis, Stephen. "Africa After the Cold War: New Patterns of Government and Politics." Development and Change. 27.1 (1996): 1-28. Print. Enders, Walter, and Todd Sandler. "Transnational Terrorism in the Post-Cold War Era."International Studies Quarterly. 43.1 (1999): 145-167. Print. Kühne, Winrich. "Africa After the End of the Cold War." Economics. 45 (2002): 7-28. Print. Trachtenberg, Marc. The Cold War and After: History, Theory, and the Logic of International Politics. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2012. Electronic source. Layne, Christopher. "Superpower Disengagement." Foreign Policy. (1989): 17-40. Print. Vasquez, John A. Beyond Confrontation: Learning Conflict Resolution in the Post-Cold War Era. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1995. Print. Read More