1

THE ORIGINS OF WORLD WAR I, 1900-1914

(European Option: Modern Europe, 1789-1917)
(Cambridge International AS and A level History 9389)

TIMELINE

• May 1871- Treaty of Frankfurt (France loses Alsace and Lorraine to Germany).
• Oct 1873- 3 Emperors’ League (Austria, Germany + Russia).
• Oct 1879- Dual Alliance formed (Austria + Germany).
• May 1882- Triple Alliance formed (Germany, Austria + Italy).
• Jun 1887- Reinsurance Treaty (Germany + Russia).
• Jun 1888- Wilhelm II becomes Kaiser Germany.
• Jan 1894- Franco-Russian alliance formed.
• Apr 1904- Entente Cordiale created (Britain + France)
• Mar 1905- 1st Moroccan crises begins.
• Aug 1907- Triple Entente established (Britain France Russia).
• Oct 1908- Balkans crisis (Austria annexes Bosnia).
• Jul 1911- 3rd Moroccan Crisis begins.
• Jul 1914- Outbreak WWI.

Summary
June 1914, Archduke Franz Ferdinand (Austria) visited Sarajevo in Bosnia (recently province
of Austria). Majority of population were ethnic Serbs which hated Austrian leadership.
Looked to Serbia for leadership. Sarajevo Serb activist hotbed for terrorist + activists (Tense
situation). He + wife killed by Gavrilo Princip.
Assassination triggered series events that led to world war. Killing was final nail into coffin
as political tension build up. Caused two opposing powers to form, Entente and Central
Powers that caused world war.

Development of Alliance System

Europe in 1900
Start of 20th century, Europe dominated by six major powers. (All created alliance for power
+ security).
2

Austria-Hungary
1867 known as Austria- Hungary. Monarchy. Declining power, defeated by Prussia in
1866.Peace settlement that concluded Austro-Prussian war meant Germany now ally. Had
growing interests in Balkans + Russia rival there.

Britain
Parliament + monarchy with limited power. More interested in overseas empire than
Europe conflicts. Long standing distrust of France. Russia also threat e.g. Suez Canal + route
to India. Russia suspected expand into area near India.

France
Only major Republic power. Lost Franco-Prussian war 1871, economy recovered quickly.
Had to pay large sums money compensation for war to Germany. French gov. threatened by
internal rivalries. Political parties wanted revenge against Germany, socialists no favour war.
France recently signed treaty of friendship with Russia. Distrust Britain + Austria-Hungary.

Germany
Monarchy. Parliament (Reichstag) limited power + opinions influence gov. decisions. Latter
half 19th century Bismarck(chancellor) controlled Germany. Priority = isolate France.
Dismissed 1890 by Wilhelm II (Kaiser), aimed to make Germany leading power. Replaced
with Caprivi. Feared encircled Russia + France. Wanted to consolidate Germany’s position by
stabilising Russia around her. Bismarck tried make France focus on Africa rather than Alsace
+ Lorraine + getting revenge. Knew that France would do anything possible for revenge
defeat in Prussia war. After 1890 less skilfully, operators unable to deal with the alliances
created by Bismarck.

Russia
Nick II (tsar) absolute monarch. Remained friendly relations Germany until Wilhelm II
refused renew treaty with Russia. Russia rival with Austria. H. in Balkans.

Turkey
Ottoman Empire governed by absolute Monarch. In decline by 1900 “sick man of Europe”.
Loosing Balkans. Britain + France assist Turkey avoid A.H + Russia gaining power.
3

Who was Wilhelm II?

Friedrich Wilhelm Viktor Albert (27 January 1859 to 4 June 1941) was last German Emperor
(Kaiser) and Prussian king, ruled Kingdom of Prussia (15 June 1888 to 9 November 1918).
Was eldest grandchild of British Queen Victoria and related King George V (UK) and Nicholas
II (Russia). Came to throne (1888), dismissed Otto von Bismarck (Chancellor) in 1890,
launched Germany on “New Course” in foreign affairs and supported Austria-Hungary in
1914 Crisis which led WWI. Often made pronouncement on sensitive topics without
consulting with Minsters. 1908 interview cost him his influence, he was an ineffective war-
time leader that abdicated 1918 and exiled to Netherlands.

Bismarck’s Alliance
Germany large pop. + rapid modernising economy, army that superior to Austria + France.
Germany had Bismarck (clever + ruthless statesman).
In 10 years leading up to German unification, Bismarck changed Euro balance of power. End
of Franco-Prussian war forced France give Alsace + Lorraine to Germany. Said more German
than French whereas not true + high metal industry + agriculture in 1871. Provinces
economically valuable. French hated Germany + influenced foreign policy for years to come.
Bismarck knew French seek revenge for humiliation, tried to isolate France + prevent from
getting allies. Britain not interested in Europe, didn’t like France + Germany. Bismarck two
possible allies: Austria-Hungary + Russia, would leave France weak. Problem Austria. H +
Russia rivals in Balkans.

Three Emperors’ League (1873)

Bismarck negotiated agreement Tsar Alexander II (Russia) + Emperor Franz Joseph I (Austria.
H) + Kaiser Wilhelm I (Germany). Isolate France + hoped that calm down disputes over
Balkans between Austria. H + Russia through regular meetings. League was largely
unsuccessful, mainly disputes between Germany’s 2 allies. 1879 league collapsed. Did not
lead to significant agreements as powers found difficult reach agreement on concrete
objectives.

Dual Alliance (1879)

Bismarck hoped maintain 3 country alliance. Firm agreement with Austria .H better than
risky one worth Russia. Germany + Austria. H agreed to defend if Russia attacked. Defensive
alliance. Pledged remain neutral if attacked by another country e.g. France. Bismarck kept
alliance secret as didn’t want to complete alienate Russia. Bid to maintain French diplomatic
isolation + force Austrian cooperation with Russia. Made harder for Bismarck separate
France + Russia. This would later drag Germany into the Balkan Crises and cause Ww1.
4

Triple Alliance 1882

Extension of Dual. Germany, Austria. H + Italy offered to support. Italy joined to preserve
nat. security + anger France for taking Tunisia previous year as Italy also wanted. Bismarck
saw Italy as tool to isolate France (not useful for war). Italy insisted alliance exclude action
against Britain + offer no guarantee to A. H if war break out. Same time France encouraged
peruse colonial ambitions in Africa.

Reinsurance Treaty (1887)

Bismarck’s plan to isolate France no work. Austria. H + Italy traditional enemies + couldn’t
make large army to defend Germany if France invade. Germany + Russia no alliance so
Germany at risk if France + Russia Ally. Bismarck signed Reinsurance Treaty with Russia to
stop invade from East.
Russia + Germany agreed maintain neutral unless Germany attack France or Russia war with
Austria. H. Bismarck encourage for country foreign policy to be in different areas, Russia in
Balkans + Germany in West. Failed to renew treaty helping France secure Russia as ally
severely affecting Germany.
Treaty seemed offer encouragement as allowed as allowed Russia Balkan ambitions +
Germany remove threat Russia France collaboration.
Bismarck’s influence beginning to wane. Year after treaty made Wilhelm II became Kaiser.
More anti-Russian than leaders before + generals persuaded war. Bismarck resigned in 1890
+ Reinsurance treaty collapsed.

Opposition to Germany
All alliances, negotiated by Bismarck, entirely defensive + intended preserve peace. Formed
in secret making other powers suspicious. Suspicions intensified when Germany adopted
aggressive foreign approach. Germany wanted to expand into Africa + achieve access to
seas for good trading. Russia, Britain, France getting in way of success.

Franco-Russian Alliance (1894)

When Reinsurance lapsed 1890 Russia felt threatened. Russia + France steadily improved
relations. Began negotiations for treaty. 1888 France gave Russia loans as wanted to keep
friendly. They scared of Triple alliance so created their own defensive one. Both countries
give aid if either attacked. Alliance exist as long as Triple alliance exist. Was defensive
alliance.

Britain policy (Splendid Isolation)

“Splendid Isolation” Brits focused expanding + controlling empire than events at home.
Tried agreement with Germany for colonies in Africa. 7 attempts made all failed. Wilhelm II
5

expansionist (Conflict with Brits). Britain began depart from isolationist policy, treaty with
Japan 1902. Worried as Germany’s economy rapidly improving. By 1914 best in Europe.
Turn of 20th century uncertain whether Britain preferred Russia, France Germany. Many Brit
politicians + army preferred Germany as:
• Germany monarchy (same as Britain).
• Wilhelm II Queen Victoria’s grandson
• Queen’s husband was German
• German got thriving economy.
• German philosophers, writers, scientists regarded in Britain.

British alliance with France less likely:

• France republic, less politically stable than Germany.
• In Britain, Memories of Napoleon still there.
• Two countries followed history of mistrust.
• France’s defeat in Franco-Prussian war showed weaknesses.
• France bigger threat to Brits colonies.
• France diplomatically closer to Russia (Brits didn’t trust).

A British Alliance Russia equally unlikely:

• Russia underdeveloped economy + offered few opportunities for trade.
• Militarily weak.
• Russia wanted to expand influence in India + China (competition with Britain).

Britain chose France as scared of German Navy. Britain + France signed Entente Cordiale in
1904. France gave Britain Egypt and France got Morocco. Offered Britain end to isolation.
Britain basically disagreeing with Germany by joining.

Triple Entente
Anglo-Russian Entente brought France, Britain + Russia together series friendly alliances to
defend if attacked. Known as Triple Entente. 1907 Europe divided two opposing camps –
Triple Alliance + Triple Entente. Created defensive purpose but both sides suspicious of
other’s aims.
6

Anglo-Russian Entente (1907)

Russia saw Germany + Triple Alliance as major threat to security. Also concerned as Austria-
H + Germany take over large part of Balkans which affect trade for 40% Russia export.
Russia vast country, largest army. Defeat by Japanese made Britain not think as threat in
East for imperial ambitions. Economically underdeveloped + military weak. Germany now
bigger threat. Entente was marriage of convenience for both countries + agreement didn’t
say support each other if war.

Anglo-Japanese Alliance 1902

Britain concerned by reaction of Euro powers to loss in Boer wars. German navy made Brit.
No isolationist + make allies. Made ally with Japan. Offered protection to Brit. Possession in
East during war. Ally with France more surprising to Germany.

