Name____________________________________

Period________

DBQ Practice: Cold War in Africa

Sample Essay

Directions:
1. Change the color of the text/font to identify and illustrate each component of the DBQ essay:
 Grey: Contextualization
 Orange: Thesis (1st paragraph) and Arguments (topic sentence of each body paragraph related to the thesis)
 Blue: Summary of document
 Purple: Analysis- explains how the document supports the argument
 Red: POV/CAP
 Green: Outside evidence

Prompt:
Evaluate the extent to which African countries were able to conduct independent policies
during the Cold War period.

The events at the end of WWII in the 1940s became the catalyst for the emergence of two new superpowers in
the world: The United States and the Soviet Union. Consequently, these new superpowers clashed in their ideological
differences between communism and capitalism, and as a result, would compete to expand their influence around the
world. Concurrently, countries in Africa began gaining their independence as a result of the Western idea of self-
determination as well as nationalist movements post-WWII. These newly independent countries became the center
stage of Cold War ideological power struggles between the Soviet Union and the United States, as each attempted to
intervene in the new governments. During the Cold War, the United States and the USSR, were so intrusive and
powerful in comparison to newly independent nations in Africa that is was very difficult to avoid being forced to become
the client of one or the other. Although joining the western-capitalist or the socialist-communist communities often
brought benefits, it also brought controlling influences that limited national sovereignty in many African countries.
Despite the competition between the Soviet Union and the United States during the Cold War, many African countries
were able to play the two superpowers against each other in order to pursue policies that were in their own national
interests.
During the Cold War, the United States and the USSR, were so intrusive and powerful in comparison to newly
independent nations in Africa that is was very difficult to avoid being forced to become the client of one or the other. Joining
the western-capitalist or the socialist-communist communities often brought benefits. Doc 5 is a Soviet diplomat’s briefing to
Poland on the positive effects of Soviet influence in Somalia. He specifically notes military and economic aid, as well as
providing professionals such as teachers, doctors, and government officials to the Somali government. This provides evidence
that Somalia benefitted from Soviet influence during the Cold War. The author, a Soviet diplomat working for the Soviet
Union, was writing this briefing to the Polish government (which was a satellite state of the Soviet Union) in attempts to
persuade them to also offer aid to Somalia as well, in order to advance their socialist influence in Africa as a joint-effort with
other socialist nations. Moreover, Doc 6 also describes the influence of the Soviet Union in Somalia, but refers to the
deteriorating relations between the two countries. As a result, it describes the idea of allowing for increased American-Somali
relations in exchange for similar aid that would match the Soviet’s economic and humanitarian aid. This proves that Somalia
would also benefit from accepting American influence during the Cold War. The author, a Yugoslavian ambassador to
Somalia, wrote this to expose to the Yugoslavian government Somalia’s plan to strengthen relations with the United States
and act as a warning of future Somalian expansion in Africa.
Although external influences from the Soviet Union and the United States benefitted some states in Africa, being
persuaded to join the western-capitalist or the socialist-communist communities often brought controlling influences that
limited national sovereignty in many African countries. Doc 1 is a map created by a United States committee that illustrates
Soviet involvement in various parts of the world. The title of the map “How Communists Menace Vital Materials” indicates
that Soviet involvement in these regions exploited the resources, therefor making it difficult for newly independent states to
develop their economies independently. Moreover, its’ explanation of Soviet instigated terrorism and increased racial
tensions would have also made it challenging for new states to conduct independent policies without interference. This map,
created by the Committee on Un-American Activities, clearly has a negative bias against Soviet involvement in any part of the
world. The goal of this image was to continue to influence anti-Soviet sentiment in the United States. This would help gain
the support of American citizens for the US government to become involved in proxy conflicts in Africa and Asia, to help
control the communist ‘menace’ through the policy of containment. Moreover, Doc 3 is a secret telegram from the US CIA
that compares the governmental changes from a recent election in the Congo to that of the political changes in Cuba, and
warns of an imminent communist takeover if the US does not get directly involved. Unlike the Congo, the United States failed
to get involved in the Cuban Revolution when Fidel Castro overthrew the capitalist dictator Baustista, and brought
communism to the island of Cuba, who then allied themselves with the Soviets. They initiated a failed covert attack to take
out Castro in the Bay of Pigs, which in turn led to the Cuban Missile Crisis. Doc 3 proves that African states were limited in
their ability to conduct independent policies due to the heavy involvement of outside influences, in this case, the United
States. Since this document was created by the US CIA, it was intentionally meant to be kept a secret from the Congolese.
The goal of the CIA director was to instigate a covert operation to take the newly elected Congolese leader out of power
swiftly, so that the US could continue to practice “containment” by removing any potential communist ‘threats.’
Despite competition between the Soviet Union and the United States during the Cold War, many African
countries were able to play the two superpowers against each other in order to pursue policies that were in their own
national interests and create their own independent policies. Doc 4 describes this idea of African states emerging as
independent nations that are not tied to either superpower or their influence in order to focus on their own political and
economic interests. This document is clear evidence that some African states were able to pursue their own political
agendas independently. The author, a political philosopher and activist from France, clearly believes that Africans have
been oppressed for years, and it is now their time to emerge and grow independently. As a French political activist, he
would hope to see these new countries develop much like the West, and abandon any potential influence of Soviet
communism. Moreover, Doc 2 was an editorial published in an official Ghana newspaper. It compares the uprisings of
oppressed people in Hungary from Russia with the uprisings of Kenyans from the British. The author compares the
Western response to these uprisings: in Hungary they were considered fighting for a just cause, while the Africans were
considered “terrorists.” As a result, he condemns the imperialist actions of both the Soviets and the Western world, and
concludes that Africans do not want to be influenced by either party. This document proves that many Africans had no
intention of siding with either the Soviets or the West, and fully intended on developing their new nations independent
of outside influence. This editorial was written by a citizen of Ghana, therefor he had first-hand experience in the
oppression of the world superpowers. He wrote this to convince the people at the first Conference of Independent
African States to resist influence and interference from outside forces. Last, Doc 7 is similar in sentiment to Doc 2: It is
an interview with the leader of the Zimbabwe African National Union in a Mozambique newspaper which entails the ideas
of a clearly unique and independent Zimbabwe, though they had received aid from the Soviets at one point. The
author’s clear distinction of the people of Zimbabwe from other countries is evidence that some African states were
determined to remain independent and free from entangled alliances with other powers, which in turn would allow
them to conduct their own political developments independently. As the leader of the Zimbabwe African National Union,
whose goal was to end White minority rule in Zimbabwe, gave this interview to inspire the people of Zimbabwe to remain
loyal to the fight for independence.