the end of cold war essay introduction

You are using an outdated browser. Please upgrade your browser or activate Google Chrome Frame to improve your experience.

Gr. 12 HISTORY T3 W1:The end of the Cold War and a new world order 1989 to the present

This essay focus on Gorbachev's reforms in the Soviet Union in 1989 and its impact on South Africa

Do you have an educational app, video, ebook, course or eResource?

Contribute to the Western Cape Education Department's ePortal to make a difference.

Home Contact us Terms of Use Privacy Policy Western Cape Government © 2024. All rights reserved.

The End of the Cold War – An In-Depth Analysis

Collapse of the cold war: a thorough dissection, introduction.

The Cold War, a term coined in the aftermath of World War II, does not denote a conventional war fought with direct military engagements between the superpowers, but rather a prolonged state of political and military tension. The two primary antagonists, the United States and the Soviet Union, engaged in various forms of psychological warfare, economic clashes, and proxy wars, influencing global politics for nearly half a century. This essay seeks to unravel the complex tapestry of events and undercurrents that led to the end of this ideological standoff, marking a significant transition in world affairs. The termination of the Cold War was not brought about by a singular event, but by a series of economic, political, and ideological factors that precipitated the dissolution of the Soviet Union and mitigated global hostilities.

Historical Context

The post-world war ii geopolitical landscape.

Following the devastation of World War II, two nations emerged as superpowers: the United States and the Soviet Union. The geopolitical landscape of the time was heavily influenced by the ruins of war and the need for reconstruction. The establishment of the United Nations in 1945 was a testament to the world’s collective desire for peace and cooperation, yet the superpowers were already on a path to confrontation. This bipolar world was soon divided into spheres of influence, with the U.S. promoting a capitalist, democratic model and the USSR espousing a communist, authoritarian ideology. The Iron Curtain metaphorically descended across Europe, delineating the Western nations from the Eastern bloc, which were under Soviet influence.

Formation of NATO and the Warsaw Pact

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) was created in 1949 by the United States, Canada, and several Western European nations to provide collective security against the Soviet threat. In response, the USSR and its allies formed the Warsaw Pact in 1955, solidifying the divide in Europe and setting the stage for various Cold War confrontations. The respective military alliances were the embodiment of the struggle for power between the East and the West, and they played a pivotal role in maintaining the balance of terror, which prevented direct military engagement between the superpowers.

Key Early Events: Berlin, Korea, and Cuba

The Berlin Blockade of 1948-1949 was one of the first major crises of the Cold War. The Soviet Union’s attempt to push the Allies out of Berlin was countered by the Western nations’ remarkable Berlin Airlift, setting a precedent for Cold War confrontations. The Korean War (1950-1953) further entrenched the divide as forces from the North, backed by China and the USSR, clashed with South Korean and UN forces, primarily composed of U.S. troops. Lastly, the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962 brought the world to the brink of nuclear war when the Soviet Union placed nuclear missiles in Cuba, just 90 miles from the U.S. coastline. These early events not only exemplified the potential for global catastrophe inherent in the Cold War but also set the tone for the intense rivalry that would persist until the late 20th century.

Economic Factors

The economic dimension of the Cold War played a critical role in its eventual resolution. The sustainability of the superpower competition relied heavily on economic strength, and ultimately, the economic vulnerabilities of the Soviet Union contributed significantly to its collapse. Understanding these economic factors is vital to comprehending the decline of one of the 20th century’s most formidable powers.

The Burden of the Arms Race

The arms race between the United States and the Soviet Union was a massive economic drain for both powers, but disproportionately so for the USSR. Nuclear proliferation required enormous investment, with a significant portion of the Soviet Union’s GDP allocated to defense spending. This relentless pursuit of military parity with the U.S. placed an unsustainable burden on the Soviet economy, diverting resources away from consumer industries and social programs.

Impact on Soviet Economy

The Soviet Union’s centralized economy struggled under the weight of its military obligations. Unlike the U.S., which had a diverse and robust economy, the USSR’s economic system was less adaptable and more vulnerable to the strains of military expenditure. The inefficiencies of central planning, coupled with the stagnation of economic growth, exacerbated the impact of the arms race, leading to shortages, declining standards of living, and eventual economic crisis.

Western Economic Policies

The economic strategies employed by the West, particularly during the Reagan administration, were designed to exacerbate the Soviet Union’s economic difficulties. Reaganomics, characterized by tax cuts and increased defense spending, was not only a domestic economic policy but also a calculated maneuver to force the Soviet Union into an untenable position in the arms race. The Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI), although never fully realized, compelled the USSR to invest in countermeasures, further straining its finances.

Trade Embargoes and Sanctions on the USSR

Trade embargoes and sanctions played a subtle yet significant role in undermining the Soviet economy. By limiting access to technology and markets, the West was able to restrict the Soviet Union’s economic growth and access to resources. These economic measures were particularly impactful during a time when global trade was becoming an increasingly important component of economic strength.

Internal Economic Struggles of the USSR

The internal economic structure of the Soviet Union was fraught with problems. Centralized planning failed to respond effectively to the needs of the economy, leading to widespread inefficiencies and corruption. Additionally, the economy suffered from a lack of innovation and the inability to compete in the burgeoning global market. The oil price crash in the 1980s dealt a severe blow to the Soviet economy, which was heavily reliant on oil exports for foreign currency. This reduction in revenue further exacerbated the existing economic instability.

Political and Ideological Factors

The interplay of political maneuvering and ideological contest within and beyond the borders of the Soviet Union were central to the unravelling of the Cold War. While the ideological schism had long provided the bedrock for Cold War tensions, political dynamics within the Soviet Union and its sphere of influence during the 1980s brought these issues to a critical juncture.

Gorbachev’s Policies

When Mikhail Gorbachev assumed leadership of the USSR in 1985, he brought with him a new set of policies and an approach that contrasted sharply with that of his predecessors. Gorbachev’s dual policies of Glasnost (openness) and Perestroika (restructuring) sought to revive the stagnant Soviet economy and to liberalize the oppressive political system. Glasnost allowed for increased transparency and freedom of expression, leading to a flood of pent-up criticism of the government, while Perestroika aimed to decentralize the economy to foster productivity and efficiency.

Eastern European Political Shifts

The political landscape of Eastern Europe, long dominated by Soviet influence, began to shift as the 1980s progressed. In Poland, the Solidarity movement, led by Lech Wałęsa, became a symbol of resistance against Soviet control and an advocate for political reform. Similar movements gained momentum across Eastern Europe, including Hungary, where reforms led to multi-party elections, and Czechoslovakia, which experienced the peaceful “Velvet Revolution.” These shifts indicated a growing weariness with authoritarian rule and a leaning towards democratic governance.

The Role of Ideological Dissent

The increased flow of information and the exposure to Western ideologies, facilitated in part by Gorbachev’s Glasnost, amplified ideological dissent within the Soviet Union and its satellite states. The spread of democratic ideals, coupled with the visible economic success of Western nations, undermined the credibility of the communist model. This ideological erosion was profound, not only in the public’s consciousness but also within the ruling Communist Party, leading to a loss of confidence in the system and contributing to the eventual collapse.

Influence of Western Ideals

Western influence played a subtle, yet significant role in shaping the ideological debate within the Soviet bloc. The allure of Western culture and the appeal of its consumerist lifestyle became more pronounced as the Iron Curtain’s permeability increased. The stark contrast between the stagnation in the Soviet Union and the prosperity in the West challenged the legitimacy of the communist ideology and spurred a desire for change among the Eastern European populace.

The Spread of Democracy

The latter half of the 20th century saw a global trend towards democracy, a wave that eventually reached the Soviet Union’s sphere of influence. The democratic movements within Eastern Europe not only contributed to the political realignment but also reflected a broader ideological shift towards democracy and away from authoritarian regimes. This trend was a clear ideological victory for the West and a blow to the Soviet Union, which had long posited itself as a viable alternative to capitalist democracy.

The Role of International Diplomacy

International diplomacy was a key instrument in navigating the Cold War’s intricate and often perilous tensions. As the ideological rift between the Soviet Union and the United States began to close, diplomatic efforts intensified to manage and, ultimately, resolve the conflict. The artful handling of international relations proved to be as decisive as any military strategy in the Cold War’s denouement.

The Reagan-Gorbachev Dialogues

The series of summits and negotiations between U.S. President Ronald Reagan and Soviet General Secretary Mikhail Gorbachev marked a significant thaw in Cold War relations. Their meetings, which spanned from Geneva in 1985 to Moscow in 1988, provided a platform for dialogue and set the groundwork for major arms reduction agreements. The most notable of these, the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty of 1987, eliminated an entire class of nuclear weapons and symbolized a shift away from the doctrine of mutual assured destruction.

Impact of ‘New Thinking’

Gorbachev’s “New Thinking” was a doctrine that reimagined Soviet foreign policy, emphasizing international cooperation and peaceful coexistence over ideological confrontation. This shift had profound implications for the Soviet Union’s relationships with its Eastern Bloc allies and the non-aligned movement, and it signalled an openness to integrate with the global community. Gorbachev’s willingness to withdraw from Afghanistan in 1988 and to allow greater autonomy for Eastern Bloc nations were indicative of this seismic change in Soviet diplomacy.

Engagement of Smaller States and Non-State Actors

Throughout the Cold War, smaller states and non-state actors played a role in the international diplomatic arena, often as proxies or pawns of the superpowers. However, as the Cold War waned, these actors found new agency in shaping the dialogue. The contributions of smaller nations in brokering peace, and the influence of transnational organizations in promoting disarmament and dialogue, helped create an environment conducive to ending the Cold War.

The United Nations’ Evolving Role

The United Nations emerged as a forum for peaceful resolution and international cooperation. As Cold War hostilities subsided, the U.N. played a more active role in resolving conflicts that had once been Cold War flashpoints. The resolution of long-standing disputes, such as the occupation of Namibia and the Iran-Iraq War, with U.N. mediation, exemplified this renewed capacity to foster peace.

Normalization of Relations

The gradual normalization of relations between the Eastern and Western blocs was a testament to the effective use of diplomacy. Beyond the U.S.-Soviet summits, a series of bilateral and multilateral engagements facilitated the easing of travel restrictions, cultural exchanges, and economic cooperation. This normalization was not an end in itself but a means to build trust and to dismantle the structures of hostility that had long perpetuated the Cold War.

Decisive Events Leading to the End of the Cold War

The culmination of the Cold War was not precipitated by a singular event, but rather a series of critical junctures that signaled a shift away from the half-century-long geopolitical and ideological standoff. These events, occurring in rapid succession, underscored the transformation of the international order and the changing ethos of global politics.

The Fall of the Berlin Wall

Perhaps no other event symbolized the end of the Cold War more powerfully than the fall of the Berlin Wall in November 1989. The collapse of this concrete barrier, which had stood as the most tangible manifestation of the Iron Curtain, not only reunited Germany but also marked the beginning of the end for Soviet influence in Eastern Europe. This pivotal moment was as much a consequence of the erosion of Soviet authority as it was a catalyst for further change.

The Velvet Revolution in Czechoslovakia

The peaceful Velvet Revolution in Czechoslovakia, which saw the overthrow of the communist regime in late 1989, was a testament to the power of nonviolent resistance and the waning Soviet grip on Eastern Europe. The success of this revolution and the subsequent election of dissident playwright Václav Havel as president represented the triumph of democratic principles over authoritarian rule.

The Romanian Revolution

In stark contrast to the peaceful transitions in other parts of Eastern Europe, Romania experienced a violent revolution in December 1989 that led to the fall of Nicolae Ceaușescu’s dictatorial regime. The bloody nature of the Romanian Revolution highlighted the varying degrees of resistance to change within the Eastern Bloc and underscored the lengths to which people were willing to go to secure their freedom.

The Baltic States’ Push for Independence

The Baltic republics of Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia declared their independence from the Soviet Union in 1990. These declarations were significant, as they represented a direct challenge to Soviet territorial integrity. The peaceful mass protests, such as the Baltic Way, in which approximately two million people formed a human chain spanning the three countries, demonstrated the popular support for independence and the limitations of Soviet power to quell the tide of nationalism.

The Coup Attempt Against Gorbachev

In August 1991, hardline members of the Soviet government and military attempted a coup d’état against Gorbachev, hoping to reverse the disintegration of Soviet power. The coup failed, largely due to the resistance led by Boris Yeltsin, president of the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic. The coup’s failure accelerated the disintegration of the Soviet Union and the dissolution of communist authority.

The Dissolution of the Soviet Union

The final act in the Cold War drama was the dissolution of the Soviet Union itself. On December 25, 1991, Mikhail Gorbachev resigned as President of the USSR, and the Soviet flag was lowered for the last time over the Kremlin. The formation of the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) by Russia and other former Soviet republics effectively signified the end of the Soviet Union as a political entity and the definitive end of the Cold War.

Consequences and Aftermath

The end of the Cold War marked a transformative moment in global history, with profound consequences that reshaped international relations, domestic politics, and economic paradigms across the world. The aftermath of this ideological and geopolitical conflict’s resolution set the stage for the new world order of the late 20th and early 21st centuries.

The New World Order

With the disintegration of the Soviet Union, the United States emerged as the world’s sole superpower, a status that led to the proclamation of a “new world order.” This term, popularized by U.S. President George H.W. Bush, reflected a vision for a post-Cold War era characterized by U.S. leadership in creating a world where democracy and free market economies were the norm, and where international disputes would be settled by peaceful means through international institutions like the United Nations.

Shifts in NATO and European Security

The end of the Cold War necessitated a reevaluation of NATO’s role in a world no longer defined by the U.S.-Soviet rivalry. The organization shifted its focus from collective defense against the Warsaw Pact to crisis management and peacekeeping. Additionally, the Warsaw Pact was dissolved, and many of its former members sought closer ties with the West, with several joining NATO and the European Union, signaling a significant realignment in European security structures.

Economic Transformations

The transition from command economies to market-based systems in the former Eastern Bloc was a rocky process, marked by significant hardship for many. The “shock therapy” approach to economic reform had varying levels of success, leading to the rapid emergence of a capitalist class but also contributing to widespread poverty, unemployment, and social dislocation. Despite these challenges, many Eastern European countries eventually found paths to economic growth and integration into the global economy.

The Rise of Ethnic and Regional Conflicts

The power vacuum left by the Soviet Union’s collapse led to the re-emergence of long-suppressed ethnic and regional conflicts, particularly in the Balkans and the Caucasus. The wars in the former Yugoslavia and the violent struggles in Chechnya were among the most devastating, highlighting the complexities of nation-building and the challenges of maintaining peace and security in a post-Cold War context.

Democratic Expansion and Authoritarian Resistance

The post-Cold War era saw a significant expansion of democracy, particularly in Eastern Europe and Latin America. However, this “third wave of democratization” was met with resistance in some quarters, where authoritarian regimes persisted and, in some cases, reasserted themselves. The struggle between democratic forces and authoritarianism remained a central theme in global politics, demonstrating that the ideological contestations of the Cold War continued in different forms.

Legacy of the Cold War

The legacies of the Cold War are manifold and enduring. It left behind a world deeply scarred by proxy wars, nuclear proliferation, and ideological divisions. At the same time, the end of the Cold War provided opportunities for reconciliation and the forging of new partnerships. The lessons learned from this period continue to influence how current generations approach international conflict, cooperation, and the pursuit of global peace.

Alternative Perspectives on the End of the Cold War

While the mainstream historical narrative attributes the end of the Cold War to a combination of economic, political, and diplomatic factors, alternative perspectives offer different interpretations. These viewpoints challenge conventional wisdom and provide a more nuanced understanding of this complex period.