Entente Cordiale 1904

King Edward VII visit France 1904 + led to Entente. Was series agreements settle disputes
between Britain + France. France gave Brit. Egypt in return recognition France control
Morocco. Gave France security against Triple Alliance. For Britain offered end to Euro.
Isolation.

Consequences of alliances for international stability

1907, Europe divided triple Alliance + Triple Entente. Germany strongest, Italy weakest.
1900 Germany saw itself as world power, no interest in Balkans. Austria. H worried about
Balkans + Germany get involved as only ally. Italy joined as deprived of territories in N.
Africa by France.
Triple Entente just series loose associations Russia, Britain + France. Agreement didn’t state
result of attack by Austria or Germany. System of alliances responsible as confusing + not
clear.
1914 France Russia likely support in war. Britain not so much.
Naval race created tension Britain and Germany. Invasion of Belgium short term.
Alliance system worked in short term not in long. Stopped war in Balkans + N. Africa. Too
many countries wanted war so alliance made worse.

Militarism + Naval Race

1900-14 Euro countries increase money on armaments. German navy £50 million 1910 to 90
mili in 14. Britain also increased. German nationalism + patriotism also growing. Defeat of
British in Boer Wars made countries question military + whether strong enough. Boer means
farmer. Used ‘scorched earth policy’ during war.
7

Increasing armaments
Army more important in Germany than rest of Europe. Frederick the Great expanded
Prussia. Bismarck relied on his strong army to win wars + unify Germany. German generals
respected. German army well financed. 1913+ army increased. Germany concerned France
soon army to defeat.
Russia seen weak in Russo- Japanese war. Improved army + better transport modernise
navy + military.
Austria no longer great army. Possibly win against Serbia + Balkan states but not against
Europe powers.
Britain only country without conscription before war. Brought in 18 months after war broke
out. People were very nationalistic and didn’t mind following aggressive foreign policies to
preserve pride. “scramble” caused arms race as Country had to defend country + colony.

The Naval Race: Britain + Germany

Started 1906 when Britain launch Dreadnaughts. Germany started modernising navy to
defend trade routes. Britain said navy too big for their colonies.
Created tension between two countries.
Britain built Naval base on East Scotland against invasion Germany. Reasoning Failed. Public
opinion in both countries supported their govs.
1914 British Navy still stronger but had larger empire to control.
Germany could use navy to defend whereas Britain had to control empire + defend.
Britain knew how to use navy in war Germany didn’t. Navy heavy expense for Germany.

Rivalries overseas
Rivalries between European countries began to spread out into Africa + rest of world.
Imperialism

Scramble for Africa + Struggle for Concessions

1870 Britain Germany France looked to Africa for resources. 1914 only independent ones
were Ethiopia + Liberia. Russia focused mainly on China called Scramble for concessions.
Each countries reason for expansionist policy:
• Britain- Already controlled vast part of globe. 19 century Britain wanted to spread
into Africa + Far East. Had largest Empire. Trade routes with India vital for Britain.
Suez Canal, ports in South. People say establishment British power in Egypt caused
scramble for Africa. Used excuse that making people not pagan + bringing
Catholicism. Discovery of gold + diamonds made want more land. Encouraged by
Cecil Rhodes. Wanted to reinforce commercial gain
8

• France- Suffered defeat against Prussia 1870s. Lost land. Expansion into Africa allow
to continue calling great power. Gained Algeria + Senegal. French moved in land to
find raw materials. Politicians believed development of overseas empire essential for
+ wealth, power and prestige.
• Germany- Under Wilhelm II followed “World Policy”, Bismarck preferred European
concentration. Germany wanted place in the Sun. Colonies supply raw materials. In
19th century Germany had small colonies in Africa. Desired more. Politicians made
change policy of conc. In Europe to Africa to boost economy. By time got involved in
Africa most good land gone. Spent more than got in return.
• Italy- Unified in 1870 + wanted to become Great Power. Economy less advanced +
wanted Africa. Annex Abyssinia failed 1896. Gained some trade routes in China.
• Russia- Divided between aims expand at expense of Turkey or Far East for China.

Britain + France both wanted Egypt + later negotiated + stopped war.

South Africa Expansion by Britain made conflict with Germany who had territories in S-E
+ S-W.
Africa plentiful in Gold diamonds etc. great powers wanted these as good for economy.
Cecil Rhodes Important Figure.
1871 only 10% Africa under Euro control, by 1900 +90% under Euro rule. Easy to
colonise due to weaponry + better military than Africa. Countries had to look overseas to
increase wealth, power, prestige + influence, raw materials. Colonists used excuse that
improving lives of Africans.
Treaty of Berlin. Countries argued over division of land which built up tension.

The Moroccan Crises

Most serious crises took place Morocco. It was independent but Britain + France both
rival trading interests. France claimed borders not certain + proximity to French Algeria
mentions should be there’s.
1905 Kaiser Wilhelm II visited area during Med cruise to pay respects to Sultan + claimed
Morocco should be independent + count on Germany for help against French expansion.
Britain + France angry as wanted for trading. Germany aimed at dividing Britain + France
over matter + improve German prestige. Convinced that war close. Plan failed. Crises
defused conference in Algeciras 1906 only Austria supported Germany. Italy supported
France. Morocco gained independence, France controlling power. Brought Britain +
France together as brit gov alarmed German bullying tactics + growing navy.

Second Moroccan Crises 1908 resolved quick France + Germany.

Third Crises 1911 threatened cause war. Panther, German gunboat, sent Moroccan port
Agadir undermine French power in region. Britain not involved, saw as dangerous use of
9

German navy. British Politicians concerned. Some German generals + politicians in

favour going war, Kaiser backed down, agreeing concession France in Congo. Britain +
France drew closer, Germany diplomatic defeat. Made Brit + France serious planning
coordinate naval defences + military strategy combats further German challenges. 1912
German leaders felt ambitions + position in Europe menaced by growing power of
Entente. German public disappointed as no naval triumphs. Anger of Germans not
successes made war even more inevitable.

Instability in the Balkans

Turkey had controlled a vast empire. Began to decline in 17th century, survived 19th
century due to lack of agreements.
Turkey was main loser + sick man. New Balkans states created including Bulgaria,
Montenegro, Serbia threatened peace. New countries recognised dangers of being
overtaken by Balkans States. Peace settlements regarded as temporary as not solve
ambitions of small states + concerns of larger countries.

Balkan Nationalism
Turkey’s weak control Balkans led to increase nationalism end 19th century. Few natural
frontiers boundaries of new countries + region of different racial groups, religions,
cultures. Groups agitated for freedom Turkish rule + fought among themselves. Russia +
Austria. H saw situation Balkans dangerous yet power vacuum for each country to win
land. Set two nations on collision course.
Austria lost leading role in Germany to Bismarck’s Prussia. Could still remain power if
controlled Balkans. Region dangerous to A. H growing separatism + nationalism could
split up empire. Domino effect could spread affecting A. H as also full of different racial
groups, Croats, Slavs, Serbs. Some say that main cause of war was the denial of self-
determination to minority groups by powers in region. Some say that Austria defensive
policy as collapse of Turkey scared to keep balance in power. Also, aggressive as wanted
power vacuum + destroy Serbia. Germans blank check gave Austria too much
confidence.
Russia lost Crimean, mid 19th century + Japanese war in 1905. Not able to extend. Had
cultural + religious links with Slavs, Serbs + helped as were Orthodox Christians in area.
Britain, France + Germany lost interest in Balkans but France allied to Russia + Germany
to Austria. Could not avoid being involved. Britain anti Russian until entente early 20th
century. British continued avoid involvement. negotiating when problems.

Crises in the Balkans before 1914

1908-09 Austria Hungary annexed Bosnia mainly populated by Serbs. Serbs in Bosnia +
Serbia + Russia angered by move. Germany backed Austria + two countries threatened
invade Serbia. Potential disaster included same as 1914 crisis. Serbia + Russia backed
down + resolved peacefully. Germany, Austria. H believed Russia would back down in
the future. Russia believed that should never back down again.
10

1912, members of Balkan League rose against Turkey. Crisis persuaded great powers
hold conference in London to resolve problem before European conflict. As result of
conference, Serbia made gains that persuaded its people that Austria power in decline.
Saw opportunity to unify Serbs outside of country e.g. Austrian Bosnia.

Reasons for outbreak of War in 1914

Before assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand 1914 Sarajevo all major European
countries dealing with internal problems more pressing than Balkans. Some politicians
said could develop into armed conflict but more likely to settle by diplomacy as Crises.
Consequences took people by surprise.

Austrian Ultimatum
Príncip’s actions gave Austria. H excuse crush Serbia power + end threat of nationalism
to empire. No desire for another negotiated settlement. On 23 July sent Serbia series of
unreasonable demands with deadline in 48 hours. Ultimatum accused Serbian gov of
supporting murderers, demanded Serbia prosecute assassins + end anti-Austrian
propaganda. Austrian officials allowed to enter to make sure done. Serbian gov ordered
to publish acceptance of demands.
Serbian gov accepted most demands but denied responsibility for murder + suggested
international judgement reached by Hague Tribunal or meeting of Great powers. Events
developed + much of Europe got involved:
• Russia intervened for Serbia. 29 July mobilised army to put pressure on Austria.
H.
• Germany urged Austria. H not back down. 30 July Germany mobilised in reaction
to Russia.
• France not concerned with rivalries in Balkans, long time enemy Germany, to
support Russia mobilised 1 August.

Britain + Germany by 1914

As countries prepared for war Britain wanted stay out. By 1914 relations between
Germany + Britain improving. British Politicians didn’t believe would have to get
involved in war even though Triple Entente. After assassination in Sarajevo, brit gov
called for negotiations without indicating which outcome favoured.
1914, naval race soured relations between Britain + Germany, also had different
international priorities. Britain uneasy about getting drawn into politics of continental
Europe. Germany focused less on becoming world power as weren’t successful. Despite
this much to suggest Britain + Germany do everything possible avoid war with each
other:
• Countries had close trade links. British businessmen not favour expensive war
with Germany.
11

• Britain uneasy about alliance Russia + regarded Entente Cordiale as agreement

with France that not involve fighting war.
• Britain not interested in Balkans + favoured negotiated settlement to Sarajevo
crisis.
• Germany’s priorities keep France weak, neutralise Russia + keep Austria. H as
ally, avoid being encircled. Britain not major problem.

The road to war

1910 France, Russia, Germany, Austria. H developed offensive plans to defend if war.
Austria. H decided go to war against Serbia to remove as threat to nationalism.

