Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The role of Ronald Reagan in the ending of the Cold War
Relevance of realism in international relations
Relevance of realism in international relations
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Why did the Cold War end?
In 1946, George Orwell foretold that “the Russian regime will either democratize itself or it will perish”. He was one of the first to predict the fate the Soviet Union, and yet, when it occurred, “the abrupt end of the Cold War … and the sudden disintegration of the Soviet Union astonished almost everyone, whether in government, the academy, the media, or the think tanks” (Gladdis 1992). The Cold War’s sudden end can be attributed to a number of tensions which, occurring simultaneously, diminished the once-extraordinary power of the USSR.
Tensions between the United States and the Soviet Union had risen fast since the end of World War II, were spurred on by the Space Race and the Arms Race, and peaked dangerously
…show more content…
The response of US President Ronald Reagan has often been cited as a contributor to the end of the Cold War: he introduced a number of anti-communist policies including the Reagan Doctrine (in which the USA would aid anti-communist movements) and the Strategic Defense Initiative (better known as ‘Star Wars’, a missile strategy, intended to resurrect competition and diminish the Soviet economy) and negotiated arms reductions with the Soviet leaders. Some argue his actiosn left the Soviet Union “completely defeated by the USA, economically [and] technologically” (Gorum 2014) and hence were a major factor in ending the cold war. Mike Bowker (1997) suggests this view is an exaggeration, and that Reagan in fact “changed very little on the ground and certainly was not sufficient to explain the radical change”. He proposes instead that the cause for change was primarily the “new thinking” of Mikhail …show more content…
The Cold War, then, would fit the realist view of the world: states, by nature, are self-serving. But it does not fit in its entirety, as realism expects that the world is “condemned to perpetual great power competition” (Baylis, Smith & Owens 2011). Following this theory, the Cold War should have ended because one state defeated the other, but – and this is what stumped the political theorists – contrary to what the realist view expects, the USSR collapsed without a fight and almost entirely of its own accord. If the Cold War proved realism wrong, perhaps a goal of harmony throughout the world was not such an implausible idea.
The end of the Cold War does not have an exact date, but by August 1991, the threat of an expansionist Soviet Union had deteriorated, as a result of the culmination of overwhelming long run economic stagnation alongside many internal and external political and social tensions. But this was not just the end of a rivalry between two superpowers: this brought forth the possibility that world peace was not so far from
“The distinct differences in the political systems of the two countries often prevented them from reaching a mutual understanding on key policy issues and even, as in the case of the Cuban missile crisis, brought them to the brink of war” (Library of Congress). The Soviet Union and The United States were complete opposites, The United States was a democracy whereas The Soviet Union was a dictatorship. This only began their differences though, their economies, beliefs, goals, and even their fears, everything about them made them different except for their enemy. The
Tensions between the United States and the Soviet Union had started since the early conference in World War Two and increased further at the War’s conclusion. These tensions developed further during the Berlin Blockade and Airlift during 1948 and 1949, China becoming communist in 1949, and the Korean War between 1950 and 1953. The events, have been labelled as the early crisis of the Cold War between the United States and the Soviet Union, and greatly increased tensions between the two superpowers and further led the countries into a Cold War.
The major factor that led to the true end of the Cold War was the ongoing personal and diplomatic relationship between Presidents George H. Bush and Mikhail Gorbachev. This resulted in the reduction of the Russian military and favorable arms agreements. Key indicators of the substance behind this relationship were the Soviet troop withdrawals from Czechoslovakia, Afghanistan, and Hungary (lifting the Hungarian/Austrian “Iron Curtain” along the border). Subsequently the opening of the Berl...
In 1980, it seemed like the United States was not as dominant in the world as it had been before. The Cold War between the United States and the Soviet Union began after World War II. The two nations had joined forces as members of the Allies, but tensions arose after the war. The Americans were very worried about the spread of Soviet communism, and tried to prevent it with a policy of containment, where the United States would protect countries from outside oppression. The Cold War also expanded to include the race between the Soviets and Americans to create atomic weapons. Furthermore, there was a race between the two countries to put the first man in space, which was accomplished by the United States in 1961 (“Cold War History”). The Cold War was a standoff between the United States and the Soviet Union to try to prove their dominance in the world. Each country wanted to have more power and diminish the power of the other. At home, Americans were paranoid with the thought of Soviet spies and communists hiding amongst them, dubbed the “Red Scare.” President Richard Nixon and the Soviet premier Leonid Brezhnev signed the Strategic A...
Gaddis, John Lewis. We Now Know: Rethinking the Cold War: Dividing the World. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 1997. Publishing.
8 Levering 173 9 "The End of the Cold War" http://usa.coldwar.server.gov/index/coldwar/ 2 Feb. 1997. 10. http://usa.coldwar.server.gov/index/coldwar/. 11 Young, 28.. 12 Young, 28.. 13 Tom Morganthou, "Reagan's Cold War'sting'? ", Newsweek, 32 August 1993:
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...