Revisionist Views

Revisionist historians argue that internal economic challenges within the USSR, rather than Western pressure, were the primary drivers of the Soviet collapse. They suggest that the arms race, while a burden, was not as decisive as the inherent inefficiencies and the eventual failure of the Soviet economic model.

Role of Middle Powers

Some scholars emphasize the role of middle powers and their diplomatic efforts during the final years of the Cold War. Countries such as Canada, Australia, and the Nordic nations are cited for their ‘soft power’ approaches that promoted human rights and disarmament, influencing both superpowers indirectly and contributing to a climate ripe for the Cold War’s resolution.

People’s Movements

Another perspective highlights the influence of grassroots movements and the collective action of citizens. The pivotal role played by solidarity movements in Poland, human rights activists in the USSR, and the pan-European peace movement are seen as critical forces that undermined the legitimacy of communist governments and compelled leadership to seek reform.

Globalization and Cultural Exchange

Others argue that the cultural exchanges and the onset of globalization played a more significant role in ending the Cold War than has been acknowledged. The penetration of Western culture and ideas into the Eastern Bloc via media and personal contacts is seen as a catalyst for change, as it exposed the shortcomings of the Soviet system and inspired a desire for a different way of life.

The Cold War’s conclusion was a pivotal event in world history, marking the end of a period of intense ideological rivalry and nuclear brinkmanship. The dissolution of the Soviet Union and the subsequent geopolitical shifts have had lasting implications for international politics, economics, and social dynamics. This essay has traced the complex web of factors that contributed to the end of the Cold War, acknowledging that no single factor can fully explain this transformative period. Understanding these various elements provides not only a clearer picture of the past but also insights into current global tensions and the potential pathways to their resolution.

As we reflect on this history, it becomes evident that the end of the Cold War was not the “end of history” as some had proclaimed, but rather the beginning of a new era of challenges and opportunities. The legacy of the Cold War continues to shape our world, reminding us of the importance of dialogue, cooperation, and the relentless pursuit of peace.

Class Notes and Outline – End of the Cold War

As the tension between the United States and the Soviet Union grew it was clear that the US had a decided advantage. The US was the worlds only atomic power and United States policy became of containment had proven to be successful. Stalin felt forced to respond. Stalin acted quickly and decisively to attempt to limit US influence in Eastern Europe and balance the emerging power of the United States. As the Cold War pressed on the US tried to enforce its policy of containment. Sometimes it was successful, other times it was not. The policy of containment brought US troops to the far edges of the world. Perhaps to the young it seemed inevitable but on that day in 1989 when the Berlin Wall came down (brick by brick sold off in a capitalist venture it should be noted!) It seemed almost surreal. The giant monolith of the Soviet Union had been defeated. The foundation of the Soviet Union had been crumbling for a decade… some might say it had never actually been solid yet nonetheless for those of us that lived through the Cold War the sight was still shocking. It all seemed so sudden. The days of air raid drills and realistic fears of

a nuclear war would never leave us. What had vanquished the giant of the Soviet Union? What would be the future of world politics? What would happen to all of those nuclear weapons? So many questions… a very uncertain period of time.

• When it was proven that LBJ had lied, this power was withdrawn during the Nixon administration with the passage of the War Powers Act that only allows the President to commit troops for 90 days without Presidential approval. (NY Times v United States)

In 1959 Fidel Castro, a Marxist, took control of Cuba. What did we do about it?

• History Classics
• Your Profile
• Find History on Facebook (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on Twitter (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on YouTube (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on Instagram (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on TikTok (Opens in a new window)
• This Day In History
• History Podcasts
• History Vault

Cold War History

By: History.com Editors

Updated: June 26, 2023 | Original: October 27, 2009

The Cold War was a period of geopolitical tension marked by competition and confrontation between communist nations led by the Soviet Union and Western democracies including the United States. During World War II , the United States and the Soviets fought together as allies against Nazi Germany . However, U.S./Soviet relations were never truly friendly: Americans had long been wary of Soviet communism and Russian leader Joseph Stalin ’s tyrannical rule. The Soviets resented Americans’ refusal to give them a leading role in the international community, as well as America’s delayed entry into World War II, in which millions of Russians died.

These grievances ripened into an overwhelming sense of mutual distrust and enmity that never developed into open warfare (thus the term “cold war”). Soviet expansionism into Eastern Europe fueled many Americans’ fears of a Russian plan to control the world. Meanwhile, the USSR came to resent what they perceived as U.S. officials’ bellicose rhetoric, arms buildup and strident approach to international relations. In such a hostile atmosphere, no single party was entirely to blame for the Cold War; in fact, some historians believe it was inevitable.

Containment

By the time World War II ended, most American officials agreed that the best defense against the Soviet threat was a strategy called “containment.” In his famous “Long Telegram,” the diplomat George Kennan (1904-2005) explained the policy: The Soviet Union, he wrote, was “a political force committed fanatically to the belief that with the U.S. there can be no permanent modus vivendi [agreement between parties that disagree].” As a result, America’s only choice was the “long-term, patient but firm and vigilant containment of Russian expansive tendencies.”

“It must be the policy of the United States,” he declared before Congress in 1947, “to support free peoples who are resisting attempted subjugation…by outside pressures.” This way of thinking would shape American foreign policy for the next four decades.

Did you know? The term 'cold war' first appeared in a 1945 essay by the English writer George Orwell called 'You and the Atomic Bomb.'

The Cold War: The Atomic Age

The containment strategy also provided the rationale for an unprecedented arms buildup in the United States. In 1950, a National Security Council Report known as NSC–68 had echoed Truman’s recommendation that the country use military force to contain communist expansionism anywhere it seemed to be occurring. To that end, the report called for a four-fold increase in defense spending.

In particular, American officials encouraged the development of atomic weapons like the ones that had ended World War II. Thus began a deadly “ arms race .” In 1949, the Soviets tested an atom bomb of their own. In response, President Truman announced that the United States would build an even more destructive atomic weapon: the hydrogen bomb, or “superbomb.” Stalin followed suit.

As a result, the stakes of the Cold War were perilously high. The first H-bomb test, in the Eniwetok atoll in the Marshall Islands, showed just how fearsome the nuclear age could be. It created a 25-square-mile fireball that vaporized an island, blew a huge hole in the ocean floor and had the power to destroy half of Manhattan. Subsequent American and Soviet tests spewed radioactive waste into the atmosphere.

The ever-present threat of nuclear annihilation had a great impact on American domestic life as well. People built bomb shelters in their backyards. They practiced attack drills in schools and other public places. The 1950s and 1960s saw an epidemic of popular films that horrified moviegoers with depictions of nuclear devastation and mutant creatures. In these and other ways, the Cold War was a constant presence in Americans’ everyday lives.

HISTORY Vault: Nuclear Terror

Now more than ever, terrorist groups are obtaining nuclear weapons. With increasing cases of theft and re-sale at dozens of Russian sites, it's becoming more and more likely for terrorists to succeed.

The Cold War and the Space Race

Space exploration served as another dramatic arena for Cold War competition. On October 4, 1957, a Soviet R-7 intercontinental ballistic missile launched Sputnik (Russian for “traveling companion”), the world’s first artificial satellite and the first man-made object to be placed into the Earth’s orbit. Sputnik’s launch came as a surprise, and not a pleasant one, to most Americans.

In the United States, space was seen as the next frontier, a logical extension of the grand American tradition of exploration, and it was crucial not to lose too much ground to the Soviets. In addition, this demonstration of the overwhelming power of the R-7 missile–seemingly capable of delivering a nuclear warhead into U.S. air space–made gathering intelligence about Soviet military activities particularly urgent.

In 1958, the U.S. launched its own satellite, Explorer I, designed by the U.S. Army under the direction of rocket scientist Wernher von Braun, and what came to be known as the Space Race was underway. That same year, President Dwight Eisenhower signed a public order creating the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), a federal agency dedicated to space exploration, as well as several programs seeking to exploit the military potential of space. Still, the Soviets were one step ahead, launching the first man into space in April 1961.

That May, after Alan Shepard become the first American man in space, President John F. Kennedy (1917-1963) made the bold public claim that the U.S. would land a man on the moon by the end of the decade. His prediction came true on July 20, 1969, when Neil Armstrong of NASA’s Apollo 11 mission , became the first man to set foot on the moon, effectively winning the Space Race for the Americans. 

U.S. astronauts came to be seen as the ultimate American heroes. Soviets, in turn, were pictured as the ultimate villains, with their massive, relentless efforts to surpass America and prove the power of the communist system.

The Cold War and the Red Scare

Meanwhile, beginning in 1947, the House Un-American Activities Committee ( HUAC ) brought the Cold War home in another way. The committee began a series of hearings designed to show that communist subversion in the United States was alive and well.

In Hollywood , HUAC forced hundreds of people who worked in the movie industry to renounce left-wing political beliefs and testify against one another. More than 500 people lost their jobs. Many of these “blacklisted” writers, directors, actors and others were unable to work again for more than a decade. HUAC also accused State Department workers of engaging in subversive activities. Soon, other anticommunist politicians, most notably Senator Joseph McCarthy (1908-1957), expanded this probe to include anyone who worked in the federal government. 

Thousands of federal employees were investigated, fired and even prosecuted. As this anticommunist hysteria spread throughout the 1950s, liberal college professors lost their jobs, people were asked to testify against colleagues and “loyalty oaths” became commonplace.

The Cold War Abroad

The fight against subversion at home mirrored a growing concern with the Soviet threat abroad. In June 1950, the first military action of the Cold War began when the Soviet-backed North Korean People’s Army invaded its pro-Western neighbor to the south. Many American officials feared this was the first step in a communist campaign to take over the world and deemed that nonintervention was not an option. Truman sent the American military into Korea, but the Korean War dragged to a stalemate and ended in 1953.

In 1955, the United States and other members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) made West Germany a member of NATO and permitted it to remilitarize. The Soviets responded with the Warsaw Pact , a mutual defense organization between the Soviet Union, Albania, Poland, Romania, Hungary, East Germany, Czechoslovakia and Bulgaria that set up a unified military command under Marshal Ivan S. Konev of the Soviet Union.

Other international disputes followed. In the early 1960s, President Kennedy faced a number of troubling situations in his own hemisphere. The Bay of Pigs invasion in 1961 and the Cuban missile crisis the following year seemed to prove that the real communist threat now lay in the unstable, postcolonial “Third World.” 

Nowhere was this more apparent than in Vietnam , where the collapse of the French colonial regime had led to a struggle between the American-backed nationalist Ngo Dinh Diem in the south and the communist nationalist Ho Chi Minh in the north. Since the 1950s, the United States had been committed to the survival of an anticommunist government in the region, and by the early 1960s it seemed clear to American leaders that if they were to successfully “contain” communist expansionism there, they would have to intervene more actively on Diem’s behalf. However, what was intended to be a brief military action spiraled into a 10-year conflict .

The End of the Cold War and Effects

Almost as soon as he took office, President Richard Nixon (1913-1994) began to implement a new approach to international relations. Instead of viewing the world as a hostile, “bi-polar” place, he suggested, why not use diplomacy instead of military action to create more poles? To that end, he encouraged the United Nations to recognize the communist Chinese government and, after a trip there in 1972, began to establish diplomatic relations with Beijing.

At the same time, he adopted a policy of “détente”—”relaxation”—toward the Soviet Union. In 1972, he and Soviet premier Leonid Brezhnev (1906-1982) signed the Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty (SALT I), which prohibited the manufacture of nuclear missiles by both sides and took a step toward reducing the decades-old threat of nuclear war.

Despite Nixon’s efforts, the Cold War heated up again under President Ronald Reagan (1911-2004). Like many leaders of his generation, Reagan believed that the spread of communism anywhere threatened freedom everywhere. As a result, he worked to provide financial and military aid to anticommunist governments and insurgencies around the world. This policy, particularly as it was applied in the developing world in places like Grenada and El Salvador, was known as the Reagan Doctrine .

Even as Reagan fought communism in Central America, however, the Soviet Union was disintegrating. In response to severe economic problems and growing political ferment in the USSR, Premier Mikhail Gorbachev (1931-2022) took office in 1985 and introduced two policies that redefined Russia’s relationship to the rest of the world: “glasnost,” or political openness, and “ perestroika ,” or economic reform. 

Soviet influence in Eastern Europe waned. In 1989, every other communist state in the region replaced its government with a noncommunist one. In November of that year, the Berlin Wall –the most visible symbol of the decades-long Cold War–was finally destroyed, just over two years after Reagan had challenged the Soviet premier in a speech at Brandenburg Gate in Berlin: “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall.” By 1991, the Soviet Union itself had fallen apart. The Cold War was over.

‘Blood in the Water’: The Cold War Olympic Showdown Between Hungary and the USSR

Just weeks before the match, Soviet tanks and troops brutally crushed the short‑lived Hungarian Revolution.

How the Cold War Space Race Led to US Students Doing Tons of Homework

In the first half of the 20th century, U.S. educators shunned homework. The Soviet Union’s launch of Sputnik 1 changed that.

Why the Berlin Airlift Was the First Major Battle of the Cold War

American and British pilots ferried some 2.3 million tons of supplies into West Berlin on a total of 277,500 flights, in what would be the largest air relief operation in history.

Sign up for Inside History

Get HISTORY’s most fascinating stories delivered to your inbox three times a week.

By submitting your information, you agree to receive emails from HISTORY and A+E Networks. You can opt out at any time. You must be 16 years or older and a resident of the United States.

More details : Privacy Notice | Terms of Use | Contact Us

59e. The End of the Cold War

The fall of the Berlin Wall. The shredding of the Iron Curtain. The end of the Cold War.

When Mikhail Gorbachev assumed the reins of power in the Soviet Union in 1985, no one predicted the revolution he would bring. A dedicated reformer, Gorbachev introduced the policies of glasnost and perestroika to the USSR.

Glasnost , or openness, meant a greater willingness on the part of Soviet officials to allow western ideas and goods into the USSR. Perestroika was an initiative that allowed limited market incentives to Soviet citizens.

Gorbachev hoped these changes would be enough to spark the sluggish Soviet economy. Freedom, however, is addictive.

The unraveling of the Soviet Bloc began in Poland in June 1989. Despite previous Soviet military interventions in Hungary, Czechoslovakia, and Poland itself, Polish voters elected a noncommunist opposition government to their legislature. The world watched with anxious eyes, expecting Soviet tanks to roll into Poland preventing the new government from taking power.

Gorbachev, however, refused to act.

Like dominoes, Eastern European communist dictatorships fell one by one. By the fall of 1989, East and West Germans were tearing down the Berlin Wall with pickaxes. Communist regimes were ousted in Hungary and Czechoslovakia. On Christmas Day, the brutal Romanian dictator Nicolae Ceausescu and his wife were summarily executed on live television. Yugoslavia threw off the yoke of communism only to dissolve quickly into a violent civil war.

Demands for freedom soon spread to the Soviet Union. The Baltic states of Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania declared independence. Talks of similar sentiments were heard in Ukraine , the Caucasus , and the Central Asian states. Here Gorbachev wished to draw the line. Self-determination for Eastern Europe was one thing, but he intended to maintain the territorial integrity of the Soviet Union. In 1991, he proposed a Union Treaty, giving greater autonomy to the Soviet republics, while keeping them under central control.

That summer, a coup by conservative hardliners took place. Gorbachev was placed under house arrest. Meanwhile, Boris Yeltsin , the leader of the Russian Soviet Republic , demanded the arrest of the hardliners. The army and the public sided with Yeltsin, and the coup failed. Though Gorbachev was freed, he was left with little legitimacy.

Nationalist leaders like Yeltsin were far more popular than he could hope to become. In December 1991, Ukraine, Byelorussia , and Russia itself declared independence and the Soviet Union was dissolved. Gorbachev was a president without a country.