The Schlieffen Plan

Put forward in 1895 to defend Germany against France + Germany. Go through Belgium,
defeat France in six weeks then defeat Russia. Take Russia time to mobilise so Germany
win. Grey warned Germany that British could get involved if War.

The railway system

Believed that made war easily. Powers use railway to mobilise troops as fast as possible.
Some mobilised before war was declared to be better prepared. By time troops reach
border too late to stop war. Confusion + poor communication made war inevitable once
troops mobilised.

Invasion of Belgium
Germany’s concern always prospect war on two fronts:
Against France in West + Russia in East. 1905 German military developed Schlieffen plan,
based on assumption that, Russia take longer mobilise + defeat due to vast size than
France. Plan imagined quick success against France. By time defeat France enough
soldiers to defeat Russia.
French frontier with Germany heavily defended + probably not allow Germany swift
victory. Alternate way to attack through Belgium which is weak + passive. Made part of
the Schlieffen plan. This posed political problem for Germany. Belgian neutrality
protected by series of treaties established 1839, both Britain + France committed to
defend.
Schlieffen plan formed basis of German strategy in 1914. Assumed that:
• Russia would take at least six weeks to mobilise
• France could be defeated in six weeks
• Belgium be too weak to resist German Invasion
• Britain might protest, not go to war over belgium
12

• Britain could protest but not go to war over Belgium

Most serious German error was assuming Britain no defend Belgium. Belgium decisive factor
which brought Britain into war. Matter of honour to defend “little Belgium + important
geographically. Brits relied on Navy for defence, Belgium in N. sea dangerous base for
German navy. Invasion persuaded British politicians to go to war.

European Politicians in 1914

Several Euro politicians played role diplomatic manoeuvres leading to WWI:
➢ Count Leopold Berchtold- Austro foreign minister 1912-15. Hardliner against Serbia
pre. 1914 + supported Austria Ultimatum. Preferred invade Serbia immediately
without ulti.
➢ Bethmann-Hollweg- Chancellor of Germany 1909-17. Came under pressure from
extreme right-wing + militaristic groups for foreign policies + from liberals for
domestic. Had to manage Kaiser’s tendency to pursue extreme policies abroad.
Supported war 1914 but hoped to be brief. Was Opposed political reform, came
dependent on non-parliamentary centres influence such as court, army +
bureaucracy.
➢ Sir Edward Grey- British foreign Minister 1905-16. Supported Entente Cordiale with
France, feared growth German Navy. Did not make clear whether Britain go to war
Germany until mobilisation + invasion Belgium.
➢ Nikola Pasic- Prime minister Serbia 1912-18. He caught between strength Serbian
nationalism feeling + Serbian ambitions threat to own security. Austria blamed him +
gov for Ferdinand. Promised to prosecute anybody involved, events soon out of
control.
➢ Raymond Poincaré- President France 1913-20. Pursued strongly anti-German + pro-
Russian policies. Sought good relations with Brits + tried to make Cordiale firm
alliance.
➢ Sergei Sazonov- Russian foreign minister 1910-16. Opposed A. H influence in Balkans
pre-WWI. Some believed too moderate + wanted him assert Russian influence in
Region.

Declaration of War
1. Austria declare war Serbia.
2. Russia mobilises army frontiers Austria + Germany.
3. Germany warns Russia + when decline declared war Russia, France, Belgium.
4. Britain declared war Germany.
13

Why did break out so quickly:

✓ Austria-Hungary determined crush Serbia, punish for anti-Austrian campaign.
Confident Serbia, weak militarily, back down. Even if not Austria believed win quick
war backing of Germany.
✓ Germany 1 reliable ally Austria. H which not strong power. With German support
show power not reckon with. Russia friendship Serbia likely cause war with
Germany. Involve France causing war two fronts.
✓ Serbia small country, encouraged by gains in previous Balkan Crises. Majority
country nationalistic. Some convinced Austria. H final state decline + others more
realistic.
✓ Russia believed made too many concessions in past, must stand up against Austria +
Germany. Russia + Serbia common interests.
✓ France keen keep Russia ally against Germany, had to make stand for Serbia against
Austria. H.
✓ Britain wanted balance of power, didn’t want Austria + Germany or France + Russia
dominate Europe. Ententes with France + Russia not oblige Britain war against
Austria. Britain not clear solution favoured beyond hope crisis remain local. Belgium
independence more important for brit honour + strategic than Balkans. Treaty of
London.

Some believe Russia mobilisation more important than Austrian Ultimatum. Germany took
mobilisation as declare war. Russia size + poor communication longer to prepare. Others say
main cause = fear. Powers scared that lose influence unless take stand:
• Austria scared lose position of power if let Serbia no punish.
• Britain threatened German navy + Belgium Invasion.
• France resist German ambitions + try get Alsace and Lorraine.
• Germany afraid encircled Russia + France + support only good ally, Austria.
• Russia saw as champ of Slavs + afraid seemed weak previous Balkan Crises.
1

THE RUSSIAN REVOLUTION c.

1894-1917
(European Option: Modern Europe, 1789-1917)
(Cambridge International AS and A level History 9389)

TIMELINE

• NOV 1894-Nicholas II becomes Tsar

• FEB 1904-Start of Russo-Japanese War
• JAN 1905-Start 1905 Rev.
• OCT 1905-October Manifesto Issued
• NOV 1905-Sergei Witte becomes prime minister
• APR 1906-Duma introduced
• JUL 1906-Stolypin becomes prime minister
• SEP 1911-Stolypin assassinated
• JUL 1914-Start WWI
• MAR 1917-Nicholas II abdicates + Prov. Gov. established
• OCT 1917-Oct Rev. led by Lenin
• JUL 1918-Nicholas + family murdered by Bolsheviks

Summary
From 1894 Russia ruled by Tsar Nicholas II (Absolut Monarch + unlimited power). Nicholas
determined to model Gov. just like Alexander III (his father). Nicholas badly educated +
chose ministers that bad at job (exception = Sergei Witte). Nick had support Russian nobility
+ full authority of Orthodox Church.
Peasants + workers dissatisfied with conditions causing Rev 1905. Troubles spread to middle
classes. Army saved Nicholas II but didn’t do reforms.1906-1914 army + police maintained
order while opposition groups (divided and disorganised).
1914 WWI most supported countries involvement. Drastic defeat due to obsolete and
outdated army caused national morale to suffer. Nicholas went to front lines to control his
army, backfired. Nicholas bad general and nobody capable of governing in his place.
Nicholas lost support + FEB 1917 Rev broke out and Nicholas abdicated.
Throughout 1917 chaos continued. Prov. Gov. led by Alexander Kerensky faced problems
over distribution of land + devastation of war. NOV 1917 Vladimir Lenin led Bolsheviks to
2

overthrow Gov. Bolsheviks governed Russia 1917-24, ended war with Germany, set up 1
party state + economic changes. Civil war broke out 1918-21.

Russia beginning 20th century

Many different ethnic groups, languages, religion at the time. Nicholas II alienated different
ethnic groups because of Russification – enforcing Russian language + orthodox religion
throughout. Not so many loyal to Tsar anymore.
Second half of 19th Century 10% lived in urban + earned living from trade, industry,
government service.

Who was Nicholas II?

Nicholas II (18 May 1868 to 17 July 1918) was last Emperor of Russia, ruling 1 Nov. 1894
until abdication 15 March 1917. Carried out anti-Semitic pogroms, Bloody Sunday during
1905 Rev, executions of political opponents and caused Russo-Japanese War. Given
nickname “Nicholas the Bloody”, Soviet Historians portray him as a weak leader who caused
military defeats and the deaths of millions. Estimated that 3,300,000 Russians killed in WWI.
Following February Revolution 1917, Nicholas abdicated on behalf of himself and his son. He
was imprisoned with his family and sent to Tobolsk and then Ekaterinburg (Ural) April 1918.
Eventually killed by Bolshevik guards 16 July 1918. Remains buried St. Petersburg 80 years
later.

Social hierarchy in Russia

Vast majority = peasants. Most burdened to their land with high taxes. Most peasants liked
Tsar but hated tax collectors. Peasants rioted in protest to burdens (non-Rev). Their aims
were social + economic changes. No political parties in Russia. Scattered groups wanted
change + some extremists overthrow tsar. Until the 1880s peasants paid poll tax + tax on
vodka + goods, nobility exempt. Peasantry liable long periods of military service, couldn’t
travel to other part of country without passport. Peasants had to buy freedom.
Emancipation gave peasants freedom but poor land. Productivity was very low. Gov tried to
keep peasantry isolated and ignorant.
Money invested into improving industry rather than agriculture. Condition of peasantry
perhaps Russia’s most serious problem. Famines frequent because poor transport, Gov.
couldn’t disperse excess food across Russia. Widespread poverty + production low. Peasants
encouraged to move from West (problems worse) to Siberia (lots of land). 1893 Land Bank
founded to give locals money to buy land. 1905 redemption payments cancelled (made little
difference). Harsh climates + poor communication made difficult attract migrant Labour.
3

Economic structure
Several factors that affected economy:
• Agricultural methods underdeveloped (nobody interested in modernising). structure
• Profits from wheat exports bad as Gov. inefficient to impose taxes on landowners.
• Russia lacked railway. By 1910 more built but not effective for Russia’s size.
• Work in factories during 1890s unproductive due to illiteracy.

Expanded railway system, increased industry helped Russia export more wheat, benefited
foreign trade. Money not shared equally. Taxes affected peasantry and the poor who lived
in towns. E.g. Just like in France before 1789 Wealthier classes taxed less or not at all.
Tax collection system corrupt as money disappeared into pockets of collectors before reach
central gov. Money spent on improving army and police instead of economy. Nicholas II not
interested in modernisation + reform, committed to autocracy instead. Result caused
people to feel alienated from Tsar.

Causes + Immediate outcomes of 1905 Revolution

Position + policies of Nicholas II

Nicholas believed that reforms by grandfather Alexander II weakened Russia. 1894 Zemstva
continued to have power. Konstantin fully supported Nick’s rule.
Nicholas was kind man. Alexandra and son with haemophilia questioned who replace him
when he dies.
Nicholas not educated but could speak many languages. Called Russian, “language of
peasants”. Wasn’t effective ruler as:

• Isolated at court, uninterested in Gov., preferred to go hunting than meetings.

• Could change mind easily
• He chose Ministers cause of social reasons rather than their abilities. They Competed
for attention of Tsar.