Odd Arne Westad, Director of the Cold War Studies Centre at the London School of Economics and Political Science, explains how the Cold War “shaped the world we live in today — its politics, economics, and military affairs“ (Westad, The Global Cold War, 1). Furthermore, Westad continues, “ the globalization of the Cold War during the last century created foundations” for most of the historic conflicts we see today. The Cold War, asserts Westad, centers on how the Third World policies of the two twentieth-century superpowers — the United States and the Soviet Union — escalates to antipathy and conflict that in the end helped oust one world power while challenging the other. This supplies a universal understanding on the Cold War (Westad, The Global Cold War, 1). After World War II, the United States and the Soviet Union opposed each other over the expansion of their power.
Ronald Reagan came to the Presidency without any major political qualifications, but his victory in the Cold War was no lucky outcome. Dinesh D'Souza’s new book, Ronald Reagan: How an Ordinary Man Became an Extraordinary Leader, just published by the Free Press, looks at how Reagan helped end the Cold War. Ten years ago Ronald Reagan stood at the Brandenburg Gate and said, “General Secretary Gorbachev, if you seek peace, if you seek prosperity for the Soviet Union and East...
There have been many attempts to explain the origins of the Cold War that developed between the capitalist West and the communist East after the Second World War. Indeed, there is great disagreement in explaining the source for the Cold War; some explanations draw on events pre-1945; some draw only on issues of ideology; others look to economics; security concerns dominate some arguments; personalities are seen as the root cause for some historians. So wide is the range of the historiography of the origins of the Cold War that is has been said "the Cold War has also spawned a war among historians, a controversy over how the Cold War got started, whether or not it was inevitable, and (above all) who bears the main responsibility for starting it" (Hammond 4). There are three main schools of thought in the historiography: the traditional view, known alternatively as the orthodox or liberal view, which finds fault lying mostly with the Russians and deems security concerns to be the root cause of the Cold War; the revisionist view, which argues that it is, in fact, the United States and the West to blame for the Cold War and not the Russians, and cites economic open-door interests for spawning the Cold War; finally, the post-revisionist view which finds fault with both sides in the conflict and points to issues raised both by the traditionalists as well as the revisionists for combining to cause the Cold War. While strong arguments are made by historians writing from the traditionalist school, as well as those writing from the revisionist school, I claim that the viewpoint of the post-revisionists is the most accurate in describing the origins of the Cold War.
In the minds of many Americans Ronald Reagan is the president that ended the Cold War, but is this view accurate? They claim Reagan's unprecedented military spending forced the Soviets to crumble. However, many critics of the president's outspending theory claim that the Russian economy would have imploded without such spending, and a military buildup of that kind did nothing but delay peace. Although, Reagan's willingness to negotiate was a clear factor in ending the Cold War, his aggressive arms race may have done more to forestall peace than abet it. The ascendance of Mikhail Gorbachev to power, the stagnating economy of Russia, and the personal friendship forged between Gorbachev and Reagan were the clear factors that contributed to the war's end.
Dwight D. Eisenhower once said, "Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signified, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold but not clothed." There was never a war that this idea can be more correct applied to than the Cold War. According to noted author and Cold War historian Walter Lippman, the Cold War can be defined as a state of tension between states, which behave with great distrust and hostility towards each other, but do not resort to violence. The Cold War encompasses a period from the end of the Second World War (WWII), in 1945, to the fall of the Soviet Union, in 1989. It also encompassed the Korean and Vietnam Wars and other armed conflicts in the Middle East and Africa, that, essentially, were not wars for people but instead for territories and ideologies. "Nevertheless, like its predecessors, the Cold War has been a worldwide power contest in which one expanding power has threatened to make itself predominant, and in which other powers have banded together in a defensive coalition to frustrate it---as was the case before 1815, as was the case in 1914-1918 as was the case from 1939-1945" (Halle 9). From this power contest, the Cold War erupted.
To understand the growing controversy between the United States and The Soviet Union, we first must travel back in history. During World War II, most of the world had a common enemy in Germany, the war machine led by Adolf Hitler that was conquering Europe. This United The United States and Russia into one Allied force; however, the distrust was present and rising.
With the shock of two destructive world wars and then the creation of the United Nations, whose aim is to preserve peace, it is unconceivable for these two nations to fight directly in order to promote their own ideology. But the US and the USSR end up to be in competition in numerous ways, particularly in technological and industrial fields. In the same time they start to spread their influence over their former allies. This phenomenon have led to the creation of a bipolar world, divided in two powerful blocs surrounded by buffer zones, and to the beginning of what we call the Cold War because of the absence of direct conflicts between the two nations.