Americans were pleasantly shocked, but shocked nonetheless at the turn of events in the Soviet bloc. No serious discourse on any diplomatic levels in the USSR addressed the likelihood of a Soviet collapse. Republicans were quick to claim credit for winning the Cold War. They believed the military spending policies of the Reagan-Bush years forced the Soviets to the brink of economic collapse. Democrats argued that containment of communism was a bipartisan policy for 45 years begun by the Democrat Harry Truman.

Others pointed out that no one really won the Cold War. The United States spent trillions of dollars arming themselves for a direct confrontation with the Soviet Union that fortunately never came. Regardless, thousands of American lives were lost waging proxy wars in Korea and Vietnam.

Most Americans found it difficult to get used to the idea of no Cold War. Since 1945, Americans were born into a Cold War culture that featured McCarthyist witchhunts, backyard bomb shelters, a space race, a missile crisis, détente, the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, and the Star Wars defense proposal. Now the enemy was beaten, but the world remained unsafe. In many ways, facing one superpower was simpler than challenging dozens of rogue states and renegade groups sponsoring global terrorism.

Americans hoped against hope that the new world order of the 1990s would be marked with the security and prosperity to which they had become accustomed.

QUIZ TIME: Reagan Years Quiz

Report broken link

If you like our content, please share it on social media!

Copyright ©2008-2022 ushistory.org , owned by the Independence Hall Association in Philadelphia, founded 1942.

THE TEXT ON THIS PAGE IS NOT PUBLIC DOMAIN AND HAS NOT BEEN SHARED VIA A CC LICENCE. UNAUTHORIZED REPUBLICATION IS A COPYRIGHT VIOLATION Content Usage Permissions

• Sign in to the Digital Toolbox

Already registered?

Not yet registered, the cold war (1945–1989), introduction.

• Resources (2)

The End of the Cold War Essay

• To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
• As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
• As a template for you assignment

History Discussion

The ideas suggested by Mikhail Gorbachev had a pernicious impact on the USSR and the whole communist society. The fact is that these new policies contradicted the ideological principles of the Soviet Union that had been fundamental for its existence and evolution for decades. Additionally, the majority of communist leaders were not able to accept these alterations because of their radical character and contradictory nature (Sanders, 2014). The principles of glasnost and democratization were introduced with the primary aim to reduce the power of the Communist party which was central to the state (Sell, 2016). In such a way, the principles mentioned above destroyed the basis of the USSR and preconditioned its further collapse.

The Cold War was one of the most important and complex periods in the history of human civilization. The confrontation between two superstates resulted in the appearance of numerous security concerns. Additionally, the emergence and fast evolution of nuclear weapons posed a new threat to the whole world. Incidents like the Caribbean Crisis proved the existence of critical discrepancies between the USSR and the USA (Sell, 2016). In such a way, the given period of history preconditioned the evolution of the modern world and the formation of peoples mentalities and the modern international discourse. That is why the Cold War period impresses by its fundamental role in the newest history.

Analyzing Gorbachevs actions and his incentives in the economy of the USSR, it is possible to conclude that the primary aim of these actions was the destruction of the welfare of the country, the growth of peoples dissatisfaction, gradual decline, and collapse. For instance, Gorbachevs anti-alcohol campaign resulted in colossal financial problems as about 100 billion rubles were lost during these years (Sell, 2016).

Correctly realizing the importance of this item of income for the budget he wanted to undermine the power of the USSR and trigger the growth of peoples dissatisfaction with the existing state. For this reason, using this factor and some other pieces of evidence, one can conclude that Gorbachevs primary intention was to destroy the USSR.

At the end of the Cold War, the USSR experienced significant economic problems caused by unwise Gorbachevs reforms and attempts to liberalize the Soviet society. Additionally, the focus on the rapprochement between the Eastern and Western camps accompanied by the proliferation of nuclear weapons resulted in the decrease in the level of tension between these superstates (Sanders, 2014). In such a way, the combination of these factors and the growth of peoples dissatisfaction in the state stipulated the peaceful resolution of the opposition and breakup of the Soviet Union.

Perfectly realizing the fact that the reformation initiated by Gorbachev would serve American interests, Reagan supported the First President of the USSR in his incentives. Being a vigorous anti-communist, Reagan reconsidered his attitude to soviet policy and tried to convince the USSR that cooperation remains the only choice for positive outcomes (Matlock, 2008). In such a way, both these leaders contributed to the peaceful resolution of the Cold War by engaging in close cooperation and demonstrating supportive behaviors.

Speaking about the final phase of the Cold War, we should admit the critical difference in relations between the leaders of the USSR and the USA if to compare with the previous ones. The fact is that both Reagan and Gorbachev made steps in the same direction which was unusual for these states Presidents (Matlock, 2008). At long last, it accelerated the collapse of the USSR and the peaceful resolution of the Cold War.

Matlock, J. (2008). Reagan and Gorbachev: How the Cold War ended . New York, NY: Random House Trade Paperbacks.

Sanders, T. (2014). The world in the twentieth century: From empires to nation s (7th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.

Sell, L. (2016). From Washington to Moscow: US-Soviet relations and the collapse of the USSR . Durham, NC: Duke University Press Books.

• Cuban Missile Crisis and Administrations Negotiation
• The Americans and the Middle East Relations
• The Political Rise of Ronald Reagan
• Soviet Union's Fall and New Russia's Start
• The Cold War: A New History
• The Industrial Revolution Changes and Effects
• Partitioning and Wars Through the History
• The Oral History's Concept
• Ecological Imperialism in World History
• The Immigration Museum: Cultural Diversity in Australia
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2021, March 23). The End of the Cold War. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-end-of-the-cold-war/

"The End of the Cold War." IvyPanda , 23 Mar. 2021, ivypanda.com/essays/the-end-of-the-cold-war/.

IvyPanda . (2021) 'The End of the Cold War'. 23 March.

IvyPanda . 2021. "The End of the Cold War." March 23, 2021. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-end-of-the-cold-war/.

1. IvyPanda . "The End of the Cold War." March 23, 2021. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-end-of-the-cold-war/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "The End of the Cold War." March 23, 2021. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-end-of-the-cold-war/.

• Society and Politics
• Art and Culture
• Biographies
• Publications

Grade 12 - Topic 4 - The end of the Cold War and a new global world order 1989 to present

There were many reasons why apartheid collapsed. You can read about the crisis of Apartheid in the 1980s in section 5 of the grade 12 material. The collapse of communism in the Soviet Union was another major cause of the end of apartheid.

Under apartheid, South Africa was a fascist state with a capitalist economy. The National Party was strongly anti-communist and said they were faced with a ' Rooi Gevaar' or a 'Red Threat'. The apartheid state used the label 'communist' to justify its repressive actions against anyone who disagreed with their policies.

During the Cold War, there was a contest for influence in Africa, between the US and Western powers on the one hand, and the Soviet Union and Eastern bloc countries on the other. Most of newly independent ex-colonies in Africa received military and economic support from one of the Superpowers.

Despite its racist policies, the South African government was supported by many governments in the West, particularly Britain and the USA. This was because the South African government was anti-communist. The British and American governments used political rhetoric and economic sanctions against apartheid, but continued to supply the South African regime with military expertise and hardware.

The collapse of the USSR in 1989 meant that the National Party could no longer use communism as a justification for their oppression. The ANC could also no longer rely on the Soviet Union for economic and military support. By the end of the 1980s, the Soviet Union was in political and economic crisis, and it was increasingly difficult for the Soviet Government to justify spending money in Africa.

In 1989, President F.W de Klerk , the last apartheid Head of State, unbanned the African National Congress , the South African Communist Party and the Pan Africanist Congress . He states that the collapse of the Soviet Union was decisive in persuading him to take this step:

"The collapse of the Soviet Union helped to remove our long-standing concern regarding the influence of the South African Communist Party within the ANC Alliance. By 1990 classic socialism had been thoroughly discredited throughout the world and was no longer a serious option, even for revolutionary parties like the ANC.

At about the same time, the ANC was reaching a similar conclusion that it could not achieve a revolutionary victory within the foreseeable future. The State of Emergency, declared by the South African Government in 1986, and the collapse of the Soviet Union - which had traditionally been one the ANC's main allies and suppliers - led the organisation to adopt a more realistic view of the balance of forces. It concluded that its interests could be best secured by accepting negotiations rather than by committing itself to a long and ruinous civil war." - Quote source: www.fwdklerk.org.za

Suggested activities and links:

• " End of the Cold War " at www.schoolhistory.co.uk (provides additional information from an international perspective. Includes activities)
• " The Cold War Museum " at www.coldwar.org (This link gives a decade by decade breakdown of all major developments in the Cold War from an American perspective. This is helpful for general understanding. Also includes a trivia game and timeline) *needs Windows IE browser for quiz
• " Learning Curve " at www.learningcurve.gov.uk (This resource has some interesting clips and worksheets from a British perspective)
• " Cartoon Stock " at www.cartoonstock.com (This site has a range of Cold War cartoons that could be used to practise cartoon analysis.)

To reflect on the impact of the collapse of the USSR in 1989 on the re-imagining of African nations in the 1990s the curriculum requires that certain countries are examined in detail.

The case studies for the examination are as follows:

Central Africa: Congo and Angola to be examined in 2009 (below)

West Africa: Benin and Guinea: to be examined in 2010

North Africa: Egypt: to be examined in 2011

Colonialism in the Congo

The present day Democratic Republic of Congo was formerly the Belgian Congo. The capital under colonial rule was Leopoldville (now Kinshasa).

The area was colonised in 1885 as a personal possession of the Belgian King Leopold II as the Congo Free State. It is one of the largest countries in Africa and one of the richest.

Leopold ideas reflected the racist ideas of most of his European counterparts at the time. He thought that Africa was "stagnant, primitive and dark", and that his rule would bring "progress, civilisation and light."

Belgium's brutal exploitation of the Congo is infamous. Leopold accumulated a vast personal fortune from ivory and rubber using Congolese forced labour. In 1891, the price of rubber began to increase following the invention of the inflatable rubber tyre, which increased his profits even further.

He was known locally as 'Bula Matadi' (He Who Breaks Rocks) to indicate the brutality of his regime. During Leopold's rule the population of the Congo declined from an estimated 20-30 million to less than nine million.

In 1907, administration of the colony shifted from the king to the Belgian Government, which renamed the country the Belgian Congo.

Independence in the Congo

Independence was granted in 1960, and the country was named the Republic of the Congo. The African elite in the colony was very small, and this suited the financial interests of Belgium, which planned to maintain its economic grip on the Congo's mineral resources and raw materials.

Elections were held, and Patrice Lumumba became Prime Minister. Joseph Kasavubu became Head of State.

During the Cold War, there was a contest for influence in Africa, between the US and Western powers on the one hand, and the Soviet Union and Eastern bloc countries on the other. The Cold War spread outside Europe to every region of the world. Most of newly independent ex-colonies in Africa got military and economic support from one of the Superpowers. The Congo was important because of its wealth and its size.

Lumumba followed a policy of "positive neutralism," - a return to African values and the rejection of foreign non-African ideologies, including that of the Soviet Union.

The West feared the consequences of a Lumumba's Congo government for its position in Africa. The USA had recently witnessed Fidel Castro's victorious revolution in Cuba, and Castro's friendship with Moscow.

The CIA quickly became involved in destabilising Lumumba's government. US President Eisenhower's government said Lumumba was a "very difficult if not impossible person to deal with, and was dangerous to the peace and safety of the world."

Within weeks of independence, the Katanga Province, which was rich in copper, led by Moise Tshombe, broke away from the new republic. Belgium sent in troops. It said the troops were to protect Belgian nationals. However, the Belgian troops mainly landed in Katanga, where they helped keep the regime of Moise Tshombe in power with the help of the USA.

Lumumba appealed to the United Nations to expel the Belgians and help restore internal order. The United Nations forces refused to help suppress the Katangese revolt.

Having been rejected by the West, Lumumba appealed to the Soviet Union for planes to assist in transporting his troops to Katanga. The Western powers were alarmed. Moreover, in the context of the Cold War, the Soviet Union's support for Lumumba appeared at the time as a threat to the West.

On 5 September 1960, President Kasavubu dismissed Lumumba, and Lumumba contested the move. There were therefore two groups now claiming to be the legal central government. On 14 September 1960, power was seized by the Congolese army leader Colonel Joseph Mobutu (president of Zaire as Mobutu Sese Seko), who later reached a working agreement with Kasavubu.

The assassination of Lumumba

In November 1960, Lumumba wanted to travel from Leopoldville, where the United Nations had provided him with protection, to Stanleyville where his supporters had control. With the secret help of the CIA, Joseph Mobutu sent his soldiers after Lumumba. Lumumba was caught, and spent three months in prison, while his enemies tried in vain to consolidate their power.

In January 1961, Lumumba was handed over to the Katanga secessionist regime, where he was executed. Documents from the USA which were released in 2000 revealed that President Eisenhower gave direct orders for the CIA to assassinate Lumumba. You can read an interesting article about Lumumba's assassination on this external link: www.wsws.org

Mobutu seizes power

In 1965, army leader Joseph Mobutu seized control as the dictator of the Congo. Mobutu renamed the country, and called it the Republic of Zaire. All citizens had to adopt African names. He called himself Mobutu Sese Seko. He had the backing of the USA government, as he was willing to turn Zaire into a springboard for operations against Soviet-backed Angola. You can read about Angola in another section.

The USA considered Mobutu Sese Seko as a safeguard against Soviet-sponsored Communism in Africa. Mobutu received American support, including military aid, throughout his ruthless dictatorship. He was even received by American presidents at the White House. The Cold War support of Mobutu by the USA put Mobutu in a position to loot his country's riches and he became one of history's most corrupt dictators. He funnelled the wealth of the Congo into his own pockets. 

Lumumba had wanted to reform the Congo and use its riches to lift the Congolese out of poverty. In contrast, Mobutu chose King Leopold II as his role model. Leopold ran the Congo as his private rubber plantation. Mobutu outdid even Leopold, as he sold off the Congo's resources and stashed billions of dollars in Swiss bank accounts. Mobutu built himself a refuge on the French Riviera.

The Congolese continued to live in poverty.

Zaire and the Cold War

President Ford's American administration opposed the Soviet-backed Popular Movement for the Liberation of Angola (MPLA). Mobutu helped the USA against the MPLA. He supported his brother-in-law, Jonas Savimbi, who led UNITA.

In the 1980s, the Reagan administration called Savimbi a "freedom fighter" worthy of CIA support. Thankful for the use of Zaire as a supply route to Savimbi's forces, Reagan praised Mobutu as "a voice of good sense and good will."

Between 1962 and 1991, the U.S. directly supported Mobutu and his government with more than $1.03 billion in development aid and $227.4 million in military assistance.

Reviewing America's support for Mobutu, the former US Assistant Secretary of State, Chester Crocker said: "I think we have no apologies to make. We were in a state of global rivalry with a global adversary."

The end of the Cold War

Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev introduced reform policies in the USSR - called perestroika (restructuring of the Soviet economy) and glasnost (openness and transparency). After more than four decades, in December 1989, Gorbachev and President George H.W. Bush Sr. declared the Cold War officially over.

With the Cold War ended, Zaire ceased to be of interest to the US, and US aid to Mobutu began to dry up.

There had been simmering anger and discontent with Mobutu's rule in Zaire for a long time. Mobutu could not stay in power without US help. The Zairian liberation movement led by Laurent Kabila overthrew Mobutu's dictatorship in 1997. It quickly reinstated the country's name, the Democratic Republic of the Congo (D.R.C.) and appointed a new government. Laurent Kabila declared himself President.