State council had no powers. Members gave advice that believed that Tsar would like.
Limited power of Zemstva allowed governors to take control + follow policies of no reform.
Russia less efficient than other powers + disorganised.
4

Who was Sergei Witte?

Sergei Yulyevich Witte (29 June 1849 to 13 March 1915) was a highly
influential econometrician, minister and prime minister in Imperial Russia from the end 19 th
century to beginning 20th century. Attracted foreign capital to boost Russia’s
industrialisation. He served under the last two emperors of Russia, framed October
Manifesto 1905. October 1905 became first prime minister and designed Russia’s first
constitution. He resigned before the first Duma was established. Described as “The Great
Reformist”.

Witte’s reforms
He believed Russia’s problem lay in loans + foreign exports. Russia had lots of raw materials
but lacked money to industrialised. Sought to create stable financial climate which would
draw in large amounts of investments. Foreign investment was crucial to expand railway
which boost economy + trade.
Witte increased taxes + raise money by giving investors high rates of interest. He built Trans-
Siberian Railway + increased coal industry in Ukraine. His reforms also caused problems.
Twice spent on repaying foreign loans than invest in education. Taxes increased to pay loans
affected peasants. Nicholas gave Witte little support + many saw his reforms as dangerous
(nobility). Made prime minister after 1905 to negotiate loan with France then dismissed.
Witte put high tariffs + tried reduce imports. Same time gov forced peasants sell grain to
keep trade up.
Positive aspects of Witte were improving in industry + railway. Negative was country’s
national dept increase + living conditions decreased.
Witte got blamed for creating the tension + instability. Russia went to war against Japan to
try and bring country together + quick victory. Made worse as lost + lead to 1905 Rev.

Social + political consequences of industrialisation

Peasants
Peasant communes found difficult cope with rising prices + heavy burden taxes. Peasants
forced sell more grain, leaving hungry. As rural pop grew peasant distress also grew. Rate
infant mortality highest in Euro. 1/5 army recruits rejected as unfit due to famines. Many
fled to Siberia + in 1902 peasants rose up against land owners.

Industrial workers
New industrial areas recruited with Peasants. Work low pay long hours + no security. Poor
conditions. Spent earnings on food to survive. Tried to improve conditions by forming
unions, strikes, + going against Tsar + police.
5

Russo-Japanese War
1900 China very weak as poor gov. and internal conflict. Japan + Russia saw as possibility to
expand into Manchuria, eastern China + Korea. Port Arthur in Manchuria useful to Russia as
ice-free harbour. Tried to negotiate Japan take Korea + Russia Manchuria. Britain saw Russia
as threat to colonies signed Anglo-Japanese Alliance 1902. Gave Japan strength to seek
settlement with Russia. Tried to give Russian rights in Manchuria in exchange for Japanese
rights in Korea. Russia refused due to military superiority + invaded Korea. Japan attacked
Port Arthur + war broke out 1904 Russian ships unprepared + dispersed around globe.
Japanese took Manchuria + made Russians retreat. Britain denied Russia access to Sue canal
as attacked British Fishing boats. Named Japan champion of Asia.
Poor quality of Russian navy demonstrated when ships sent from Baltic to confront
Japanese navy. Russian fleet suffered loss at battle of Tsushima May 1905. Russian army
much larger but poor quality. Russia lost capital of Manchuria + signed Portsmouth Treaty
1905 (humiliating).
7 consequences of this war:
• Japan regarded as more modern + efficient state. First in Asia to defeat European
country.
• Russia’s weaknesses revealed. Led its interests from east to Balkans. Led to WW1.
• Defeat blow to prestige of tsarist rule.
• Russo-Japanese war major cause of 1905 Rev.

Popular protest
1902 major peasant uprisings in Ukraine. 1905 +3 thousand disturbances put down by gov.
Concentration of factory workers led to unrest + militant attitudes + mass strike in 1902.
Oppression spreading in major cities.

Liberal Opposition
Among educated Russians challenged gov differently. Many nobles alienated from running
country. Many began support union of Liberation. A group aimed at united the people to
overthrow the Tsarist. 1904 Union organised successful banquet campaign. During
Alexander II banquets held to look for solutions just like democracy.

Social Revolutionaries
Social Revolutionary parted founded 1901. Wanted change in form of gov + society. Wanted
new rights + improved conditions for workers, self det. For minority groups + land given to
peasants if work it. Some of group result to terror to get change. 1902-1904 killed ministers
+ caused terror.
6

Social Democrats
Opposition to social Rev party was social Rev. Party, all Russian social democratic workers
party founded 1898. Concentrated efforts on peasantry, saw village commune as start to
establishment social society. Were a Marxist party, looked to industrial worker to bring
change. Believed that industrialisation would lay foundation for socialism.
Industrial development. Led to create bourgeois who economic interests lead to overthrow
Tsar. 1904 social democratic party largest in Russia 10,000 supporters.

1905 Revolution
Disrupted communications + transport, increased gov expenditure. 1904-5 hard winter
caused crops fail + price rise. Father Gabon helped cause strikes in 1905. People went to see
strike for repayment for conditions. March met by soldiers + people killed which damaged
Tsar’s reputation.
Peasants annoyed by redemption dues. People mutinied in military. Railway system come to
halt. Witte managed restore power.
Russian Rev. was caused by build up of several factors over previous years:
• Poor economic condition of peasantry, little improvement following emancipation.
• Autocratic rule of Nicholas that distanced from people.
• Economic recession early 20th high rates of unemployment.
• Growing nationalistic unrest among ethnic groups, resented Russification.
• Other groups in Russia wanted democracy or socialism.
• Unrest met by ruthless repression.

Revolutionary groups not solely responsible for 1905 Rev. Lenin (leader of Bolshevik party)
was in exile at time + played no part in 1905 Rev. Leon Trotsky involved as encouraged Rev.

Who was Lenin?

Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov aka Lenin (22 April 1870 to 21 January 1924) was Russian
communist revolutionary, politician and political theorist. served as head of Soviet Russia
government (1917 to 1924) and USSR (1922 to 1924). Under administration, Russia and
Soviet Union became a one-party communist state. Created Leninism ideology. Born into
wealthy middle-class family and followed socialist politics after execution brother (1887).
Moved St Petersburg 1893 and became senior Marxist activist. In 1897 he vas arrested and
exiled for 3 years and moved W. Europe. Took a major role in split of RSDLP creating
Bolsheviks and Mensheviks. After Bloody Sunday tried promote Socialism, in 1917
overthrew tsar and new regime forming Bolshevik regime. Lenin's administration
redistributed land among peasantry and nationalised banks and large-scale industry.
Withdrew Russia from WWI by signing. Opponents suppressed and killed in Red Terror.
Lenin expressed opposition to Stalin before dying. Some see him as the figurehead for
7

Communism and others see him as a leader of a authoritarian regime that carried out mass
killings.
Who was Trotsky?
Leon Trotsky (7 November to 21 August 1940) was Marxist revolutionary, theorist, and
Soviet politician. Initially supported the Menshevik faction and changed to Bolshevik before
1917 October Revolution, became leader immediately in Communist Party. Became
member of Politburo (1917) that ran Bolshevik Revolution, also became commander in Red
Army and key figure in Bolshevik success in Civil War. Trotsky removed when Stalin replaced
Lenin and went into exile, Stalin hired assassin to kill Trotsky. Trotsky formed Trotskyism
which opposed theories of Stalinism.

Bloody Sunday
22 January 1905, Father Gapon (priest) led non-violent march in Moscow to ask Tsar for
land reform + assembly elected by universal suffrage. Crowd dispersed violently. Russian
people blamed Tsar for brutal actions.
Events of “Bloody Sunday” showed Nicholas’ unpopularity. Strikes began in Moscow + some
middle classes supported protests. Workers organised into trade unions. Revolutionary
groups disorganise + lacked leader. At time army still loyal to Tsar.

October Manifesto 1905

As unrest continued Nick persuaded to give people what want (Oct Manifesto). Promised
free speech + elected assembly called Duma whose agreement before pass any laws. Nick
didn’t allow Duma to elect own ministers, claimed right to discharge council whenever
wanted.
Reaction to manifesto divided. Many rebels felt that voice heard + landowners accept their
demands. Minority of extremists (Bolsheviks) felt that manifesto didn’t go far enough in
addressing grievances. Some armed resistance but Tsar’s soldiers suppressed + stability
return to Russia.
Nick’s insincerity in issuing decree became apparent. Proved unwilling to enforce reforms as
continued autocratic. Est. 15,000 killed and 70,000 arrested in one year.

Did industrial workers + minority groups become less Rev after 1905?
Working + living conditions still poor. 1912 in Siberia people killed for protesting for higher
wages in Siberia. After 1909 strikes rose about change in politics + wages. When entered
into war more strikes + discontent. 1906 revolutionary’s gods tear. Social parties spread
their aims.
8

How successful industry + social development after 1905?

Heavy industry + increase in bumper harvests + cops and trade. Industry grew. Made
powers like Germany worried by 1913. Caused war. 3rd Duma made increase in education.
85% growth in schools since 1905 to 14. Doctors + professionals also increased. Economic +
social modernisation. Increase in industrial workers which made conditions worse.

The Duma
It was elected body yet not represent democracy. First Duma met in 1906, represented
minority of pop. Restricted to landowners + some peasants that owned land could vote.
Duma limited to small piece of budget. Nick ignored + dissolved it within few months.
Second Duma met few months in 1907 + gave more people the right. Third Duma lasted
longer (1907-12) still achieved little. Nick managed to maintain power. Fourth Duma set up
at start of WWI.
Tsar could introduce laws + could veto laws passed by Duma, Ministers still appointed by
tsar, controlled military. Duma got no way of enforcing decisions.

Strengths + Weaknesses of Romanov rule

1905 Rev shook Russia. Many couldn’t picture Russia without tsarist rule as seen as un-
Russian. Tiny groups of radicals.

Who was Pyotr Stolypin?

Pyotr Arkadyevich Stolypin (14 April 1862 to 18 September 1911) 3rd Prime Minister Russia
+ Minister Internal Affairs (1906 to 1911). His tenure marked by efforts counter
revolutionary groups and implementation agrarian reforms. He was monarchist and
considered last Imperial Russian statesmen which defined public policies and undertook
major reforms.

Stolypin’s reforms
Nicholas took positive step in 1906 when appointed Stolypin as minister of interior, later
prime minister. S saw agriculture as major problem + wanted to improve peasant’s
situation. Believed in strict law ruthlessly repressed any peasant uprising (Death by
hanging).

