Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Similarities between lenin and stalin
Essay between lenin and stalin
Similarities between lenin and stalin
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Despite the appearance of goodwill exhibited in Khrushchev’s speeches, a Western leader would be inherently skeptical of the Stalin crony as he attempts to gain and maintain power over the Soviet Union and his own party. An obvious politician, Khrushchev’s “peaceful coexistence” and “Secret Speech” in February 1956 served to distance him from the unpopular and failing Stalinist approach of communist control. His rhetoric, however, remains no less expansionist than his predecessor. Specifically, in his comments on “peaceful coexistence”, Khrushchev emphasized the ultimate triumph of the socialist system, but concedes that military intervention alone will not achieve such a victory (Judge & Langdon, 339). Rhetoric aside, one must consider Khrushchev’s
pragmatism. The development of the Warsaw Pact was a logical, Newtonian reaction to the expansion of NATO into West Germany and ensure the defense of Eastern Europe (336). Yet, when juxtaposed with Khrushchev’s calls for coexistence and a softening of rhetoric, one may identify the misaligned action of collective defense expansion while calling for a softened approach and a more global appeal (336, 338). Ultimately, one must judge a state by its actions, not its aims. Through this lens, a Western leader might identify little difference in the transition from Stalin to Khrushchev. Particularly, one must consider the Soviet military repression in reply to Hungarian desires for a multiparty system and neutrality in the Cold War (342). This action runs counter to Khrushchev’s previous rhetoric and publicized policy aims. Therefore, one must view him with caution and apprehension. It is possible to negotiate with Khrushchev, but one must exercise caution and prudence, otherwise Khrushchev will leverage opacities to achieve his objectives. Tough, ambiguous, and pragmatic, Khrushchev is anything other than flighty. Perhaps most concerning is his penchant for risk and strategic overreach. This Soviet willingness to accept risk increases Western uncertainty in negotiations.
The alliance formed between the US and USSR during the second world war was not strong enough to overcome the decades of uneasiness which existed between the two ideologically polar opposite countries. With their German enemy defeated, the two emerging nuclear superpowers no longer had any common ground on which to base a political, economical, or any other type of relationship. Tensions ran high as the USSR sought to expand Soviet influence throughout Europe while the US and other Western European nations made their opposition to such actions well known. The Eastern countries already under Soviet rule yearned for their independence, while the Western countries were willing to go to great lengths to limit Soviet expansion. "Containment of 'world revolution' became the watchword of American foreign policy throughout the 1950s a...
“When the people fear the government, there is tyranny;when the government fears the people,there is liberty” -Thomas Jefferson. The reason why I chose this quote is that the Northern Korean and South Korean civilians were afraid of the government so there was tyranny. Tyranny is cruel and oppressive government or rule.
However, evidence that is presented may indicate otherwise, as Joseph Stalin provides adequate counter claims for discrediting the “simplicity” of “yes”. Within this controversial topic, two authors provide their sides of the story to whom is to blame and/or responsible for the “Cold War.” Authors Arnold A. Offner and John Lewis Gaddis duck it out in this controversial situation as each individual leads the readers to believe a certain aspect by divulging certain persuading information. However, although both sides have given historical data as substance for their claim, it is nothing more than a single sided personal perception of that particular piece of information; thus, leaving much room for interpretations by the reader/s. Finding the truth to either claim is the obligation of the reader and outside research would accommodate the authors potential inadequacies and personal fallacies.... ...
Discussions of the causes of the Cold War are often divisive, creating disparate ideological camps that focus the blame in different directions depending on the academic’s political disposition. One popular argument places the blame largely on the American people, whose emphasis on “strength over compromise” and their deployment of the atomic bomb in the Second World War’s Pacific theatre apparently functioned as two key catalysts to the conflict between US and Soviet powers. This revisionist approach minimizes Stalin’s forceful approach and history of violent leadership throughout World War 2, and focuses instead on President Harry Truman’s apparent insensitivity to “reasonable Soviet security anxieties” in his quest to impose “American interests on the world.” Revisionist historians depict President Truman as a “Cold War monger,” whose unjustified political use of the atomic bomb and ornery diplomatic style forced Russia into the Cold War to oppose the spread of a looming capitalist democratic monopoly. In reality, Truman’s responsibility for the Cold War and the atomic bomb drop should be minimized.
During the late 1940's and the 1950's, the Cold War became increasingly tense. Each side accused the other of wanting to rule the world (Walker 388). Each side believed its political and economic systems were better than the other's. Each strengthened its armed forces. Both sides viewed the Cold War as a dispute between right and wron...