Mobutu went into exile in Togo and then in Morocco, and died of cancer in 1997. He had seventeen children. The accounts held by Swiss institutions containing the assets of the late Mobutu Sese Seko were frozen in 1997. Swiss authorities have repeatedly denied Mobutu's heirs access to the money, and in May 2009 the funds remained frozen.

Laurent Kabila banned all political parties except his own, and elections were never held. Kabila's policies differed little from his Mobutu's as he ran a dictatorship that was corrupt and rampant with human rights abuses. He was assassinated in 2001, and succeeded by his son, Joseph Kabila.

Case Study: Congo

The sources that appear in the Grade 12 examination are often quite long and difficult. The sources in this task on the Congo are taken from the Supplementary History Paper Two that was written in March 2009. It is good practice for you to try to answer all the questions, and then check your answers.

There are four sources A, B, C and D. Each source has a separate set of questions and answers.

Examine the sources and then answer the questions that follow.

The following extract is adapted from In the Footsteps of Mr Kurtz: Living on the Brink of Disaster in the Congo :

The US played a major role in converting the newly independent Congo into a Cold War battleground. The US administration in the 1960s authorised the murder of Prime Minister Patrice Lumumba, who had been voted into office just months earlier in the territory's first-ever democratic election. Washington, who was instrumental in helping Mobutu Seso Seko to power and kept him there for more than 30 years, bears heavy responsibility for the disastrous economic conditions, massive corruption, and suppression of human rights in the Congo.

Mobutu was regarded as a particularly valuable asset by the United States of America and they were determined to keep him in power at all costs so that the Congo remained a pro-Western defence against Soviet ambitions in Africa. When Mobutu visited Washington for the first time in May 1963, President Kennedy stated: 'General if it hadn't been for you, the whole thing would have collapsed and the Communists would have taken over...'

Subsequent US presidents believed that Mobutu was the only alternative to communism and continued to support him financially and militarily. The US, using Congo's bases as the conduit (pipeline) for arms destined for Angola's rebels, was determined to keep Mobutu on board. This despite having substantial knowledge that he was highly corrupt and an inefficient leader.

According to Roger Morris, US representative responsible for African affairs in the 1970s, keeping Mobutu on the US side was not cheap. It is argued that the CIA prolonged Mobutu's rule by providing more than $300 million in weapons and $100 million in military training ...

Look at Source A and answer the following questions:

1. Why do you think the US administration 'authorised the murder' of Lumumba?

2. Explain to what extent the USA was responsible for the installation of Mobutu as leader of the Congo.

3. How did the various US presidents continue to keep Mobutu's regime in power?

4. Why was the Congo important to the USA in the Cold War context?

The following has been taken from World History, A New Perspective . It focuses on Mikhail Gorbachev's reform measures.

Gorbachev, a reformist communist, became general secretary of the Soviet Communist Party in March 1985. He introduced reforms called Perestroika and Glasnost which allowed greater openness and freedom of speech.

When Gorbachev addressed the United Nations in 1988, he committed himself to ending the Cold War with the United States. He decided to abandon the Brezhnev Doctrine, renounced the Communist Party's emphasis on a world revolution dating back to 1917 and was intent on cutting back on nuclear weapons. With Russia's conservative and ailing economy, Gorbachev was no longer prepared to support Soviet dominated governments in Europe and Africa. By doing this Gorbachev effectively withdrew his support from hard-line communist regimes of Europe and Africa and he encouraged the leaders of these regimes to seek new ways of gaining support. By doing so, Gorbachev opened the way for political and economic reforms in Europe and Africa.

Look at Source B and answer the following questions:

1. Using the information in the source and your own knowledge, define the following concepts: (a) Perestroika (b) Glasnost. Explain how the concepts differ from each other.

2. Explain why Gorbachev wanted to end Russia's participation in the Cold War.

3. List some of the criticism of Gorbachev's reforms.

4. Using the information in the source and your own knowledge, explain how African countries (such as the Congo) responded to Gorbachev's decision?

The following extract focuses on the impact of Gorbachev's reforms on Mobutu's regime. Taken from A History of Fifty Years of Independence .

With Mikhail Gorbachev's perestroika transforming the Soviet Union, the Cold War priorities were fading. Democracy was sweeping across Africa and Mobutu was moving from useful US ally to an embarrassment. In the 1990s the World Bank noted that Congo's economy had shrunk to the level of 1958, while the population had tripled. Average life expectancy was fifty-two years, illiteracy was growing, Aids was rife and diseases such as bubonic plague and sleeping sickness were enjoying a vibrant comeback. It further noted that by the end of the century one of Africa's richest states was dipping below the daily takings of the US super store Wal-Mart.

Western self-interest made indulging Mobutu worthwhile, in fact Chester Crocker, the former US assistant secretary of state for Africa, stated that 'If we tried to attach 1990's governance conditionalities to Mobutu, we would have been calling for his overthrow and if we asked him to turn off the taps, his own people would have toppled him. We would, in effect, have been calling for a coup. I'm sure of that'.

However, when the Cold War ended, the US gradually stopped supporting Mobutu. On 29 April 1997 American negotiators met Mobutu, bearing a letter from President Clinton, trying to persuade him to leave 'with honour and dignity' and spare the capital from looting and destruction that seemed likely to accompany his downfall.

He was overthrown in 1997 and went into exile. A new government, under Laurent Kabila, took over and changed Zaire's name to the Democratic Republic of Congo.

Look at Source C and answer the following questions:

1. Why, according to the source, did Mobutu prove to be an embarrassment to the USA?

2. Explain how Chester Crocker justified the US's support of Mobutu.

3. What factors contributed to Mobutu being overthrown as the leader of the Congo?

The following is a Cuban cartoon showing American arms pushing Mobutu over the cliff with the words 'the time for change has arrived' and putting Laurent Kabila in his place. Kabila and Mobutu both hold skulls as sceptres (symbol of a ruler).

Look at Source D and answer the following questions:

1. Identify the man on the left and the right and explain what is happening to both of them.

2. Who is 'the boss' being referred to by the man on the right?

3. What does the cartoonist suggest about the nature of the change of leadership?

4. Why do you think the USSR is not involved?

5. The cartoonist is Cuban. What is the cartoonist opinion of the USA?

Case Study: Angola

The following extract is from The Post Cold War Diplomacy in Angola: The Emergence of New Foci of Power by Dr. Skyne Uku-Wertimer.

Angola is potentially one of the richest countries in sub-Saharan Africa with extensive petroleum reserves, rich agricultural land and valuable mineral resources. Few countries in the world have experienced as well as sustained the degree of violent conflict seen in Angola.

Intervention has diminished but has not disappeared. Angola's abundant natural resources continue to attract outside interests from industrialized nations globally. In the competition for oil, diamonds and other precious resources in Angola, interests external to Angola continue to play a large and decisive role, both in suppressing conflict and in sustaining it.

The end of the Cold War changed the political landscape of Africa since the 1990s and opened new vistas for the continent, it helped in reshaping international relations as well as the emergence of new concepts of security and self interest. It eliminated the division of Africa into two ideological camps and eliminated a source of external support that was taken for granted.

1. What were the Cold War ideological camps referred to in the source? Lists some of the countries that belonged in both ideological camps.

2. What other reason does the source suggest is a reason for the violent conflict in Angola?

The Civil War has ended in Angola, but most of the country is still in chaos. Almost half of the land in Angola is considered too dangerous to walk on. Nobody knows how many landmines lie beneath the soil of Angola. Some say it may be somewhere between 500,000 and one million, others say there may be as many as six million landmines.

A child bearing the effects of conflict and landmines in civil war torn Angola. Source: www.emine.org

1. What does Source B suggest about one of the legacies of the Civil War?

2. What impact would the image in Source B have on Angola's economy?

1. What four images in the cartoon tell you about the state of Angola?

2. Explain the play on words the cartoon is using.

This cartoon shows the USSR releasing its control of Africa. (Source unknown)

1. What message does the source convey?

2. Using the information from the source and your own knowledge, explain the accuracy of the cartoonist's portrayal of events in Africa.

3. Why is this cartoon a reflection of the history of Africa that goes beyond its presence in the Cold War?

Collections in the Archives

Know something about this topic.

Towards a people's history

• History & Society
• Science & Tech
• Biographies
• Animals & Nature
• Geography & Travel
• Arts & Culture
• Games & Quizzes
• On This Day
• One Good Fact
• New Articles
• Lifestyles & Social Issues
• Philosophy & Religion
• Politics, Law & Government
• World History
• Health & Medicine
• Browse Biographies
• Birds, Reptiles & Other Vertebrates
• Bugs, Mollusks & Other Invertebrates
• Environment
• Fossils & Geologic Time
• Entertainment & Pop Culture
• Sports & Recreation
• Visual Arts
• Demystified
• Image Galleries
• Infographics
• Top Questions
• Britannica Kids
• Saving Earth
• Space Next 50
• Student Center
• Introduction & Top Questions

Origins of the Cold War

The struggle between superpowers.

• Toward a new world order

What was the Cold War?

How did the cold war end, why was the cuban missile crisis such an important event in the cold war.

• What was Harry S. Truman's reaction to communist North Korea's attempt to seize noncommunist South Korea in 1950?
• Should the United States maintain the embargo enforced by John F. Kennedy against Cuba?

Our editors will review what you’ve submitted and determine whether to revise the article.

• Chemistry LibreTexts - The Cold War
• The National WWII Museum New Orleans - Cold Conflict
• John F. Kennedy Presidential Library and Museum - The Cold War
• New Zealand History - The Cold War
• The New York Times - The Blacklist and The Cold War
• Alpha History - The Cold War
• The Canadian Encyclopedia - Cold War
• Cold War - Children's Encyclopedia (Ages 8-11)
• Cold War - Student Encyclopedia (Ages 11 and up)
• Table Of Contents

The Cold War was an ongoing political rivalry between the United States and the Soviet Union and their respective allies that developed after World War II . This hostility between the two superpowers was first given its name by George Orwell in an article published in 1945. Orwell understood it as a nuclear stalemate between “super-states”: each possessed weapons of mass destruction and was capable of annihilating the other.

The Cold War began after the surrender of Nazi Germany in 1945, when the uneasy alliance between the United States and Great Britain on the one hand and the Soviet Union on the other started to fall apart. The Soviet Union began to establish left-wing governments in the countries of eastern Europe, determined to safeguard against a possible renewed threat from Germany. The Americans and the British worried that Soviet domination in eastern Europe might be permanent. The Cold War was solidified by 1947–48, when U.S. aid had brought certain Western countries under American influence and the Soviets had established openly communist regimes. Nevertheless, there was very little use of weapons on battlefields during the Cold War. It was waged mainly on political, economic, and propaganda fronts and lasted until 1991.

The Cold War came to a close gradually. The unity in the communist bloc was unraveling throughout the 1960s and ’70s as a split occurred between China and the Soviet Union . Meanwhile, Japan and certain Western countries were becoming more economically independent. Increasingly complex international relationships developed as a result, and smaller countries became more resistant to superpower cajoling.

The Cold War truly began to break down during the administration of Mikhail Gorbachev , who changed the more totalitarian aspects of the Soviet government and tried to democratize its political system. Communist regimes began to collapse in eastern Europe, and democratic governments rose in East Germany , Poland , Hungary , and Czechoslovakia , followed by the reunification of West and East Germany under NATO auspices. Gorbachev’s reforms meanwhile weakened his own communist party and allowed power to shift to the constituent governments of the Soviet bloc. The Soviet Union collapsed in late 1991, giving rise to 15 newly independent nations, including a Russia with an anticommunist leader.

In the late 1950s, both the United States and the Soviet Union were developing intercontinental ballistic missiles . In 1962 the Soviet Union began to secretly install missiles in Cuba to launch attacks on U.S. cities. The confrontation that followed, known as the Cuban missile crisis , brought the two superpowers to the brink of war before an agreement was reached to withdraw the missiles.

The conflict showed that both superpowers were wary of using their nuclear weapons against each other for fear of mutual atomic annihilation. The signing of the Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty followed in 1963, which banned aboveground nuclear weapons testing. Still, after the crisis, the Soviets were determined not to be humiliated by their military inferiority again, and they began a buildup of conventional and strategic forces that the United States was forced to match for the next 25 years.

Recent News

Cold War , the open yet restricted rivalry that developed after World War II between the United States and the Soviet Union and their respective allies. The Cold War was waged on political, economic, and propaganda fronts and had only limited recourse to weapons. The term was first used by the English writer George Orwell in an article published in 1945 to refer to what he predicted would be a nuclear stalemate between “two or three monstrous super-states, each possessed of a weapon by which millions of people can be wiped out in a few seconds.” It was first used in the United States by the American financier and presidential adviser Bernard Baruch in a speech at the State House in Columbia, South Carolina , in 1947.

A brief treatment of the Cold War follows. For full treatment, see international relations .

Following the surrender of Nazi Germany in May 1945 near the close of World War II , the uneasy wartime alliance between the United States and Great Britain on the one hand and the Soviet Union on the other began to unravel. By 1948 the Soviets had installed left-wing governments in the countries of eastern Europe that had been liberated by the Red Army . The Americans and the British feared the permanent Soviet domination of eastern Europe and the threat of Soviet-influenced communist parties coming to power in the democracies of western Europe. The Soviets, on the other hand, were determined to maintain control of eastern Europe in order to safeguard against any possible renewed threat from Germany, and they were intent on spreading communism worldwide, largely for ideological reasons. The Cold War had solidified by 1947–48, when U.S. aid provided under the Marshall Plan to western Europe had brought those countries under American influence and the Soviets had installed openly communist regimes in eastern Europe.

The Cold War reached its peak in 1948–53. In this period the Soviets unsuccessfully blockaded the Western-held sectors of West Berlin (1948–49); the United States and its European allies formed the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), a unified military command to resist the Soviet presence in Europe (1949); the Soviets exploded their first atomic warhead (1949), thus ending the American monopoly on the atomic bomb; the Chinese communists came to power in mainland China (1949); and the Soviet-supported communist government of North Korea invaded U.S.-supported South Korea in 1950, setting off an indecisive Korean War that lasted until 1953.

From 1953 to 1957 Cold War tensions relaxed somewhat, largely owing to the death of the longtime Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin in 1953; nevertheless, the standoff remained. A unified military organization among the Soviet-bloc countries, the Warsaw Pact , was formed in 1955; and West Germany was admitted into NATO that same year. Another intense stage of the Cold War was in 1958–62. The United States and the Soviet Union began developing intercontinental ballistic missiles , and in 1962 the Soviets began secretly installing missiles in Cuba that could be used to launch nuclear attacks on U.S. cities. This sparked the Cuban missile crisis (1962), a confrontation that brought the two superpowers to the brink of war before an agreement was reached to withdraw the missiles.

The Cuban missile crisis showed that neither the United States nor the Soviet Union were ready to use nuclear weapons for fear of the other’s retaliation (and thus of mutual atomic annihilation). The two superpowers soon signed the Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty of 1963 , which banned aboveground nuclear weapons testing. But the crisis also hardened the Soviets’ determination never again to be humiliated by their military inferiority, and they began a buildup of both conventional and strategic forces that the United States was forced to match for the next 25 years.

Throughout the Cold War the United States and the Soviet Union avoided direct military confrontation in Europe and engaged in actual combat operations only to keep allies from defecting to the other side or to overthrow them after they had done so. Thus, the Soviet Union sent troops to preserve communist rule in East Germany (1953), Hungary (1956) , Czechoslovakia (1968) , and Afghanistan (1979) . For its part, the United States helped overthrow a left-wing government in Guatemala (1954) , supported an unsuccessful invasion of Cuba (1961), invaded the Dominican Republic (1965) and Grenada (1983) , and undertook a long (1954–75) and unsuccessful effort to prevent communist North Vietnam from bringing South Vietnam under its rule ( see Vietnam War ).