Agrarian reform
He was not democrat. Wanted to weaken troublesome Duma + placed under control of
landowners. Perused policy of social + economic reform. Believed most beneficial change be
encourage growth of wealthy peasant class (Kulak). Mirs (Self-governing community
peasants) directed what peasants could grow + limited their abilities to improve. Stolypin
wanted to make peasants independent of mirs. Allow them to put together individual strips
9

of land + more efficient. Kulaks became independent but experiment didn’t last long enough
to transform Russia. Peasant Land Bank lent peasants money to buy land. Some encouraged
to move to east. Taken advantage of and peasants moved to areas with better soil fertility.
Production increased + befitted gov’s export of wheat.
After 1917 Lenin tried to suppress Kulaks but Stalin finally eliminated them.

Successful?!
Peasants had increase in land bank so could borrow to purchase extra land. Relocation
programme allowed people to move to less overcrowded areas e.g. Siberia. Most people in
Russia before ww1 now had good land. Contemporaries believed change improved
machinery in farming, increase yields, increase levels of well being. Peasant land hunger
continued. Divisions grew between rich + poor. War caused reforms to not fully work.

Industrialisation
Stolypin’s interests went beyond agricultural reform. Industry boomed, trade with Britain,
France + Germany increased substantially. Russia had vast raw materials. Russia was going
through industrial Revolution.
Developments caused rural-urban migration as better living conditions. Overpopulation in
cities led to drastic decrease in living conditions. Factory pop more than doubled before
WWI. Low medical care + standards of education low. Workers virtually no rights. Trade
unions banned + police cracked down on protests.
In absence of middle-class country’s reliance on loans gave power to banks. Control
weakened efforts of small businessmen. Russia benefiting from industrialisation, suffered
socially.
Nicholas saw no need for political concessions apart for Duma. Most reforms of people
demanded:
• Maximum working week
• Factory inspections ensure laws enforced
• Health and insurance provision

To Nicholas appeared radical.

Opposition to the Tsar

Industrialisation brought prosperity + problems for inefficient + authoritarian. 1909-14
strikes more common + gradually more violent. Shop workers, railway employees, Uni
students etc. went on strike. 1912 Lena gold mine massacre.
10

Many peasants couldn’t pay land repayments (prob. Worse conditions than pre-reform.
Anarchism + Marxism broke out due to.
Land and Liberty movement (give peasants more rights + power + less pov.) Radicals fled to
Switzerland + abroad to plot uprising. E.g. Vladimir Lenin.
Unrest seeping into Russia. Military couldn’t eliminate all radicals. Exile of rev. allowed them
to plan abroad in safety (gained support). Censorship evaded + still managed to spread
ideology.
Before WWI Tsar still had power cause of army + police + tradition. 1905 Rev. caused
growing distrust.

Causes of February Revolution in 1917

1906-14 uneasy peace in Russia. 1905 Rev. caused alarm among liberals, generals, police
took steps to eliminate opposition. 1911 tsar lost confidence in Stolypin + murdered.
Replaced with Ivan Goremykin (Believed in Nick’s ways of governing). 1913, Russia
celebrated 300th anniversary.

Who was Grigori Rasputin?

Grigori Yefimovich Rasputin (21 January 1869 to 30 December 1916) was Russian holy man
who befriended Tsar Nicholas II family and gained influence in late imperial Russia. He came
from a peasant family from Siberia and had religious conversion experience after taking
pilgrimage to monastery 1897. Described as a monk and met Tsar in 1905, In 1906 acted as
healer for Alexei (Tsar’s son) who had haemophilia. Rasputin’s power peaked in 1915 when
left in charge with Alexandra as Nicholas went to front lines. He was unpopular as was seen
as a spy, assassinated 1916 by conservative noblemen.

Impacts of WWI
Russia claimed 1914 war to protect Serbia, not for land. Intentions of Austria and Germany
reason. Russians honoured as hated A.H. Austrians believed that Russia using Serbia as way
of getting Balkans + benefit of break up of empire.
Russian gov. Totally unprepared. If Russia involved in war would lead to hopeless anarchy.
War made Russian people eager for an adventure.
Within weak Russian army heavily defeats + War now going to last longer than few months.
Russian gov. Struggling sustain war funds. Not able to provide soldiers with weapons.
Soldiers picked up off dead soldiers. Weapons ineffective as soldiers found restricted to how
many rounds could fire. Deserting + decrease 8n morale followed.
Output of consumer goods plummeted as factories made war things. Tried to improve but
didn’t work. Duma tried but failed to improve economy. Nick took charge of army, left
Alexandra in charge + Rasputin. Caused controversy as thought of as spy for Germans.
Alienated Romanovs from people.
11

The Economy
Growing unpopularity of gov caused by absence firm leadership, spiralling cost of living +
shortage of food. Gov printed more money + asked for loans to pay population. Massive
inflation occurred, people realised wages worthless. *4 increase by 16.
Rural areas situation better. Loss of men from war good as solved overpopulation. Peasants
had horses for army. Hyperinflation + lack of things to spend money on meant farmers sell
less grain. Farmers therefore had surplus of grain + stored money in bank. Most surplus
went to army + little towns.
War efforts planned poorly. Food badly distributed to front lines + cities away from war
where people fled to. Unbalance in rural + Urban population caused famine + food shortage.

Start of War
Russian military mixed feelings about another war (Defeat Japan). Money spent on + army.
1914 3 times size of German. Russia take longer mobilise troops (poor transport system +
lack of railway). Russia proved slow when war broke out. Russian still relied on cavalry
(inefficient against machine guns). Methods of modern warfare not yet introduced into
army. Slaughtered.

Course of War
Russia won some against Austro + turkey, defeat vs. Germany. Human cost for Russia
mounted. Peasant soldiers poorly equipped + no weapons (transport system). 1 million lost
in 1916. Tactics didn’t change.
Because of failures Nick II went to frontlines (mistake as tsar not skilled). Absence at court
created power vacuum.

Effects of War
Alexandra (Wife) left in charge of Gov. German heritage caused controversy with being spy.
Reliance on Rasputin decreased pop. + being woman. As army lost Romanov gov.
disintegrated.
Russia disorganised, couldn’t transport conc. Food from 1 area to other. Nom. Farm animals
increased, death by famine increased.
Inflation raised prices, affected lower classes. Strikes in Moscow + St. Petersburg. People
wanted more efficient tsarist gov.
12

October Revolution 1917

Short term causes:
• Prov. Gov. no control over events. Discredited by disobedience from soviets +
Kornilov affair.
• Military Revolution Council (MRC) established in Moscow (rival gov.) Controlled by
Trotsky on behalf of Bolsheviks.
• Russian army losses made Prov. Gov. more unpopular.
• Kerensky no distribute other reforms e.g. land redistribution.

As German troops advanced Kerensky believed to hand over St. Petersburg. Lenin made rev.
actually occur.
Bolsheviks gained controlled of St. Petersburg + seize Winter Palace. Rev. successful as
people stood down. Doubtful whether Bolsheviks maintain power.
In middle of chaos Duma agreed create provisional Gov. Was to be provisional until
elections to produce Constituent Assembly. Meanwhile people granted freedom of speech
etc…

Problems Facing Provisional Gov:

The war
Britain + France put pressure on Russia continue fighting Germany. Offered loans Prov Gov
to stay in war. Petrograd Soviet tried persuade Gov make peace Germany. German peace
terms meant huge loss of land, make Gov unpopular. 7 million armed soldiers would return
home making ungov. Discontent grew, food shortages, poor harvest, inflation.

The land
Prov Gov reluctant for land reform before Constituent Assembly establishes. Wanted to
survive against People into established. People invaded land + Prov Gov couldn’t do
anything.

Factory Committees
Workers factories determined Feb Rev bring gains such as 8 hour day, higher wages, greater
say in running of factories. Worsening economic sit. Brought shortage of food + possible
closures. Factory committees emerged to protect workers. Though share of control would
sustain order. Prov Gov though managers should have power.
13

The Army
Disaffection of soldiers allowed rev gain momentum. Soldier committees formed to remove
power from officers. Shops looted by soldiers as many dying + defeat. Deserting. Army
command demanded Prov gov re-impose discipline into army ranks. Prov gov torn between
restore of strong army + use to crush rev.

Abdication of Nicholas II
1917 vast amount of army mutinied. Killed officers + returned home to help families. Loyal
Romanovs turned on Nick. He abdicated Feb. 1917 + blamed on treason, cowardice.
After Oct. Rev. Nick + family captured by Bolsheviks + killed 1918.
Members of Duma wanted continue war + didn’t reform. Power later past to Prov. Gov. led
by Alexander Kerensky.

Who was Alexander Kerensky?

Alexander Fyodorovich Kerensky (4 May 1881 to 11 June 1970) was Russian lawyer and
revolutionary who was key political figure in Russian Revolution (1917). Joined the
provisional government as Minister of Justice, then Minister War, after July became second
Minister-Chairman. Was also vice-chairman of Petrograd Soviet. When his government
overthrown by Bolsheviks spent remainder of life in exile, worked for Hoover Institution
while in exile.

Bolsheviks’ rise to power

Drove Prov gov out of out of winter Palace. Kerensky tried find troops to defend but
unsuccessful.
Mensheviks + social revolutionary deputies left Congress. Right wing angered as didn’t want
Rev. Lenin used remaining Congress to announce: peace be immediately, landed estates
abolished + land handed to peasants. People’s commissar be formed. Chairman Lenin +
Trotsky Commissar.

Lenin’s skills
Greatest skill was ability idealistic + practical. Gov. after 1917 showed willingness to
compromise. Aimed to do Rev. that bring down tsarist autocracy. Ironic as didn’t allow
change to his leadership. Skilled orator, good writer + political thinker.
Appreciated importance of organisation + discipline within rev. party. Wanted to shape
factory workers into weapon for rev.
14

Lenin + 1905 Revolution

Bolsheviks + Mensheviks unawares by 1905 Rev. Unrest broke out Trotsky + Mensheviks,
radicals promote strikes + Workers committees. Lenin right man in wrong place. Exiled + too
late to be effective. Mensheviks willing to work together (Bolsheviks no).