It is the inquisitive nature of man that is primary driving force behind the Five W’s: Who, What, When, Where and Why. Though these are all meaningful pursuits in their own right, it is the purpose of this piece to shed light on the Treaty of Non-Aggression between Germany and the Soviet Union’s purpose, as well as the most likely causes for its manifestation. Also in question, but not out of the scope of discussion, is whether or not non-aggression pacts truly work to preserve peace, or whether they are unintentionally one of the primary fuel sources that combust to cause war amongst the nations involved. The realist holds the key to this argument. The realist perspective sits alone as being the most concise angle from which to view the events transpired. However, without understanding a bulk of the history, a moderately concise answer cannot be delivered to the reader.
The long lasting Cold war has come to an end. As a result, new risks were taken to build and influence a new world, whether it would be new perceptions, leaders or ideas. In “President Ronald Reagan’s Successful Strategy of Negotiating from Strength,” John Lewis Gaddis argues President Ronald Reagan’s leadership skills brought the Cold War to an end, but he fails to realize that the end of the Cold War is forced by the economic issues of the time, domestic politics and the rise of nationalism.
The cold war was failed by the Soviet Union for many reasons, including the sudden collapse of communism (Baylis & Smith, 2001.) This sudden collapse of communism was brought on ultimately by internal factors. The soviet unions president Gorbachev’s reforms: glasnost (openness) and perestroika (political reconstructering) ultimately caused the collapse of the Soviet Empire. Gorbachev’s basics for glasnost were the promotion of principles of freedom to criticize; the loosening of controls on media and publishing; and the freedom of worship. His essentials of perestroika were, a new legislature; creation of an executive presidency; ending of the ‘leading role’ of the communist party; allowing state enterprises to sell part of their product on the open market; lastly, allowing foreign companies to own Soviet enterprises (Baylis & Smith, 2001.) Gorbachev believed his reforms would benefit his country, but the Soviet Union was ultimately held together by the soviet tradition he was trying to change. The Soviet Union was none the less held together by “…powerful central institutions, pressure for ideological conformity, and the threat of force.
Outline of Essay About the Origins of the Cold War OUTLINE: Introduction- 1. Definition of ‘Cold War’ and the Powers involved 2. Perceived definition of ‘start of Cold War’ 3. Iron Curtain Speech, Truman Doctrine and Berlin Blockade as significant events that caused strife between both powers, but which triggering off the start of the Cold War Body- 1. Iron Curtain Speech (1946) - A warning of Soviet influence beyond the acknowledged Eastern Europe - Churchill’s belief that the idea of a balance in power does not appeal to the Soviets - Wants Western democracies to stand together in prevention of further
George Kennan was an observer of the Russian Civil War aftermath. Kennan served as a Soviet front for two years in Moscow as chief of mission and a consultant for Ambassador Averell Harriman. At age 44, Kennan decided to write one of the most influential statements in the early years of the Cold War “The Sources of Soviet Conduct”. “The article was signed by ‘X’ although everyone in the know knew that authorship was Kennan’s and the Cold War gave the United States its historic opportunity to assume leadership of what would eventually be described as the ‘free world’” (Kreis, 2004). Kennan’s article in 1946 was actually sent as a telegram and influenced the Truman Doctrine which entailed how to contain the Soviet Union. “Kennan argued that the Soviets, motivated by a combination of Marxist-Leninist ideology and traditional Russian security concerns, were bent on expansion and were irrevocable opposed to the United States and the West, as well as to capitalism and democracy” (Rector, 2011).
The Yalta Conference was one of the most important events in history, let alone, this century. It took place from February 4 to February 11, 1945, at Yalta, Crimea, a port/resort. The three main individuals at this meeting were Churchill of Great Britain, Roosevelt of the United States and Stalin of the U.S.S.R, known back then, and now known as Russia. This meeting was to discuss the post war effects.
Kimball D, Chronology of Key Eventsin the Effort to End Nuclear Weapons Testing: 1945-1999, http://www.clw.org/pub/clw/coalition/ctch4050.htm, CTBTS 1999
Taubman, William. Stalin's American Policy: From Entente to Detente to Cold War. New York: Norton, 1982. Print.
Once, there was a girl, her name was Robin, and she lived in Canada deep in the woods.
The West and the Soviet have different perceptions of the purpose and outcome of war. From the Soviet’s perspective, victory is only possible when their nuclear and non-nuclear forces are more superior than those of the West especially the United States. Victory means that “Western political and economic systems would liquidate and the