Home — Essay Samples — War — Cold War

Essays on Cold War

Hook examples for cold war essays, the tension-building anecdote hook.

Start your essay with a gripping anecdote from the Cold War era, such as a close encounter between opposing forces, a spy's daring mission, or a pivotal diplomatic negotiation.

The Iron Curtain Metaphor Hook

Draw parallels between the Iron Curtain that divided Europe during the Cold War and modern-day geopolitical divisions. Explore how historical lessons can inform contemporary politics.

The Cuban Missile Crisis Revelation Hook

Begin with a revelation about the Cuban Missile Crisis, a pivotal event during the Cold War. Discuss the world's reaction to this crisis and its implications for global peace.

The Space Race Innovation Hook

Highlight the innovative aspects of the Space Race between the United States and the Soviet Union. Discuss the technological advancements and the impact on science and society.

The Proxy Wars Connection Hook

Start by exploring the concept of proxy wars during the Cold War. Discuss how these conflicts shaped the global political landscape and their relevance in today's world.

The Nuclear Arms Race Factoid Hook

Begin with startling facts about the nuclear arms race between superpowers. Discuss the fear of nuclear annihilation and its lasting effects on international relations.

The Espionage and Spy Games Hook

Introduce your essay by delving into the world of espionage during the Cold War. Discuss famous spies, intelligence agencies, and the intrigue of espionage operations.

The Cultural Cold War Reference Hook

Start with references to the cultural aspects of the Cold War, including the influence of literature, music, and art. Discuss how cultural diplomacy played a role in the conflict.

The End of the Cold War Paradox Hook

Begin with the paradox of the peaceful end of the Cold War. Explore the factors that contributed to its conclusion and the subsequent geopolitical shifts.

The Lessons from History Hook

Start by reflecting on the lessons that can be learned from the Cold War. Discuss how understanding this historical period can inform contemporary foreign policy and global relations.

The Assassination of Patrice Lumumba: a Historical Analysis

The cold war between the united states and the soviet union, made-to-order essay as fast as you need it.

Each essay is customized to cater to your unique preferences

+ experts online

Analysis of How Did The Cold War Shaped American Politics, Society, and Economy

The cold war: an era of fear, understanding the effects of the cold war, the policy of containment during the cold war, let us write you an essay from scratch.

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

How The Atomic Bomb Invention Contributed to The WW2 and The Cold War

The end of the cold war as a turning point in the history of global civil society, beginning of the cuban missile crisis, the role of "cold war" in bringing international order, get a personalized essay in under 3 hours.

Expert-written essays crafted with your exact needs in mind

American Policy of Containment During The Cold War and Its Consequences

Fears of america and the emergence of the cold war, america's leadership position at an international stage, the impact of world war ii and the cold war on the development of science in the 20th century, ronald reagan and mikhail gorbachev: discussion on resolving the cold war, analysis of the influence behind the actions of the united states army, cuban missile crisis as a world changing event, the korean war – a conflict between the soviet union and the united states, apocalypse now - cold war perspectives, the political situation in brazil during the cold war, the development of the peace corps in america, the geography of the cold war: why the us embarked on a containment policy, religion as one of the causes of the cold war, red scare: incitement to hatred of anarchy and communism, beware the red scare: another red threat to america, american containment strategy and the end of the cold war, history of american life in the early postwar era, advantages, disadvantages, and application of aip in modern submarines, president eisenhower - a cold war philosophical and rhetorical view on the farewell address, the aggressive actions of the united states against the soviet union in jeffrey burds' the early cold war in soviet west ukraine, 1944-1948.

12 March 1947 – 26 December 1991 (44 years and 9 months)

North Atlantic Treaty Organization, Soviet Union, United States, Warsaw Treaty Organization.

Winston Churchill, Joseph Stalin, Harry S. Truman, Dwight D. Eisenhower, Nikita Khrushchev, John F. Kennedy, Ronald Reagan

Cuban missile crisis, Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty, Strategic Arms Limitation Talks, Berlin crisis of 1961, collapse of the Soviet Union

The Cold War was a period of political tension and military rivalry between the United States and the Soviet Union, lasting roughly from the late 1940s to the early 1990s. It emerged in the aftermath of World War II when ideological differences and geopolitical interests between the two superpowers intensified. The historical context of the Cold War can be traced back to the division of Europe after World War II, with the United States championing democratic principles and capitalism, while the Soviet Union sought to spread communism and establish spheres of influence. This ideological divide led to a series of confrontations and proxy wars fought between the two powers and their respective allies. The development of nuclear weapons added a dangerous dimension to the conflict, as both sides engaged in an arms race to gain a strategic advantage. The Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962, a standoff between the United States and the Soviet Union over the placement of nuclear missiles in Cuba, brought the world to the brink of nuclear war.

The division of the world into two ideological blocs: The capitalist bloc led by the United States and the communist bloc led by the Soviet Union. The arms race and nuclear proliferation, leading to the stockpiling of nuclear weapons by both superpowers and the development of advanced military technology. The establishment of military alliances such as NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization) and the Warsaw Pact, which solidified the division between the Western and Eastern blocs. Proxy wars and conflicts fought between the United States and the Soviet Union or their respective allies, such as the Korean War, the Vietnam War, and various conflicts in Africa, Asia, and Latin America. The spread of communism to several countries, including Eastern European nations that became part of the Soviet-dominated Eastern Bloc. The Cuban Missile Crisis, a tense standoff between the United States and the Soviet Union in 1962, which brought the world to the brink of nuclear war. The collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, marking the end of the Cold War and the transition to a unipolar world with the United States as the dominant superpower.

One of the major effects of the Cold War was the division of the world into two competing blocs, the United States-led capitalist bloc and the Soviet Union-led communist bloc. This ideological divide created a bipolar world order and fueled numerous proxy wars and conflicts around the world, such as the Korean War and the Vietnam War. The arms race between the United States and the Soviet Union was another significant consequence of the Cold War. Both superpowers invested heavily in the development and stockpiling of nuclear weapons, leading to an unprecedented level of global military buildup. The fear of nuclear annihilation and the doctrine of mutually assured destruction shaped military strategies and had a lasting impact on international security policies. The Cold War also had economic ramifications. The United States and the Soviet Union competed for influence and sought to spread their respective economic systems, capitalism and communism, across the globe. This led to the creation of economic alliances and aid programs, such as the Marshall Plan, as well as the establishment of the Soviet-dominated Eastern Bloc and the NATO alliance. Furthermore, the Cold War influenced the course of decolonization and independence movements in many countries. The superpowers often supported or opposed regimes based on their alignment with capitalist or communist ideologies, leading to political instability and conflicts in various regions. In addition, the Cold War had cultural and social effects. It fostered a climate of suspicion and fear, which manifested in widespread political repression, surveillance, and the suppression of civil liberties. The ideological struggle between capitalism and communism influenced cultural productions, including literature, art, and film.

Studying and writing essays on the topic of the Cold War is essential for students due to its multidimensional significance. Firstly, exploring the Cold War provides students with a deeper understanding of the complexities of international relations, diplomacy, and ideological conflicts. It offers insights into the strategies, policies, and motivations of the superpowers involved, such as the United States and the Soviet Union. Secondly, writing essays on the Cold War promotes critical thinking and analytical skills. Students are encouraged to examine primary and secondary sources, analyze different perspectives, and evaluate the long-term consequences of historical events. This process enhances their ability to form well-reasoned arguments and develop a nuanced understanding of complex historical phenomena. Additionally, the Cold War has left a lasting impact on society, culture, and global dynamics. By exploring this topic, students can gain insights into the origins of the arms race, the nuclear age, the space race, and the proliferation of proxy wars. They can also examine the impact of the Cold War on civil rights, technological advancements, popular culture, and the formation of alliances.

1. The term "Cold War" was coined by the American financier and presidential adviser Bernard Baruch in a speech in 1947. It referred to the absence of direct military confrontation between the superpowers, but the ongoing ideological and political struggle between them. 2. The Cold War was characterized by a state of non-military confrontation between the United States and the Soviet Union. 3. The space race played a significant role during the Cold War, prompting the establishment of NASA and fueling competition between the superpowers. 4. The proxy wars fought between the United States and the Soviet Union during the Cold War resulted in the loss of numerous lives, with casualties reaching millions. 5. Notable "hot" conflicts of the Cold War period included the Korean War, the unsuccessful Bay of Pigs invasion in Cuba, and the Vietnam War. These conflicts involved direct military engagement or support from the superpowers, leading to significant human suffering and loss.

1. Gaddis, J. L. (2005). The Cold War: A new history. Penguin Books. 2. Westad, O. A. (2012). The Cold War: A world history. Basic Books. 3. Leffler, M. P. (2008). For the soul of mankind: The United States, the Soviet Union, and the Cold War. Hill and Wang. 4. Beschloss, M. R. (1997). Mayday: Eisenhower, Khrushchev, and the U-2 affair. HarperCollins. 5. Zubok, V. M., & Pleshakov, C. (2007). Inside the Kremlin's cold war: From Stalin to Khrushchev. Harvard University Press. 6. Hogan, M. J. (Ed.). (2015). The Cold War in retrospect: The formative years. Oxford University Press. 7. LaFeber, W. (2002). America, Russia, and the Cold War, 1945-2000. McGraw-Hill. 8. Lynch, T. (2010). The Cold War: A very short introduction. Oxford University Press. 9. Matlock, J. F. (1995). Reagan and Gorbachev: How the Cold War ended. Random House. 10. McMahon, R. J. (2003). The Cold War: A very short introduction. Oxford University Press.

Relevant topics

• Vietnam War

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

The Cold War (1945-1989) essay

The Cold War is considered to be a significant event in Modern World History. The Cold War dominated a rather long time period: between 1945, or the end of the World War II, and 1990, the collapse of the USSR. This period involved the relationships between two superpowers: the United States and the USSR. The Cold War began in Eastern Europe and Germany, according to the researchers of the Institute of Contemporary British History (Warner 15).  Researchers state that “the USSR and the United States of America held the trump cards, nuclear bombs and missiles” (Daniel 489). In other words, during the Cold War, two nations took the fate of the world under their control. The progression of the Cold War influenced the development of society, which became aware of the threat of nuclear war. After the World War II, the world experienced technological progress, which provided “the Space Race, computer development, superhighway construction, jet airliner development, the creation of international phone system, the advent of television, enormous progress in medicine, and the creation of mass consumerism, and many other achievements” (Daniel 489). Although the larger part of the world lived in poverty and lacked technological progress, the United States and other countries of Western world succeeded in economic development. The Cold War, which began in 1945, reflected the increased role of technological progress in the establishment of economic relationships between two superpowers.   The Cold War involved internal and external conflicts between two superpowers, the United States and the USSR, leading to eventual breakdown of the USSR.

• The Cold War: background information

The Cold War consisted of several confrontations between the United States and the USSR, supported by their allies. According to researchers, the Cold War was marked by a number of events, including “the escalating arms race, a competition to conquer space, a dangerously belligerent for of diplomacy known as brinkmanship, and a series of small wars, sometimes called “police actions” by the United States and sometimes excused as defense measures by the Soviets” (Gottfried 9). The Cold War had different influences on the United States and the USSR. For the USSR, the Cold War provided massive opportunities for the spread of communism across the world, Moscow’s control over the development of other nations and the increased role of the Soviet Communist party.

In fact, the Cold War could split the wartime alliance formed to oppose the plans of Nazi Germany, leaving the USSR and the United States as two superpowers with considerable economic and political differences. The USSR was based on a single-party Marxist–Leninist system, while the United States was a capitalist state with democratic governance based on free elections.

The key figure in the Cold War was the Soviet leader Gorbachev, who was elected in 1985. He managed to change the direction of the USSR, making the economies of communist ruled states independent. The major reasons for changing in the course were poor technological development of the USSR (Gottfried 115). Gorbachev believed that radical changes in political power could improve the Communist system. At the same time, he wanted to stop the Cold War and tensions with the United States. The cost of nuclear arms race had negative impact on the economy of the USSR. The leaders of the United States accepted the proposed relationships, based on cooperation and mutual trust. The end of the Cold War was marked by signing the INF treaty in 1987 (Gottfried 115).

• The origins of the Cold War

Many American historians state that the Cold War began in 1945. However, according to Russian researchers, historians and analysts “the Cold War began with the Bolshevik Revolution in 1917, for this was when the capitalist world began its systematic opposition to and effort to undermine the world’s first socialist state and society” (Warner13). For Russians, the Cold War was hot in 1918-1922, when the Allied Intervention policy implemented in Russia during the Russian Civil War. According to John W. Long, “the U.S. intervention in North Russia was a policy formulated by President Wilson during the first half of 1918 at the urgent insistence of Britain, France and Italy, the chief World War I allies” (380).

Nevertheless, there are some other opinions regarding the origins of the Cold War. For example, Geoffrey Barraclough, an outstanding English historian, states that the events in the Far East at the end of the century contributed to the origins of the Cold War. He argues that “during the previous hundred years, Russia and the United States has tended to support each other against England; but now, as England’s power passed its zenith, they came face to face across the Pacific” (Warner 13). According to Barraclough, the Cold War is associated with the conflict of interests, which involved European countries, the Middle East and South East Asia. Finally, this conflict divided the world into two camps. Thus, the Cold War origins are connected with the spread of ideological conflict caused by the emergence of the new power in the early 20-th century (Warner 14). The Cold War outbreak was associated with the spread of propaganda on the United States by the USSR. The propagandistic attacks involved the criticism of the U.S. leaders and their policies. These attacked were harmful to the interests of American nation (Whitton 151).

• The major causes of the Cold War

The United States and the USSR were regarded as two superpowers during the Cold War, each having its own sphere of influence, its power and forces. The Cold War had been the continuing conflict, caused by tensions, misunderstandings and competitions that existed between the United States and the USSR, as well as their allies from 1945 to the early 1990s (Gottfried 10). Throughout this long period, there was the so-called rivalry between the United States and the USSR, which was expressed through various transformations, including military buildup, the spread of propaganda, the growth of espionage, weapons development, considerable industrial advances, and competitive technological developments in different spheres of human activity, such as medicine, education, space exploration, etc.

There four major causes of the Cold War, which include:

• Ideological differences (communism v. capitalism);
• Mutual distrust and misperception;
• The fear of the United State regarding the spread of communism;
• The nuclear arms race (Gottfried 10).

The major causes of the Cold War point out to the fact that the USSR was focused on the spread of communist ideas worldwide. The United States followed democratic ideas and opposed the spread of communism. At the same time, the acquisition of atomic weapons by the United States caused fear in the USSR. The use of atomic weapons could become the major reason of fear of both the United States and the USSR. In other words, both countries were anxious about possible attacks from each other; therefore, they were following the production of mass destruction weapons. In addition, the USSR was focused on taking control over Eastern Europe and Central Asia. According to researchers, the USSR used various strategies to gain control over Eastern Europe and Central Asia in the years 1945-1980. Some of these strategies included “encouraging the communist takeover of governments in Eastern Europe, the setting up of Comecon, the Warsaw Pact, the presence of the Red Army in Eastern Europe, and the Brezhnev Doctrine” (Phillips 118). These actions were the major factors for the suspicions and concerns of the United States. In addition, the U.S. President had a personal dislike of the Soviet leader Joseph Stalin and his policies. In general, the United States was concerned by the Soviet Union’s actions regarding the occupied territory of Germany, while the USSR feared that the United States would use Western Europe as the major tool for attack.

• The consequences of the Cold War

The consequences of the Cold War include both positive and negative effects for both the United States and the USSR.