Crises of Provisional Government

Kerensky (head of Prov. Gov.) more reform than radical. Kept Russia in WW1 + tried to
balance. Russia internally unstable. Prov. Gov. lacked strength to restore. Experienced
unrest from army + people.
Formation of Soviets. Spread from cities to rural. Not organised but represent major threat
to Prov. Gov. Problems of food distribution not solved.
War badly for Russia. Gove hoped war unite population, instead opposite.

Lenin’s return
When come back from Switzerland realised potential power of soviets. Saw as alternative to
Prov. Gov. “All power to Soviets”.
Prov. Gov. made last attempt against Bolshevik’s Kerensky condemned Lenin as German spy
(fled to Finland). Germany helped return as thought him as threat to Gov.

Kornilov Affair
Restored Lenin’s fortunes. Kerensky accused Kornilov of attempting takeover. Soldiers
refused to back gov. + many deserted. Bolsheviks led resistance among soviets + workers.
Lenin returned.
Kerensky portrayed as German agent plotting to surrender Moscow to enemy. Rev. council
dominated by Bolsheviks. Full rev. imminent.
Military set back precipitated collapse of coalition gov. Followed by demonstration in
Petrograd. Demonstrations known as July days, not organised by Bolsheviks. Protested all
power to Soviets. Prov gov crushed demonstrations.
 The Cold War, 1950-1991
(Depth Study 3: International History, 1945-1991)
(Cambridge International AS and A level History 9389)
 CONTENTS

➢ [Pg. 1-5] -Timeline of the Cold War.

➢ [Pg. 5-8] -US Presidential Policies during the Cold War.
➢ [Pg. 8-10] -Soviet Leaders during the Cold War.
➢ [Pg. 10-15] -Korea and NSC-68.
➢ [Pg. 15-16] -The Hungarian Uprising.
➢ [Pg. 16-23] -The Cuban Missile Crisis.
➢ [Pg. 23-26] -How Germany was such a Source of Tension.
➢ [Pg. 26-31] -US Containment in Vietnam and Taiwan.
➢ [Pg. 31-34] -New Leaders and their Ideas.
➢ [Pg. 35-38] -Impact of the Arms Race on the Cold War.
➢ [Pg. 38-40] -Nuclear Weapon Development Treaties.
➢ [Pg. 41-51] -Spread of the Cold War Outside of Europe after
1950?
➢ [Pg. 51-56] -Sino-American Relations.
➢ [Pg. 56-60] -Sino-Soviet Relations.
➢ [Pg. 61-66] -Why did Détente end in a Second Cold War?
➢ [Pg. 66-68] -Impact of Non-Aligned States on the Cold War.
➢ [Pg. 69-75] -Challenges to Soviet Control 1945-1980.
➢ [Pg. 75-82] -United Nations and the Cold War.
➢ [Pg. 82-86] -Collapse of the Soviet Union and the End of the
Cold War.
 1

THE COLD WAR 1950-1991

*TIMELINE OF THE COLD WAR (1944-1991)*

1944:
Nov- Tehran Conference / meeting of Big 3.
Feb- Yalta conference.
Apr- Roosevelt dies, Truman president.
May- Germany surrenders.
Jun- UNO formed.
Jul- Potsdam Conference.
Aug- Hiroshima + Nagasaki, Japan surrenders.
1946:86
Feb- Stalin's Two Camps speech.
Mar- Churchill's Iron Curtain speech.
Jun- Baruch Plan proposed.
1947:
Mar- Truman Doctrine.
Jun- Marshall Plan proposed.
Jul- Kennan's Mr. X article.
Oct- Cominform created.
1948:
Feb- Czech Coup + Marshall Plan implemented.
May- Israel formed.
Jun- Berlin Blockade + Yugoslavia expelled from Cominform.
Nov- Truman re-elected.
1949:
Jan- COMECON founded.
Apr- NATO established.
May- End of Berlin Blockade.
Sep- USSR explodes a-bomb, FDR + GDR established.
Oct- Mao proclaims foundation PRC.
1950:
Apr- NSC-68.
Jun- N. Korea invades S.
1951:
Sep- US + Japan sign mutual security pact.
 2

1952:
Nov- Eisenhower elected.
1953:
Mar- Stalin dies.
Jun- E. German uprising.
Jul- Armistice in Korea.
1954:
Jan- Dulles announces Massive Retaliation Policy.
May- Fall of Dien Bien Phu.
Jul- Geneva Conference in Nam.
Sep- SEATO established.
Oct- W. Germany joins NATO.
1955:
May- Warsaw Pact signed.
Jul- Geneva Summit.
Sep- Nasser announces arms deal with USSR.
Nov- Baghdad Pact.
1956:
Feb- Khrushchev's de-Stalinization speech.
Jul- Suez Crisis.
Oct- Hungarian Uprising suppressed.
1957:
Oct- Sputnik launched by USSR.
1958:
Jul- Resolution in Iraq.
Aug- Quemoy + Matsu blockade.
1959:
Jan- Castro takes power in Cuba.
May- Dulles dies.
Sep- Khrushchev visits US.
1960:
May- U-2 spy plane shot down over USSR.
Nov- Kennedy elected + Sino-Soviet split confirmed.
1961:
Jan- US breaks.
Aug- Berlin Wall built.
1962:
Oct- Cuban Missile Crisis.
 3

1963:
Aug- Partial Test-ban Treaty.
Nov- Kennedy assassinated + Johnson made President.
1964:
Aug- Gulf of Tonkin Resolution + US goes to war with Vietnam.
Oct- Khrushchev deposed + Brezhnev replaces. China detonates a-bomb.
Nov- Johnson re-elected.
1965:
Aug- India + Pakistan fighting over Kashmir.
1966:
Sep- NATO HQ moved to Brussels.
1967:
Jun- Six-day war, Israel + Arab states.
Aug- ASEAN established.
1968:
Jul- Brezhnev Doctrine.
Aug- Warsaw Pact invaded Czechoslovakia.
Nov- Nixon elected.
1969:
Nov- Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
1970:
Apr- SALT talks begin.
1971:
Oct- UN admits China, expelling Taiwan.
1972:
Feb- Nixon visits China.
May- Nixon visits USSR. SALT I signed.
Nov- Nixon re-elected.
1973:
Oct- Yom Kippur War.
1974:
Aug- Nixon resigns over Watergate.
1975:
Apr- Communist victory in Nam + Cambodia.
Aug- Helsinki Final Act signed.
1976:
Feb- SEATO disbanded.
Sep- Mao dies.
 4

Nov- Carter elected.

1977:
Jun- US plans deploy cruise missiles.
Dec- USSR deploys SS-20s in Europe.
1978:
May- UN special session on disarmament.
1979:
Jan- US + China open diplomatic relations.
Jun- Carter + Brezhnev sign SALT II.
Nov- US hostage crisis in Tehran.
Dec- USSR invades Afghanistan.
1980:
May- Tito dies.
Aug- Mass strikes in Poland.
Sep- Iraq attacks Iran.
Nov- Reagan elected.
1981:
Jan- US hostages released in Iran.
Apr- Argentina seizes Falkland Islands.
Nov- Brezhnev dies, Andropov replaces.
1983:
Mar- Reagan promoted SDI.
Oct- US troops invade Grenada.
Dec- USSR walks out of START talks.
1984:
Feb- Andropov dies, Chernenko replaces
Nov- Reagan re-elected.
1985:
Mar- Chernenko dies, Gorbachev replaces.
Sep- USSR criticised SDI at UN.
Nov- Reagan + Gorbachev summit.
1986:
Apr- Chernobyl disaster.
1987:
Dec- Summit in Washington, Reagan + Gorbachev.
1988:
Feb- Gorbachev announces withdrawal Afghanistan.
May- Summit in Moscow, Reagan + Gorbachev sign INF treaty.
 5

Nov- Bush elected.

1989:
Apr- USSR withdraws from Hungary.
Jun- Tiananmen Square massacre.
Sep- Hungary opens borders with Austria.
Oct- Honecker forced to resign E. Germany.
Nov- Berlin Wall collapses, Czech Comm Party resigns.
Dec- E. G, L, Latvia parliaments abolish. position Comm Party. Ceausescu executed.
1990:
Jan- Bulg. parliament abolishes S. position Comm Party.
Mar- Lith. parliament declares independence. Estonia P votes succession USSR.
May- Latvian P declares independence.
Jun- Bush/Gorbachev summit in Washington.
Jul- NATO declares formal end of Cold War.
Aug- Iraq invades Kuwait.
Oct- German unification. Gorbachev wins Nobel Peace Prize.
Nov- CFE Treaty + Paris Charter signed. Ends econ + mili division of Europe.
1991:
Feb- Warsaw Pact disbanded. UN forces expel Iraq from Kuwait.
Apr- Georgia declares independence from USSR.
Jun- Yeltsin becomes Pr of Russia.
Aug- Fail coup Gorbachev. Est, Lat, Lith, Ukr, Bel declare independence.
Sep- 11,000 USSR troops removed Cuba.
Dec- Ukr votes ind. Rus, Ukr, Bel declare USSR not exist. Gorbachev resigns.

*US PRESIDENTIAL POLICIES DURING COLD WAR*

P. Truman (1945-1953)

• Policy ideas- Containment - Truman Doctrine

● How put into practice- Marshall Plan, NATO, NSC-68, Increase in mili spending setting
up mili bases around world, Support groups resisting Comm groups like S. Korea +
Taiwan.
● Successes- Containment- successful in EU, Marshall Plan rebuilt EU economies, Berlin
blockade resisted, W. Germany created as democratic + econ stable country, Japan
emerging as strong anti-Comm country, Comm in Korea contained.
 6

● Failures- Involved US in Indochina- failed appreciate complexity Asian nationalism,

Massive increase mili spending as NSC-68, China now enemy.
● Legacy- Huge commitment defence democracy + anti-Comm govs worldwide,
Commitment Indochina + massive mili expenditure.

P. Eisenhower (1953-1961)

● Policy ideas- Containment- ‘New Look’ and ‘Massive Retaliation’, Domino effect,
Eisenhower Doctrine, no attempts liberate Comm territory.
● How put into practice- Continuation Truman's actions, also increased reliance on nukes,
used covert operations by CIA, Economic aid + intervention M-East, more prepared
negotiate with USSR.
● Successes- Containment- successful in EU, West still in Berlin, strengthened NATO, K.
war ended, Massive retaliation policy deterred Chinese actions against Taiwan, Lebanon
+ Jordan allies in M. East secured friendly gov. in Iran after CIA coup 1953, Competent
handling of Suez crisis, attempted control mili spending, Achieved better relations with
USSR.
● Failures- Indochina: failed take part 1956 elections discredited US aims in Nam,
Supported Diem who was oppressive ruler. CIA intervention Guatemala + Iran
condemned US as imperialist, Reliance on covert operations made CIA too powerful,
Embarrassment over U-2 flight.
● Legacy- Left Kennedy difficult legacy, unsolved problems Cuba, Nam + Laos, also crisis
US-Soviet relations after U-2 incident, CIA planning Invasion Cuba.