• Both the United States and the USSR managed to build up huge arsenals of atomic weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missiles.
• The Cold War provided opportunities for the establishment of the military blocs, NATO and the Warsaw Pact.
• The Cold War led to the emergence of the destructive military conflicts, like the Vietnam War and the Korean War, which took the lives of millions of people (Gottfried13).
• The USSR collapsed because of considerable economic, political and social challenges.
• The Cold War led to the destruction of the Berlin Wall and the unification of the two German nations.
• The Cold War led to the disintegration of the Warsaw Pact (Gottfried 136).
• The Cold war provided the opportunities for achieving independence of the Baltic States and some former Soviet Republics.
• The Cold War made the United States the sole superpower of the world because of the collapse of the USSR in 1990.
• The Cold War led to the collapse of Communism and the rise of globalization worldwide (Phillips 119).

The impact of the Cold War on the development of many countries was enormous. The consequences of the Cold War were derived from numerous internal problems of the countries, which were connected with the USSR, especially developing countries (India, Africa, etc.). This fact means that foreign policies of many states were transformed (Gottfried 115).

The Cold War (1945-1989) essay part 2

Do you like this essay?

Our writers can write a paper like this for you!

Order your paper here .

Advertisement

Ideas, discourse, power and the end of the cold war: 20 years on

• Original Article
• Published: 27 May 2011
• Volume 48 , pages 591–606, ( 2011 )

Cite this article

• Thomas Risse 1  

1304 Accesses

9 Citations

Explore all metrics

Reagan's rhetoric and actions in the arms race triggered considerable opposition, which was necessary to establish a counter-discourse in particular through the peace movements in the West, which then impacted upon the discussions in Moscow. It enabled Gorbachev to overcome his considerable domestic opposition and to make the necessary concessions, which started to bring the cold war to an end. In this sense, the peace movements won the cold war, too. The end of the cold war was as much a discursive struggle over ideas about international order and the right mix of deterrence and détente as the East–West conflict itself. It is a matter of good fortune that the cold war had a relatively happy ending and that Europe was reunited. Claiming victory for one side or the other seems to be beside the point, even 20 years later.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save.

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Confusion and convergence: the Nazi challenge to world order and the CFR response, 1940–1941

“To Go Further Than Words Alone”: The World Peace Council and the Global Orchestration of Vietnam War Campaigns During the 1960s

G. E. Modigliani in the Zimmerwald Movement: ‘War Against War’ and the United States of Europe

It is interesting in this context how little attention the United States-based international relations community has paid over the years to the so-called ‘two plus four’ negotiations, which ended the cold war peacefully by settling the international aspects of German unification. As Mary Sarotte argues in this special issue, the cold war ‘originated and ended in the struggle over Germany.’ She also shows that the outcome – German unification within NATO which was preferred by both the United States and Germany – was only one of several possible results and that Soviet agreement to it was not a foregone conclusion.

Which is not to argue that international systemic forces are irrelevant, but they are notoriously incapable of explaining particular foreign policy practices.

Which is not to say, of course, that there was no opposition in the Soviet system, particularly in the military-bureaucratic complex.

The following is not to be confused with constructivist realism as suggested by Samuel Barkin ( Barkin, 2003 ). I am still convinced that realism is incompatible with constructivist ontology.

I borrow this terminology from Holzscheiter, 2010 .

Adler, E. and Barnett, M. (eds.) (1998) Security Communities. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Book   Google Scholar  

Allan, P. and Goldmann, K. (eds.) (1992) The End of the Cold War: Evaluating Theories of International Relations. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.

Google Scholar  

Austin, J.L. (1962) How To Do Things With Words. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Barkin, J.S. (2003) Realist constructivism. International Studies Review 5 (3): 325–342.

Article   Google Scholar  

Barnett, M. and Duvall, R. (eds.) (2005) Power in Global Governance. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Deutsch, K.W. et al (1957) Political Community and the North Atlantic Area: International Organization in the Light of Historical Experience. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

English, R. (2000) Russia and the Idea of the West: Gorbachev, Intellectuals, and the End of the Cold War. New York: Columbia University Press.

Evangelista, M. (1995a) The paradox of state strength: Transnational relations, domestic structures, and security policy in Russia and the Soviet Union. International Organization 49: 1–38.

Evangelista, M. (1995b) Transnational relations, domestic structures, and security policy in the USSR and Russia. In: T. Risse-Kappen (ed.) Bringing Transnational Relations Back In. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Evangelista, M. (1997) Domestic structure and international change. In: M. Doyle and G. J. Ikenberry (eds.) New Thinking in International Relations Theory. Boulder, CO: Westview.

Evangelista, M. (1999) Unarmed Forces. The Transnational Movement to End the Cold War. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

Fukuyama, F. (1992) The End of History and the Last Man. New York: Free Press.

Goldstein, J. and Keohane, R.O. (eds.) (1993) Ideas and Foreign Policy: Beliefs, Institutions and Political Change. Ithaca, NY: Cornel University Press.

Grazia, V. (2005) Irresistable Empire: America's Advance Through Twentieth Century Europe. Cambridge, MA: Belknap.

Herman, R.G. (1996) Identity, norms, and national security: The soviet foreign policy revolution and the end of the cold war. In: P.J. Katzenstein (ed.) The Culture of National Security Norms and Identity in World Politics. New York: Columbia University Press.

Holzscheiter, A. (2010) Children's Rights in International Politics: The Transformative Power of Discourse. Houndmills, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

Ikenberry, G.J. (ed.) (2002) America Unrivaled. The Future of the Balance of Power. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

Katzenstein, P.J. (1976) International relations and domestic structures: Foreign economic policies of advanced industrial states. International Organization 30 (1): 1–45.

Katzenstein, P.J. (ed.) (1978) Between Power and Plenty: Foreign Economic Policies of Advanced Industrial States. Madison, WI: Wisconsin University Press.

Katzenstein, P.J. (1985) Small States in World Markets. Industrial Policy in Europe. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press.

Keck, M.E. and Sikkink, K. (1998) Activists Beyond Borders. Advocacy Networks in International Politics. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

Koslowski, R. and Kratochwil, F. (1995) Understanding change in international politics. The Soviet empire's demise and the international system. In: R.N. Lebow and T. Risse-Kappen (eds.) International Relations Theory and the End of the Cold War. New York: Columbia University Press.

Lebow, R.N. (1994) The long peace, the end of the cold war, and the failure of realism. International Organization 48 (2): 249–277.

Lebow, R.N. and Risse-Kappen, T. (eds.) (1995) International Relations Theory and the End of the Cold War. New York: Columbia University Press.

Lebow, R.N. and Stein, J.G. (1994) We All Lost the Cold War. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

March, J.G. and Olsen, J.P. (1984) The new institutionalism: Organizational factors in political life. American Political Science Review 78: 734–749.

Mastanduno, M. (1997) Preserving the unipolar moment. Realist theories and US grand strategy after the cold war. International Security 21 (4): 49–88.

Mendelson, S. (1993) Changing Course: Ideas, Politics, and the Soviet Withdrawal from Afghanistan. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Moravcsik, A. (1997) Taking preferences seriously: A liberal theory of international politics. International Organization 51 (4): 513–553.

Nau, H.R. (2002) At Home Abroad. Identity and Power in American Foreign Policy. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

Onuf, N. (1989) World of Our Making: Rules and Rule in Social Theory and International Relations. Colombia: University of South Carolina Press.

Powell, W.W. and DiMaggio, P.J. (eds.) (1991) The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.

Risse, T. (1997) The cold war's endgame and German unification (a review essay). International Security 21 (4): 159–185.

Risse, T. (2000) Let's argue! Communicative action in international relations. International Organization 54 (1): 1–39.

Risse-Kappen, T. (1988) The Zero Option. INF, West Germany, and Arms Control. Boulder, CO: Westview.

Risse-Kappen, T. (1991a) Did peace through strength end the cold war? Lessons from INF. International Security 16 (1): 162–188.

Risse-Kappen, T. (1991b) Public opinion, domestic structure, and foreign policy in liberal democracies. World Politics 43 (4): 479–512.

Risse-Kappen, T. (1994) Ideas do not float freely: Transnational coalitions, domestic structures, and the end of the cold war. International Organization 48 (2): 185–214.

Risse-Kappen, T. (1995) Bringing transnational relations back in: Introduction. In: T. Risse-Kappen (ed.) Bringing Transnational Relations Back In: Non-state Actors, Domestic Structures and International Institutions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Risse-Kappen, T. (1996) Collective identity in a democratic community. In: P. Katzenstein (ed.) The Culture of National Security. Norms and Identity in World Politics. New York: Columbia University Press.

Sarotte, M.E. (2009) 1989: The Struggle to Create Post-Cold War Europe. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Schweller, R. and Wohlforth, W.C. (2000) Power test: Updating realism in response to the end of the cold war. Security Studies 9 (3): 60–108.

Searle, J. (1969) Speech Acts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Stein, J.G. (1995) Political learning by doing: Gorbachev as uncommitted thinker and motivated learner. In: R.N. Lebow and T. Risse-Kappen (eds.) International Relations Theory and the End of the Cold War. New York: Columbia University Press.

Thomas, D.C. (1999) The Helsinki accords and political change in Eastern Europe. In: T. Risse, S.C. Ropp and K. Sikkink (eds.) The Power of Human Rights: International Norms and Domestic Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Thomas, D.C. (2001) The Helsinki Effect. International Norms, Human Rights, and the Demise of Communism, Princeton. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Tsebelis, G. (1990) Nested Games. Rational Choice in Comparative Politics. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

Wendt, A. (1992) Anarchy is what states make of it: The social construction of power politics. International Organization 88 (2): 384–396.

Wendt, A. (1999) Social Theory of International Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Wohlforth, W.C. (1994/95) Realism and the end of the cold war. International Security 19 (2): 91–129.

Wohlforth, W.C. (1999) The stability of a unipolar world. International Security 24 (1): 5–41.

Zelikow, P. and Rice, C. (1995) Germany Unified and Europe Transformed. A Study in Statecraft. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Download references

Acknowledgements

The author thanks the participants of the Princeton workshop in March 2010 for their critical comments, in particular Michael Cox, Daniel Deudney and G. John Ikenberry.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Center for Transnational Relations, Foreign and Security Policy, Otto Suhr Institute for Political Science, Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin, D-14195, Ihnestr. 22, Germany

Thomas Risse

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Risse, T. Ideas, discourse, power and the end of the cold war: 20 years on. Int Polit 48 , 591–606 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1057/ip.2011.20

Download citation

Published : 27 May 2011

Issue Date : 01 July 2011

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1057/ip.2011.20

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• peace movements
• German reunification
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

Essay on the Cold War: it’s Origin, Causes and Phases

After the Second World War, the USA and USSR became two Super Powers. One nation tried to reduce the power of other. Indirectly the competition between the Super Powers led to the Cold War.

Then America took the leadership of all the Capitalist Countries.

Soviet Russia took the leadership of all the Communist Countries. As a result of which both stood as rivals to each other.

Definition of the Cold War:

ADVERTISEMENTS:

In the graphic language of Hartman, “Cold War is a state of tension between countries in which each side adopts policies designed to strengthen it and weaken the other by falling short by actual war”.

Image Source: i.ytimg.com/vi/y9HjvHZfCUI/maxresdefault.jpg

Infact, Cold War is a kind of verbal war which is fought through newspapers, magazines, radio and other propaganda methods. It is a propaganda to which a great power resorts against the other power. It is a sort of diplomatic war.

Origin of Cold War:

There is no unanimity amongst scholars regarding the origin of the Cold War In 1941 when Hitler invaded Russia, Roosevelt the President of USA sent armaments to Russia. It is only because the relationship between Roosevelt and Stalin was very good. But after the defeat of Germany, when Stalin wanted to implement Communist ideology in Poland, Hungery, Bulgaria and Rumania, at that time England and America suspected Stalin.

Winston Churchill, the Prime Minister of England in his ‘Fulton Speech’ on 5 March 1946 said that Soviet Russia was covered by an Iron Curtain. It led Stalin to think deeply. As a result of which suspicion became wider between Soviet Russia and western countries and thus the Cold War took birth.

Causes of the Cold War:

Various causes are responsible for the outbreak of the Cold War. At first, the difference between Soviet Russia and USA led to the Cold War. The United States of America could not tolerate the Communist ideology of Soviet Russia. On the other hand, Russia could not accept the dominance of United States of America upon the other European Countries.

Secondly, the Race of Armament between the two super powers served another cause for the Cold War. After the Second World War, Soviet Russia had increased its military strength which was a threat to the Western Countries. So America started to manufacture the Atom bomb, Hydrogen bomb and other deadly weapons. The other European Countries also participated in this race. So, the whole world was divided into two power blocs and paved the way for the Cold War.

Thirdly, the Ideological Difference was another cause for the Cold War. When Soviet Russia spread Communism, at that time America propagated Capitalism. This propaganda ultimately accelerated the Cold War.

Fourthly, Russian Declaration made another cause for the Cold War. Soviet Russia highlighted Communism in mass-media and encouraged the labour revolution. On the other hand, America helped the Capitalists against the Communism. So it helped to the growth of Cold War.

Fifthly, the Nuclear Programme of America was responsible for another cause for the Cold War. After the bombardment of America on Hiroshima and Nagasaki Soviet Russia got afraid for her existence. So, it also followed the same path to combat America. This led to the growth of Cold War.

Lastly, the Enforcement of Veto by Soviet Russia against the western countries made them to hate Russia. When the western countries put forth any view in the Security Council of the UNO, Soviet Russia immediately opposed it through veto. So western countries became annoyed in Soviet Russia which gave birth to the Cold War.

Various Phases of the Cold War:

The Cold War did not occur in a day. It passed through several phases.

First Phase (1946-1949 ):

In this phase America and Soviet Russia disbelieved each other. America always tried to control the Red Regime in Russia. Without any hesitation Soviet Russia established Communism by destroying democracy in the Poland, Bulgaria, Rumania, Hungery, Yugoslavia and other Eastern European Countries.

In order to reduce Russia’s hegemony, America helped Greece and Turkey by following Truman Doctrine which came into force on 12 March 1947. According to Marshall Plan which was declared on 5 June, 1947 America gave financial assistance to Western European Countries.

In this phase, non withdrawal of army from Iran by Soviet Russia, Berlin blaockade etc. made the cold was more furious. After the formation of NATO in 1949, the Cold War took a halt.

Second Phase (1949-1953 ):

In this phase a treaty was signed between Australia, New Zeland and America in September, 1957 which was known as ANZUS. America also signed a treaty with Japan on 8 September, 1951. At that time by taking armaments from Russia and army from China, North Korea declared war against South Korea.

Then with the help of UNO, America sent military aid to South Korea. However, both North Korea and South Korea signed peace treaty in 1953 and ended the war. In order to reduce the impact of Soviet Communism, America spent a huge amount of dollar in propaganda against Communism. On the other hand, Soviet Russia tried to be equal with America by testing atom bomb.

Third Phase (1953-1957):

Now United States of America formed SEATO in 1954 in order to reduce Soviet Russia’s influence. In 1955 America formed MEDO in Middle East. Within a short span of time, America gave military assistance to 43 countries and formed 3300 military bases around Soviet Russia. At that time, the Vietnamese War started on 1955.

To reduce the American Power, Russia signed WARSAW PACT in 1955. Russia also signed a defence pact with 12 Countries. Germany was divided into Federal Republic of Germany which was under the American control where as German Democratic Republic was under Soviet Russia. In 1957 Soviet Russia included Sphutnick in her defence programme.

In 1953 Stalin died and Khrushchev became the President of Russia. In 1956 an agreement was signed between America and Russia regarding the Suez Crisis. America agreed not to help her allies like England and France. In fact West Asia was saved from a great danger.

Fourth Phase (1957-1962):

In 1959 the Russian President Khrushchev went on a historical tour to America. Both the countries were annoyed for U-2 accident and for Berlin Crisis. In 13 August 1961, Soviet Russia made a Berlin Wall of 25 Kilometres in order to check the immigration from eastern Berlin to Western Berlin. In 1962, Cuba’s Missile Crisis contributed a lot to the cold war.

This incident created an atmosphere of conversation between American President Kenedy and Russian President Khrushchev. America assured Russia that she would not attack Cuba and Russia also withdrew missile station from Cuba.

Fifth Phase (1962-1969 ):

The Fifth Phase which began from 1962 also marked a mutual suspicion between USA and USSR. There was a worldwide concern demanding ban on nuclear weapons. In this period Hot Line was established between the White House and Kremlin. This compelled both the parties to refrain from nuclear war. Inspite of that the Vietnam problem and the Problem in Germany kept Cold War between USA and USSR in fact.

Sixth Phase (1969-1978 ):

This phase commencing from 1969 was marked by DETENTE between USA and USSR- the American President Nixon and Russian President Brezhnev played a vital role for putting an end to the Cold War. The SALT of 1972, the summit Conference on Security’ of 1975 in Helsinki and Belgrade Conference of 1978 brought America and Russia closer.

In 1971, American Foreign Secretary Henry Kissinger paid a secret visit to China to explore the possibilities of reapproachment with China. The American move to convert Diego Garcia into a military base was primarily designed to check the Soviet presence in the Indian Ocean. During the Bangladesh crisis of 1971 and the Egypt-Israel War of 1973 the two super powers extended support to the opposite sides.

Last Phase (1979-1987 ):

In this phase certain changes were noticed in the Cold War. That is why historians call this phase as New Cold War. In 1979, the American President Carter and Russian President Brezhnev signed SALT II. But in 1979 the prospects of mitigating Cold War were marred by sudden development in Afghanistan.

Vietnam (1975), Angola (1976), Ethiopia (1972) and Afghanistan (1979) issues brought success to Russia which was unbearable for America. American President Carter’s Human Rights and Open Diplomacy were criticised by Russia. The SALT II was not ratified by the US Senate. In 1980 America boycotted the Olympic held at Moscow.

In 1983, Russia withdrew from a talk on missile with America. In 1984 Russia boycotted the Olympic game held at Los-Angeles. The Star War of the American President Ronald Regan annoyed Russia. In this way the ‘New Cold War’ between America and Russia continued till 1987.

Result of the Cold War:

The Cold War had far-reaching implications in the international affairs. At first, it gave rise to a fear psychosis which resulted in a mad race for the manufacture of more sophisticated armaments. Various alliances like NATO, SEATO, WARSAW PACT, CENTO, ANZUS etc. were formed only to increase world tension.

Secondly, Cold War rendered the UNO ineffective because both super powers tried to oppose the actions proposed by the opponent. The Korean Crisis, Cuban Missile Crisis, Vietnam War etc. were the bright examples in this direction.

Thirdly, due to the Cold War, a Third World was created. A large number of nations of Africa, Asia and Latin America decided to keep away from the military alliances of the two super powers. They liked to remain neutral. So, Non-Alignments Movement became the direct outcome of the Cold War.

Fourthly, Cold War was designed against mankind. The unnecessary expenditure in the armament production created a barrier against the progress of the world and adversely affected a country and prevented improvement in the living standards of the people.

Fifthly, the principle ‘Whole World as a Family’, was shattered on the rock of frustration due to the Cold War. It divided the world into two groups which was not a healthy sign for mankind.

Sixthly, The Cold War created an atmosphere of disbelief among the countries. They questioned among themselves how unsafe were they under Russia or America.

Finally, The Cold War disturbed the World Peace. The alliances and counter-alliances created a disturbing atmosphere. It was a curse for the world. Though Russia and America, being super powers, came forward to solve the international crisis, yet they could not be able to establish a perpetual peace in the world.

Related Articles:

• Essay on the Cold War, 1945
• Central Treaty Organisation (CENTO): Structure, Principles and Other Details
• History of The Cold War: Origin, Reasons and Other Details
• Truman Doctrine: A Policy Statement Made by US during the Cold War

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

The Origins of the Cold War - A Review Essay

Following the logic of earlier scholarly debates on which side is to be blamed for the Cold War it appears that in fact both or neither: it was the inevitable consequence of the fact that two superpowers emerged after the conflagration of WWII. The ideology confrontation mattered much less vis-a-vis this immense global power shift.

Related Papers

Jonathan Morales

Bibliography of New Cold War History

Aigul Kazhenova , Tsotne Tchanturia , Marijn Mulder , Ahmet Ömer Yüce , Sergei Zakharov , Mirkamran Huseynli , Pınar Eldemir , Angela Aiello , Rastko Lompar

This bibliography attempts to present the publications on the history of the Cold War published after 1989, the beginning of the „archival revolution” in the former Soviet bloc countries. While this first edition is still far from complete, it collects a huge number of books, articles and book chapters on the topic and it is the most extensive such bibliography so far, almost 600 pages in length. An enlarged and updated edition will be completed in 2018.

Tsotne Tchanturia , Vajda Barnabás , Gökay Çınar , Barnabás Vajda , Lenka Thérová , Simon Szilvási , Irem Osmanoglu , Rastko Lompar , Aigul Kazhenova , Pınar Eldemir , Natalija Dimić Lompar , Sára Büki

This bibliography attemts to present the publications on the history of the Cold War published after 1989, the beginning of the „archival revolution” in the former Soviet bloc countries. While this first edition is still far from complete, it collects a huge number of books, articles and book chapters on the topic and it is the most extensive such bibliography so far, almost 600 pages in length. An enlarged and updated edition will be completed in 2018. So, if you are a Cold War history scholar in any country and would like us to incude all of your publications on the Cold War (published after 1989) in the second edition, we will gladly do that. Please, send us a list of your works in which books and articles/book chapters are separated and follow the format of our bibliography. The titles of non-English language entries should be translated into English in square brackets. Please, send the list to: [email protected] The Cold War History Research Center owes special thanks to the Parallel History Project on Cooperative Security (formerly: on NATO and the Warsaw Pact) in Zurich–Washington D.C. for their permission to use the Selective Bibliography on the Cold War Alliances, compiled by Anna Locher and Cristian Nünlist, available at: http://www.php.isn.ethz.ch/lory1.ethz.ch/publications/bibliography/index.html

The Bibliography of New Cold War History (second enlarged edition)

Tsotne Tchanturia , Aigul Kazhenova , Khatia Kardava

This bibliography attempts to present the publications on the history of the Cold War published after 1989, the beginning of the „archival revolution” in the former Soviet bloc countries.

Soshum: Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities

Adewunmi J Falode , Moses Yakubu

The Cold War that occurred between 1945 and 1991 was both an international political and historical event. As a political event, the Cold War laid bare the fissures, animosities, mistrusts, misconceptions and the high-stake brinksmanship that has been part of the international political system since the birth of the modern nation-state in 1648. As a historical event, the Cold War and its end marked an important epoch in human social, economic and political development. The beginning of the Cold War marked the introduction of a new form of social and political experiment in human relations with the international arena as its laboratory. Its end signaled the end of a potent social and political force that is still shaping the course of political relationship among states in the 21 st century. The historiography of the Cold War has been shrouded in controversy. Different factors have been given for the origins of the conflict. This work is a historical and structural analysis of the historiography of the Cold War. The work analyzes the competing views of the historiography of the Cold War and create an all-encompassing and holistic historiography called the Structuralist School.

Jonathan Murphy

fabio capano

In Rosella Mamoli Zorzi e Simone Francescato (eds.), American Phantasmagoria. Modes of representation in US culture

Duccio Basosi

The first section shows that the presence of ghosts in the foreign policy decision making processes of both the United States and the Soviet Union has been detected mainly in relatively recent works. The second, third and fourth sections are dedicated to distinguishing between three different kinds of apparitions—ghosts of the past, specters of the future, and phantasmagorias, respectively. The concluding section attempts some reflections on the possible meanings of such interest of Cold War historiography for spectral figures, particularly in connection with the ongoing debates about the “very notion of Cold War.”

Eliza Gheorghe

Geoffrey Roberts

Review of Jonathan Haslam's Russia's Cold War, published in International Affairs

Loading Preview

Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.

RELATED PAPERS

Saber and Scroll, 1:3 (Fall 2012), 34-39

Tsotne Tchanturia , Dionysios Dragonas

GTU academic journal “Intellectual”

Michelle Paranzino

Roham Alvandi , Eliza Gheorghe

Diplomatic History

William C. Wohlforth

Tina Machingaidze

Békés, Csaba, Melinda Kamár (Ed.): Students on the Cold War. New Findings and Interpretations. Budapest

Torben Gülstorff

Barbara D Krasner

Akindele Boladale

European History Quarterly

Benjamin Tromly

Helen Roche

Artemy Kalinovsky

Evanthis Hatzivassiliou

henry laycock

Cold War History

Vasil Paraskevov

Cold War International History Project Working Paper #89

Priscilla Roberts

Oxford Handbook in the History of Communism, ed. Stephen Anthony Smith (Oxford: Oxford University Press)

Balazs Szalontai

Martin Grossheim

Journal of Cold War Studies

Silvio Pons

Contemporary European History

Gjert L Dyndal

The Carl Beck Papers in Russian and East …

Jeffrey Burds

Stefano Bottoni

Péter Vámos

Dithekgo Mogadime

[w:] Disintegration and Integration in East-Central Europe 1919 – post-1989, red. W. Loth, N. Păun, Cluj-Napoca 2014, s. 134-146

Jerzy Lazor

Larry L Watts

Roger Voncken

The Soviet and Post-Soviet Review

Jakub Szumski

Cold War International History Project (CWIHP) Working Paper Series

Patryk Babiracki

COLD WAR. GEOPOLITICS

Patrick Kyanda

Petar Žarković

Rachel Alberstadt

gareth dale

Elidor Mehilli

Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

Kingdom in the Middle: China as an International Mediator — 2024 China Focus Essay Contest Runner Up

From University of California, San Diego

Introduction

China has long maintained an image of a non-interventionist state. Despite its global clout and rising power, China has adopted neutrality in a wide variety of situations. That could have started to change. As China seeks to expand its power and pursue its core interests, China will take on the task of becoming an international mediator. The crucial moment for China was the Saudi-Iran Deal, which has transformed how many are viewing China’s role in the international community. How did the Middle Kingdom end up in the middle? China has a complex history as a conciliatory actor, but as its economic interests move abroad, it seeks to create stability around the globe.

For the Record

Before its pivotal moment with the Saudi-Iran Deal, China’s forays into international mediation were less pronounced and more strategically selective, largely mirroring its national interests. Traditionally, China’s diplomatic philosophy has revolved around non-interference, a stance that, while contributing to its image as a neutral party, often kept it from taking robust mediatory roles that could entangle it in the internal conflicts of other nations. This approach, rooted in the doctrine of peaceful coexistence, has been both a shield and a strategy as China navigated its rise to global prominence without provoking direct confrontations with other superpowers.

In instances where China did step into the role of mediator, its efforts were mostly concentrated in its immediate sphere of influence—Asia and Africa. Notably, it played a significant part in the Six-Party Talks aimed at denuclearizing North Korea, showcasing its capability to engage in complex security dialogues. In Africa, where China’s economic stakes are massive, it has engaged more directly in mediation, particularly in countries like Sudan, helping to broker talks that aimed to stabilize regions critical to its Belt and Road Initiative. These mediations tended to prioritize economic stability.

The Six Party Talks were launched in 2003, inviting to the table China, the United States, North Korea, South Korea, Japan, and Russia. Talks took place in the hope of getting North Korea, the newly nuclearized nation, to adhere to international nuclear standards. China has maintained allyship with North Korea despite the country isolating itself from much of the rest of the world. It relies primarily on China for imports and aid. Beijing initially leveraged this partnership with North Korea to get the nation to the negotiating table. The talks reached a stalemate in 2009, but China, since 2013, has been pushing to relaunch the talks. This demonstrates greater cooperation and willingness to act as an international mediator.

China’s diplomatic engagements in Africa in the past also tell a tale of strategic depth and economic calculus. Traditionally viewed as a distant player in African politics, China shifted towards a more hands-on approach as its investments on the continent ballooned. In Sudan and South Sudan, where oil fields and infrastructure projects align with the expansive Belt and Road Initiative, China took on a mediator’s mantle. Here, it sought not just to quell conflicts but to secure a stable environment for its economic ventures. This role, while pivotal in reducing immediate tensions, often prioritized the continuity of commerce over the complexities of political reconciliation. Critics argue that China’s mediation has been more about protecting its assets and less about crafting lasting peace, reflecting a broader pattern where commercial interests drive its diplomatic strategies.

Winds of Change

The pattern of China’s non-interventionism broke as Xi Jinping came to power. China’s onslaught into international mediation notably increased with the introduction of the Belt and Road Initiative. There are several underlying reasons for the shift, including a change in diplomatic policy and a shift in economic drivers.

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine violated China’s non-interference policy, as Russia was not only invading the country, but attempting to manipulate domestic politics. China, explicitly, cannot justify this action. However, due to China and Russia’s “No Limits Partnership,” Beijing had to sit back and let Moscow act, not denouncing the levying of war publicly. China’s course of action was to call for peace from both the Ukrainian and Russian sides. Beijing is the last remaining global power that has amicable connections with Moscow, and pressure in any form from Beijing could aid in putting an end to the war. China also has massive economic leverage over Russia as the largest consumer of its oil and gas exports. The policy change may be surprising, but acting as a peacemaker has benefits. By posing itself as a force for global peace, other countries—and in the case of the Russo-Ukrainian War, Western European countries—would be prompted to engage with China. Through this engagement, China can improve ties with these countries, whether it be economic or political, and in turn, gain leverage.

The motivation for change certainly goes beyond the image of altruism. Where there are commercial interests, China is likely to mediate conflict. The Belt and Road Initiative has only increased this drive for creating safe environments to invest and do business abroad. This strategic shift, while enhancing its global stature, underscores a pragmatic alignment of diplomacy with economic imperatives. As China ascends to unparalleled economic heights, its investments across continents—from the sprawling infrastructures of Africa to the critical sea lanes of Southeast Asia—have grown exponentially. This vast economic footprint necessitates a stable international environment to safeguard its interests, compelling Beijing to adopt a more hands-on approach in global conflicts where its commercial stakes are high.

The transformation of China from a passive observer to a proactive mediator is not merely a bid for diplomatic goodwill but a calculated move to protect its global supply chains and investment ventures. By intervening in regional disputes and conflicts, China aims to secure the operational stability of its Belt and Road Initiative, as multiple trillions of dollars have already been investing in infrastructure spanning several continents. Furthermore, the Belt and Road Initiative is crucial to its long-term economic strategy, some even argue part of a grand strategy for China. This is especially apparent in regions like the Middle East and Africa. Its role in mediating the Saudi-Iran deal, for example, not only showcases its diplomatic capabilities but also protects its oil supplies and creates a more predictable regional security landscape.

Critically, this shift also allows China to project its influence in regions traditionally dominated by Western powers, positioning itself as a viable alternative to conflict resolution processes led by the United States.

In mid-2023, China successfully mediated a deal between Saudi Arabia and Iran. This came after nearly a decade of tension between the countries. China has considerable economic interests in the Middle East, specifically in the Gulf. As the Gulf could help fulfill its energy needs, China needed to become the countries’ primary bilateral trade partners. Beijing funneled numerous investments into the Gulf. Simultaneously, Xi Jinping worked to paint China as a defender of sovereignty—in line with its non-inference policy. This bid to court both Iran and Saudi Arabia was successful, as the countries were likely attracted to the idea of conducting internal affairs without external influence. The Saudi-Iran Deal was solidified as a trilateral deal, achieving peaceful relations for the time being.