P. Kennedy (1961-1963)

● Policy ideas- Containment- flexible response, Domino effect.

● How put into practice- Continuation of Truman's actions, continued Eisenhower's policy
of increasing reliance of nukes, built up conventional forces + use of CIA, prepared
negotiate with USSR, introduced Green Beret as counter insurgency force, wanted give
aid to dev. countries, Peace corps send young Americans to 3rd World countries to give
aid.
● Successes- Containment- successful in EU as safeguarded West position Berlin,
successful handling Khrushchev at Vienna Summit, skilful handling CMC, US maintains
nuke supremacy, starts space programme + arms agreements with USSR, Hot-line
established.
● Failures- Econ aid sent to L-America, US achieved aims, Bay Pigs humiliating for US,
increased aid to S. Nam, tied into supporting South after Diem was assassinated.
 7

● Legacy- Improved relations with USSR, acceptance of nuke danger + beginning arms
control agreements, Germany removed as issue, CMC resolved, space programme
established, US in increasingly difficult position in Nam.

P. Johnson (1963-1969)

● Policy ideas- Containment and Domino effect.

● How put into practice- Continuation of Truman's actions and US commitment in M-East
+ Asia stepped up, Involvement Nam as sent troops, helped anti-Comm groups Latin
America.
● Success- Containment- continued to be successful, major crises when he was in power.
● Failures- Intervention DR support Conservative junta against counter-coup to restore
democratic gov of Bosch, he said rev smashed by leading democracy in world, failed
stop escalation of Nam conflict, Tet Offensive major US failure.
● Legacy- Divided opinion US role in world, questioning of US involvement in Nam.

P. Nixon (1969-1974)

● Policy ideas- peace with honour in Nam, need for new relationship with USSR + China,
remove focus from Nam, Nixon Doctrine + idea of linkage.
● How put into practice- Withdrawal from Nam 1973, Detente with USSR + China as trade
agreements + summits.
● Successes- Withdrawal troops form Nam, improved relations USSR + China, arms
agreement SALT I.
● Failures- Unable secure financial support S. Nam as fell Comm in 1975, Invasion
Cambodia failure + helped lead Pol Pot's victory, SALT agreement not comprehensive,
some say Detente failure.
● Legacy- arms agreements but arms race continued, PRC now in UN, concern from US
that Detente benefiting USSR.

P. Carter (1977-1981)

● Policy ideas- Wanted continue Detente + arms control, believed in ethical foreign policy,
Carter Doctrine.
● How put into practice- Linked arms control reduction to human rights issues, after USSR
Afghan Invasion stopped exports to USSR + increased defence budget.
● Successes- Raised awareness human rights issues, Camp David Agreement caused peace
between Israel + Egypt, Panama Canal Treaty ended dispute about who owned as gave
 8

to Panama if keep neutral by 1999, Helsinki Agreement, US recognise Comm gov in

China.
● Failures- Lacked ability have clear approach towards USSR as division in administration,
SALT II never ratified, Ongoing hostage crisis in Iran (resolved on last day in office).
● Legacy- Belief that US need assert self in world, caused election of Reagan.

P. Reagan (1981-1989)

● Policy ideas- Re-assertion US power, Reagan Doctrine, Reduction of nukes.

● How put into practice- Increase defence spending, New missiles developed, SDI, CIA in
covert operations, Support of anti-Comm insurgents in Central America, after 1985
involved in arms reduction talks with USSR in series of Summits.
● Successes- Star Wars made USSR negotiate, INF treaty signed with USSR to reduce nuke
stocks, Meeting with Gorbachev reduce CW hostility.
● Failures- Approach to USSR early 1980s raised tension ‘evil empire’, Policy in C-America
received criticism as US seen as support right-wing govs.
● Legacy- End of CW.

*USSR LEADERS DURING THE COLD WAR*

L. Stalin (1924-1953)

● Policy ideas- Stalinism- rapid industrialization, totalitarian state, collectivization of

agriculture.
● How put into practice- Did this through agricultural + economic plans, resulted in mass
purges + clashes between classes, rural areas industrialized into cities.
● Successes- Construction of socialist economy, Splitting imperialist camp, Defeat of Hitler
fascism + Japanese imperialism, Industrialisation of Empire,
● Failures- Killed millions through agrarian reforms + secret police, starving as agrarian
reforms, resources sent to centre of USSR.
● Legacy- Was first leader of CW, remembered throughout history as evil, De-Stalinization
occurred later to dismantle his policies and beliefs.
 9

L. Malenkov (1953-1953)

● Policy ideas- Foreign policy, continued Stalin’s purges + legacy, called for cuts in mili,
reformed.
● How put into practice- after Stalin’s death he continued his legacy, lasted little as leader
as was hated.
● Successes- decreased mili spending, improved conditions compared to Stalin.
● Failures- Khrushchev overtook him as leader, was not effective enough, failed to defeat
Khrushchev.
● Legacy- Remembered for being the figure of Stalin’s purges.

L. Khrushchev (1953-1964)

● Policy ideas- Agricultural reforms- introduced planting of corn to reduce poverty and
hunger, increased education, anti-religion movement, tried Peaceful Coexistence with
the W, aimed to reduce nukes, De Stalinization.
● How put into practice- Put into practice through his policies.
● Successes- was successful in struggle for power after Stalin died, de-Stalinisation,
Peaceful Coexistence, prevented MAD.
● Failures- CMC.
● Legacy- Stopped MAD as preventing nuke war because of CMC.

L. Brezhnev (1962-1982)

● Policy ideas- Brezhnev doctrine, increased cultural freedom and economic

development, agricultural policy,
● How put into practice- Brezhnev doctrine, did to justify invasion of Czechoslovakia, agr
reform, improved relations with China.
● Successes- increased wages and econ development, promoted detente, wanted
decrease nukes + arms race.
● Failures- Brezhnev’s final years were a failure as he became an alcohol + ill health,
caused stagnation in USSR.
● Legacy- Known for uniting people and improving economy like pre-Stalin era.

L. Andropov (1982-1984)

● Same as Chernenko, didn't do much.

 10

L. Chernenko (1984-1985)

● Policy ideas- negotiated trade pact with China,

● How put into practice- foreign policy.
● Successes- trade with China
● Failures- didn't do much to help economy, increased trade with China.
● Legacy- not remembered for much.

L. Gorbachev (1985-1991)

● Policy ideas- Glasnost, Perestroika, Sinatra Doctrine, reform country, open borders etc...
● How put into practice- did this via his policies.
● Successes- Ended the CW, improved situations in the USSR, removed borders and
tension, received Nobel Peace Prize.
● Failures- Sometimes used force, In the West was seen as man who caused collapse of
the USSR.
● Legacy- Remembered for ending CW tension and collapsing USSR.

*COLD WAR GOES GLOBAL: KOREAN WAR AND NSC-68*

U.S. Foreign Policy 1949-1950

NATO established April 1949, USA optimistic Communists contained Europe, first by Truman
Doctrine, now NATO. NATO cheap option USA, power rested A. bomb. USA not invest huge
money developing conventional forces W. Europe to match Sov. Red Army. USA relied nukes,
after WW2 had demobilised troops, USSR had not. Autumn, 1949 key events shift power to
USSR:
- Got nukes
- China fell Communism (Mao Zedong)

USSR gets bomb

USA lost its ace card. USSR achieved quicker than expected cause of spies.
 11

China falls to Communism

Chinese Civil War (1945-1949) USA given little support Nationalists (Chiang Kai-Shek). When
country fell Communism, white paper stated USA couldn't have prevented. Chiang was too
unpopular. It was collapse of Nationalism than Communist victory. White paper = Mao
independent Moscow. Acheson stated Nationalism collapsed, soldiers didn't want fight.
Communist Mao troops seen as fanatical liberators taking advantage of people + situation.

Red Scare: McCarthyism + anti-Communist crusade USA

Feeling strong in US after WW2, reached peak 1950s, Senator Joseph R. McCarthy encouraged
+ alleged Soviet conspiracy place Communists into key jobs in US. These accusations led purges
+ show trials for un-American behaviour. Similar to Stalin’s 1930s. Affected every level, nobody
safe from suspicion. Most infamous Julius, Ethel Rosenberg spying, executed 1953. 1950s
people brainwashed anti-Communist. McCarthy claimed Truman administration Communist
influence, all American liberals Communists. February 1950 Acheson forced make speech
appeasing McCarthyites. Truman + Acheson seen as soft on Communism. Acheson decided
reconsider findings 1949 White Paper China. People who agreed with Acheson lost jobs,
valuable workers dismissed.
Continued pressure, Truman called review foreign, defence policy, response new threats
perceived resulting Chinese Comm. Victory + USSR nuke.
Truman not able recognise legitimacy new Chinese Gov.

NSC-68: ‘Total Commitment’

Was report from U.S. National Security Council 1950. Was one key document Cold War.
It warned how all Communist activity traced back Moscow. Indicated growth of Communism. It
was ‘Monolithic View’ Communism. It advised US to always be alert. Increased military $35-$50
billion.
It encouraged military + economic aid to countries fighting Communism.
Revisionist historians criticised American perceptions Soviet intentions expressed in policy.
Based on false premise, excuse US expansionist.

The Korean War: first hot war

Truman's democratic party difficult elections Nov. 1950. Wanted shelve issues of recognition
China + commitment Asia + recommendations NSC-68. 25 June 1950 90,000 North Koreans
 12

invaded. Truman not enough time, whether total commitment on global scale wise. North
attack seen as Soviet expansionist as assumed orders Stalin. Failure action undermine USA
containment + ‘domino effect’. Truman says N. Korea take Korea, Korea Asia, Asia Middle East,
Middle East Europe.

US sent aid South, US sent troops to UN. If UN ignore would make same mistakes as League
Nations. USSR boycotted Security Council protest refusal China attend. 1 July US troops arrived
Korea, joined by 15 Nations later, UN commander was General MacArthur.