A particular case study of success has been China’s mediation in Mali. Chinese peacekeepers operate in Mali, which is under the control of the United Nations. Notably, following the Cold War, peacekeeping missions lost their military focus and veered into development. China’s peacekeeping presence in Mali has been as such—centered on development and stability. This union of development and stability has been at the forefront of China’s agenda in Africa. China has successfully helped Mali maintain its sovereignty and integrity through mediation.

The two examples markedly create a template for what China’s general strategy is for successful mediation. China emphasizes the importance of territorial sovereignty and non-interference, even when engaging in mediation. Mediation focuses on the development of economically viable regions to support commercial interests.

Obstacles in the Road

China’s approach to international mediation is hampered by its entrenched government-to-government modality, which constrains its diplomatic flexibility and effectiveness. This rigid framework restricts Beijing from engaging with a broader spectrum of stakeholders, such as non-governmental organizations, private institutions, and civil society, which are often crucial for conflict resolution in these regions. This limitation was starkly evident in China’s dealings on the global stage, where its state-centric diplomacy sometimes overlooks or undervalues the grassroots nuances and local realities of conflicts. Consequently, China’s efforts, while grand in declaration, frequently fall short in fostering sustainable resolutions, reflecting a gap between diplomatic intention and impact.

In some cases, an obstacle for China is its preference for bilateral modalities, casting aside multilateral solutions, which can be more effective for diplomacy. Bilateral frameworks likely give more leverage to China. Operating under this assumption, China benefits from being the only other one sitting at the table. However, mediation tends to require all groups sitting at the table.

Yet another obstacle is the inefficient approach that China takes in mediation. Due to the non-interference principle, China creates an environment to facilitate mediation, but does not push either side to resolve issues. China’s inefficiency in international mediation, particularly evident during the Russo-Ukrainian War, underscores the limitations of its approach. By prioritizing equal relations and avoiding deep involvement in the internal affairs of nations, China’s diplomacy often lacks the leverage necessary to effect substantive conflict resolution. In the case of Ukraine, while Beijing positioned itself as a neutral party offering to mediate, its hands-off stance and close ties with Russia meant it could not exert meaningful pressure or propose viable solutions. Although China had the power to pressure Russia, it could not, resulting in diplomatic ineffectiveness on a contentious issue.

Lastly, inconsistent expectations between parties create another obstacle for China in fulfilling its role as an international mediator. An example is the Israel-Palestine conflict, where it struggles to reconcile the inconsistent expectations of both parties. Despite Beijing stepping outside its typical neutral rhetoric and demonstrating support for Palestine, the two parties have vastly different goals. Israel seeks unwavering support against Hamas, no matter the actions taken, while the Palestinians demand an end to the occupation. China, while decisive in its position, is unable to bridge this entrenched divide as the two groups are firm in their demands.

China’s track record of international mediation was rather weak, as it upheld the non-interference principle and maintained neutrality. Following Xi Jinping’s coming to power, Beijing began to engage more in international mediation. With the advent of the Belt and Road Initiative, mediation was now a way to exert influence and power. This influence and power came through channeling China’s economic interests and improving diplomatic relations. Many would argue that a turning point for China as a mediator was the Saudi-Iran Deal, positioning China as a peacemaker. This deal aligned with China’s commercial interests. China has been successful as a mediator in various situations, with a multilateral example being the Saudi-Iran Deal, and a bilateral example being its interventions in Mali. 

Beijing is attractive to many countries as a mediator because of its dedication to preserving sovereignty. However, there are some obstacles in the way of China acting as a mediator. China tends to be inefficient as a mediator. Rather than engaging with private institutions or NGOs, the Chinese government generally only interacts with other governments when mediating, ignoring whole segments of stakeholders. There is also a preference for bilateral mediation, rather than multilateral mediation, which benefits China, but is inefficient. The horizontal approach taken to international mediation aligns with China’s non-interference principle, but again, creates inefficiencies and can make China ineffective at times. And although not related to China’s inefficiency in mediation, the obstacle of inconsistent expectations between parties exists. With the weaknesses that exist in current international mediation for Beijing, the latter obstacle becomes a greater challenge.

References:

Ali, Z. (2023, June 23). Saudi-Iran deal: A test case of China’s role as an international mediator. Georgetown Journal of International Affairs. https://gjia.georgetown.edu/2023/06/23/saudi-iran-deal-a-test-case-of-chinas-role-as-an-international-mediator/

Caliskan, S. (2023, December 15). Understanding China’s position on the Israel-Palestine conflict. The Diplomat. https://thediplomat.com/2023/12/understanding-chinas-position-on-the-israel-palestine-conflict/

China’s position on the political settlement of the Ukraine crisis. (2023, February 24). Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People’s Republic of China. Retrieved May 3, 2024, from https://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/zxxx_662805/202302/t20230224_11030713.html

Matamis, J. (2024, January 29). China’s conflict resolution and mediation approach in Mali. Stimson Center. https://www.stimson.org/2024/china-conflict-resolution-and-mediation-in-mali/

McDonald, J. (2023, May 4). Why China is trying to mediate in Russia’s war with Ukraine. AP News. https://apnews.com/article/china-russia-ukraine-2970bea530e821a4ed2155a8bcc23980

Schultz, K. (2019). Great power mediation: Opportunities and challenges for China (J. Li, Ed.). Stimson Center. https://www.stimson.org/wp-content/files/file-attachments/Great-Power-Mediation_2019_R5_English_0.pdf

Shinji, Y. (2023). China’s role in conflict mediation in the Middle East: Normalization of relations between Iran and Saudi Arabia and the 2023 Israel-Hamas war. Asia-Pacific Review, 30(3), 99–114. https://doi.org/10.1080/13439006.2023.2295705

The six-party talks on North Korea’s nuclear program. (2013, September 30). Council on Foreign Relations. Retrieved May 3, 2024, from https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/six-party-talks-north-koreas-nuclear-program

• Latest Posts

Payton Morlock

Latest posts by payton morlock ( see all ).

• Kingdom in the Middle: China as an International Mediator — 2024 China Focus Essay Contest Runner Up - August 15, 2024

Start typing and press Enter to search

War latest: Russian state TV gloomy over Ukraine invasion of border towns - as Putin's forces capture Ukrainian territory

Moscow's forces capture parts of Donetsk amid Ukrainian strikes in the region - while commentators on Russian state TV have made gloomy assessments of Kyiv's incursions into Russia. Listen to a Daily podcast on how Ukraine broke through Vladimir Putin's "red line" as you scroll.

Friday 16 August 2024 15:10, UK

• Putin's forces capture territory in Donetsk - amid Ukrainian strikes on region
• Ukraine's invasion bringing world to 'brink of a third world war' claims Russian MP
• Kyiv hints at plan behind invasion of Russian towns
• 'We could lose': Russian state TV commentators gloomy over Kursk
• Anti-Putin group urges Russian soldiers to surrender and fight for Ukraine
• Ukrainian troops capture largest Russian town so far, says Zelenskyy
• Putin aide claims NATO and West helped Ukraine plan attacks
• Eyewitness: Russian detainees in Ukraine reveal Kursk reality
• Michael Clarke analysis: How long can Ukraine hold Kursk?
• Listen to the Daily above and tap here to follow wherever you get your podcasts
• Live reporting by Jess Sharp and (earlier)  Katie Williams

The Russian defence ministry has released a video purporting to show new recruits training for an "assault detachment". 

In the clip, which has not been verified by Sky News, a group of people in army uniforms run from the back of a vehicle and fire weapons across a piece of dry land. 

In a post on Telegram, the ministry said the recruits were practising capturing enemy strongholds at a training ground. 

It added that servicemen who helped capture a village in Ukraine's eastern Donetsk region were preparing the fighters for their units. 

Donetsk, which was illegally annexed by Russia in the early days of the war, is partially controlled by Moscow's forces.

Once the troops are trained, they will join forces fighting in the south Donetsk direction, the ministry said. 

A shopping centre in Russian-controlled Donetsk city has been destroyed in what Russia has branded as a Ukrainian attack.

Earlier, Denis Pushilin, the Kremlin-installed governor of the city, said the apparent strikes sparked a fire of more than 10,000 square metres at the "Galaktika" shopping centre and injured seven people.

Black smoke has been pouring from the building in the aftermath of the blaze.

The eastern Ukrainian city of Pokrovsk is in "real trouble" as Russian forces quickly close in, says our defence and security analyst Michael Clarke .

While Russia is pulling forces from elsewhere, including Kaliningrad and the Crimea peninsula, in response to Ukraine's invasion of Kursk, troops are staying put in Donbas, where Russia has been making steady advances for months.

Moscow is focusing its efforts on the Donetsk region and a major push towards the key Ukrainian logistics hub of Pokrovsk is ramping up.

"That's where the Ukrainians are suffering. The Russians are still moving towards Pokrovsk," says Clarke.

"Pokrovsk is in real danger now, and I think the Russians are determined to try to take it even before they take back territory [in Kursk] to prove that they're not going to be distracted from it."

Clarke adds that the "risks are rising on both sides" with Russia and Ukraine both "putting more chips onto the table".

Volunteers in Moscow are packing trucks with humanitarian aid intended for residents of Russia's Kursk region.

Authorities say more than 120,000 residents in the border region have already had to leave their homes as a result of the Ukrainian invasion.

Evacuations have also been taking place this week in the adjacent Belgorod region.

At least seven people have been injured and a fire has erupted at a shopping centre after a series of Ukrainian strikes in the Russian-controlled city of Donetsk, a Russian official in the region has claimed.

Denis Pushilin, the Kremlin-installed governor of the city, claimed the strikes sparked a fire of more than 10,000 square metres at the "Galaktika" shopping centre.

Seven civilians, including a teenager, were wounded, he said, with no deaths reported.

Sky News cannot independently verify the governor's claims. A video posted online shows smoke and flames rising from a shopping centre, purportedly in Donetsk.

Alleged strikes come as Russia captures Donetsk territory

Mr Pushilin's claim of Ukrainian attacks comes as Russian forces advance and capture more territory in Ukrainian-controlled areas of the Donetsk region.

Earlier, the Russian defence ministry claimed its forces had taken control of the village of Serhiivka, while authorities ordered the rapid evacuation of the nearby city of Pokrovsk (see 11.16am post).

Pokrovsk, which has been in Moscow's sights for several months, is one of Ukraine's main defensive strongholds and a key logistics hub in the Donetsk region. 

Its capture would compromise Ukraine's defensive abilities and supply routes.

Our security and defence analyst Michael Clarke has provided some insight into what happened when 100 Russian soldiers in Kursk were captured in one go by the Ukrainians this week.

The soldiers of Russia's 488th rifle regiment, who were mostly conscripts, "ran away" when they came up against a large unit of Ukrainian troops, Clarke says.

As they fled, they were fired on by Chechen forces on the Russia side, who were "there to stop them running away," he explains.

"They went the other way, went back towards the enemy and surrendered. So a whole company of young conscripts, all 18, 19-year-old boys, surrendered," adds Clarke.

But he says that while "several hundred" prisoners have been taken by Ukraine during its invasion of Kursk, "it hasn't all gone the Ukrainians' way".

"There's evidence that the some of the big Ukrainian units have been ambushed as well. So the fighting is very fragmentary - it's not coherent."

You can watch Clarke's full analysis of today's developments here:

Russian forces are being deployed in "greater force" to Kursk after initial "disarray and disorganisation", the UK Ministry of Defence has said.

In its latest intelligence update, the MoD said Ukrainian troops had penetrated the Russian border region "to a depth ranging between 10-25km over a frontage of approximately 40km".

It said Russia's established defensive lines and border forces were "not prepared" for last week's attacks.

"After initial disarray and disorganisation, Russian forces have deployed in greater force to the region, including likely from elsewhere along the contact line," the MoD said.

"They have also begun to construct additional defensive positions in an effort to prevent Ukrainian advances."

The thinking behind Ukraine's shock invasion of Russian border regions over the last two weeks has been the subject of intense speculation since it began on 6 August.

An aide to Volodymyr Zelenskyy has now offered a possible insight into Kyiv's plan, saying the incursion in Kursk was needed to convince Russia to start "fair" talks on a peace settlement.

Presidential adviser Mykhailo Podolyak said Kyiv needed to "inflict significant tactical defeats on Russia".

"In the Kursk region, we can clearly see how the military tool is being used objectively to persuade [Russia] to enter a fair negotiation process," he wrote in a post to X.

Mr Podolyak said Ukraine was "not interested" in occupying Russian territory and was waging an "exclusively defensive war".

"Signs of pessimism" about the Russian response to Ukraine's cross-border invasion in Kursk have started to emerge on Russian state TV, according to footage posted on social media.

The invasion seemed to catch Vladimir Putin unprepared, with a major retaliation yet to materialise and Russian forces struggling to stop Ukrainian advances.

Some pro-Kremlin military bloggers and Russian commentators have claimed that Russian forces are pushing back Ukrainian troops - but in one clip posted by BBC journalist Francis Scarr, "signs of pessimism have emerged" - on channels that tend to engage exclusively in cheerleading for the country's military prospects.

Filmmaker and state pundit Karen Shakhnazarov said: "We could lose if such blunders continue. And this isn't defeatism, it isn't scaremongering."

An air raid alert has ended in all but Ukraine's most eastern regions.

Earlier, more than half the country was issued with alerts warning of potential ballistic missile attacks.

Ukraine has said there is no sign Russian military pressure is receding along the eastern front more than a week after Kyiv's surprise cross-border push into Kursk.

Be the first to get Breaking News

Install the Sky News app for free

Trump and Allies Forge Plans to Increase Presidential Power in 2025

The former president and his backers aim to strengthen the power of the White House and limit the independence of federal agencies.

Donald J. Trump intends to bring independent regulatory agencies under direct presidential control. Credit... Doug Mills/The New York Times

Supported by

• Share full article

By Jonathan Swan Charlie Savage and Maggie Haberman

• Published July 17, 2023 Updated July 18, 2023

Donald J. Trump and his allies are planning a sweeping expansion of presidential power over the machinery of government if voters return him to the White House in 2025, reshaping the structure of the executive branch to concentrate far greater authority directly in his hands.

Their plans to centralize more power in the Oval Office stretch far beyond the former president’s recent remarks that he would order a criminal investigation into his political rival, President Biden, signaling his intent to end the post-Watergate norm of Justice Department independence from White House political control.

Mr. Trump and his associates have a broader goal: to alter the balance of power by increasing the president’s authority over every part of the federal government that now operates, by either law or tradition, with any measure of independence from political interference by the White House, according to a review of his campaign policy proposals and interviews with people close to him.

Mr. Trump intends to bring independent agencies — like the Federal Communications Commission, which makes and enforces rules for television and internet companies, and the Federal Trade Commission, which enforces various antitrust and other consumer protection rules against businesses — under direct presidential control.

He wants to revive the practice of “impounding” funds, refusing to spend money Congress has appropriated for programs a president doesn’t like — a tactic that lawmakers banned under President Richard Nixon.

He intends to strip employment protections from tens of thousands of career civil servants, making it easier to replace them if they are deemed obstacles to his agenda. And he plans to scour the intelligence agencies, the State Department and the defense bureaucracies to remove officials he has vilified as “the sick political class that hates our country.”

We are having trouble retrieving the article content.

Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and  log into  your Times account, or  subscribe  for all of The Times.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access.

Already a subscriber?  Log in .

Want all of The Times?  Subscribe .

Advertisement