Course of the war

Several dramatic changes course war first months, stalemate situation lasted armistice 1953:
- Push by North sent deep S. Korea, leaving Pusan. American + S. Korean pushed back to
here.
- General MacArthur led UN amphibious landing Incheon, bypass Korean troops + cut off.
Within month retaken Seoul + driven N back 38th parallel.
- Encouraged by success, US redefined war aims + changed to rollback. UN forces
captured Pyongyang in Oct.
- March to Yalu River, concerned China's security 27 Nov. 1950, 200,000 Chinese joined
150,000 Norths, sent UN rapid retreat. Pyongyang recaptured December, end 1950
Norths + allies all land till 38th parallel. Heavy US casualties + prisoners.
- Stalemate around 38th parallel.
- Truman followed containment again, MacArthur disagreed as believed communist
conspirators in Asia take over world. He was dismissed.
- Peace talks began 1951, focus repatriation POWs.
- War continued 2 more years, fighting continued, serious casualties (40% US casualties
during period). USA pressured China by threatening with A. bomb.
- Military armistice signed Panmunjom July, 1953.

General Douglas MacArthur (1880-1964)

Fought WW1, received 13 medals bravery. Chief of Staff US Army 1930, WW2 was Commander
against Japanese. Responsible for successful island-hopping. After surrender he developed new
constitution. 70 years in charge UN Korean war. Dismissed by Truman 1951, a. bomb against
China. Returned US + greater as hero, unsuccessful president candidate 1952.
 13

Why did North Korea attack South Korea in 1950?

Background to conflict
Japan annexed Korea 1910, still occupation Korea after WW2. Korean Nationalists led rev. 1945,
included communists, not allowed decide fate Korea 1945, agreed by USA + USSR two
superpowers take joint responsibility repatriating Japanese forces. 38th parallel line divided
point, USSR occupying N. Korea + USA S. Korea.
Intended be temporary arrangement, at Council of Foreign Ministers Moscow Dec. 1945 US +
USSR agreed creation Korean Provisional gov, short period international trusteeship, eventually
leading independence.

Difficult achieve as:

- Cold War developed, USA + USSR less willing cooperate.
- Separate administrations emerged either side 38th parallel. In south US military gov
made Syngman Rhee (rebel who fought Japanese). Soviets supported Communist,
backed faction led by Kim Il Sung (Russian trained Korean Communist, guerrilla against
Japan). Both men different but in common: both Korean nationalists, want end division
of Korea + saw as leader of United Korea.

As tension grew, division Korea confirmed 1947. USA persuaded UN establish commission
supervise Korean elections. Commission refused entry into N, observed separate election in
South May, 1948. Most Koreans opposed partition, Republic of Korea set up in South by
Syngman. Undemocratic + anti Communist administration. Democratic Peoples Republic of
Korea founded in North Kim Il Sung Sept. 1948. Cold War institutionalised Korean Civil War in
two hostile states.
USA supported Syngman Rhee with economic + military aid, not aim station troops there.
Soviets left in 1948 + USA 1949. Europe still more important than Asia for US. Acheson's speech
1950 said S. Korea + Taiwan excluded US defence perimeter.

Why did the superpowers get involved?

Orthodox historians believed U.S. views 1950, attack initiated by Stalin. Revisionist historians,
Stalin no role in Invasion, North responding attacks South. 1981 USSR control DPRK ‘flimsy’ Kim
Il Sung possibly acted independently. 1990, roles of Kim and Stalin came out.
 14

Role of Kim starting war?

He wanted unify country like Syngman. Civil war would have occurred anyway. Neither side
unify by self, Needed support USA + USSR. Kim tried persuade Stalin to back him. Stalin didn't
want to but agreed. War came from Pyongyang. Stalin didn't invade but supported Kim.

Role of Stalin starting war?

Initially unwilling agree Kim but approved early 1950. Why though:
- Possibly. As China fell Communism, now had a. bomb, facing economic problems, good
time invade Asia.
- Possibly. USA making Japan anti-Communist as won war, Stalin wanted Korea secure
soviet position N.E. Asia.
- Possibly. Acheson's perimeter speech tempt Stalin invade as don't involve USA
supposedly.
Stalin didn't support N. Korea much, remained cautious, had more important challenges. Stalin
took advantage proximity China. Mao supported N. Korea. Soviet commanders involved
Invasion.

Role of Mao in outbreak war?

Kim visited People's Republic China, Mao sceptical over Invasion, Kim made Stalin sound more
enthusiastic, at time Mao planning invade Taiwan. Mao believed if support Korea, Stalin help
invade Taiwan. Mao approved, Kim told not necessary put troops Korean border. Mao little
attention on preparations in N. Korea. Massive tank attack on S. surprised S, Mao, USA. Made
USA take rapid action.

Results of war

Actions of USA
Feared Soviets carry out more attacks elsewhere so:
- NSC-68 triple defence budget.
- U.S. land forces Europe strengthened.
- NATO strengthened. Greece + Turkey brought into Nato, military bases in Turkey
(border USSR)
- Need W. Germany armed + join NATO priority.

Korean war accelerated these U.S. policies.

 15

In Asia, USA also took steps contain Communist threats:

- Treaty San Francisco (Japan) signed 1952. USA keep bases Japan + help country econ.
- Taiwan defended as well. US sent fleet defend. Post-Korea war USA supported +
recognised as only official Chinese state.
- China seen as threat by UN + USA, not allowed seat UN security Council.
- USA supported other anti-Communist regimes, Vietnam + Philippines
- SEATO formed contain Communism.

What did the war mean for other countries?

-Korea- cost lives + property vast. No hope reunification. No longer local but Cold War. 38th
parallel became heavily armed. North Korea Communist. South heavy investment for US +
Japan.
-China- Isolated by US, reputation grew, major power. Preserved Rev., took on USA + defended
Korea. Resources used for war instead of helping rebuild. Unify Taiwan harder. Less likely rely
on Moscow for help.
-USSR- kept out of Korea, results of the war not good for them. USA tripled defence budget,
rearm W. Germany, maintain troops EU + fight Communism Asia. USSR involved broader,
intense Cold War Standoff than 1950.
S-E-Asia- USA NSC policy involved in Asia. Saw every Communist country as USSR, involved in
Cold War. These countries needed help USSR, China. Vietnam, USA, USSR, China involved
fighting.

Effects Korean War on Cold War

Caused globalisation CW. USA + USSR found fighting Asia, Europe other parts. Militarization of
Cold War. US defence increased, 1950 10% GNP US. In EU also boost, helped boost econ. In
USSR, Red Army 2.8 million 1950, 5.8 million 1955. Post Stalin Thaw cut mili spending,
continued nuke programme.

*HUNGARIAN UPRISING*

Warsaw treaty signed 1955 to justify USSR troops in Hungary. Countries in E. Europe allowed
find ways Socialism on 2 conditions:
- Not leave bloc
- Not undermine Soviet rule system.

Strikes in Poland 1956 spread to Nagy in Hungary. Clear breach in Soviet front line not
tolerated, Ulbricht + other bloc leaders adopted hard line approach to reformists.
 16

Many Hungarians wished go further than neighbours tolerate. Encouraged by unrealistic

propaganda + how far exploit circumstances of de-Stalinization + hopeful to achieve Austrian
model. Nagy tried negotiate balance nationalist + democratic aspirations.

Polish crisis ended in compromise nationalist comm leaders promoted against Moscow's wishes
in return for leading role of party.

Nagy changed mind, hoped for compromise as well like in Yugoslavia. Hungary attempting
abandon bloc. USSR tanks intervened to crush + stop Domino effect in bloc. Dulles said not
intervene as too great risk of war. Britain + France conflict in Egypt. US used Suez to avoid
criticism.

Aftermath Hungarian Invasion

US accepted Soviet sphere of influence. USSR portrayed as imperialist power. Western

Propaganda changed to not create false hope. Khrushchev showed anti-imperialist credentials
over Suez crisis.
Second term Eisenhower CW appear bitter confrontations. Not true as US did everything
possible prevent war like giving aid to rev countries etc… Aid given Poland so follow Gomulka
national gov.
Poland tried created nuclear free zone in E. Europe as scared USSR dominance + nuke war.
Crisis led to USSR making more nukes, credibility gap + Eisenhower calling their bluff.

*HOW THE CUBAN MISSILE CRISIS ALMOST CAUSED A NUCLEAR WAR*

CMC perhaps most dramatic between US + USSR. Lasted 13 days. Both sides close nuclear war.
Both leaders under domestic pressure prove themselves. All started with Castro overthrew
Cuba Gov. 1959.

TIMELINE OF EVENTS

● 1959
➢ JAN 1st: Castro seizes power.
➢ JAN 7th: Batista's supporters executed + USA recognises Cuban gov.
➢ APRIL: Castro visits the US to negotiate aid for their industrialisation programme. US
would only fund Cuba if it followed the IMF guidelines. Request for loan from
Organisation of American states turned down.
 17

➢ MAY: Agrarian reform law introduced. The USA became convinced Cuba Communist
+ hostility increased.
● 1960
➢ FEB: USSR's first deputy minister visits Cuba. 5-year treaty signed (USSR buy 5 mil.
tons sugar + give $100 mil. credit to Cuba buy machinery + material) + secretly
agrees send arms.
➢ MARCH: First shipment USSR arms arrives Cuba. Eisenhower orders CIA train exiles
for future Cuba attack.
➢ JUNE: Castro seizes Texaco + Esso oil refineries after refuse accept Russian oil.
➢ JULY: Eisenhower reduces Cuban sugar quota by 700,000 tons. Soviets agree buy
surplus sugar.
➢ AUG: Castro expropriates US industrial property + nationalized banks. USA
presented document to OAS charging Cuba introducing Comm. into W. sphere. Not
supported by OAS.
➢ OCT 7th: Kennedy calls Cuba Communist menace in election speech.
➢ OCT 19th: Cuba expropriates +166 US companies cause of embargo. US proclaims
embargo on Cuba except food + medicine. USSR signed new sugar quota.
➢ NOV: US suspends quota for 1961.
• 1961
➢ JAN 2nd: Castro ordered US embassy cut staff to 11. Eisenhower breaks diplomatic
relations.
➢ APRIL 14th: Castro announces his regime is Socialist.
➢ APRIL 15th: US Air strike Cuba
➢ APRIL 17th: Bay of Pigs landing
➢ APRIL 19th: Cubans victorious against Invasion.
➢ NOV 30th: USA begins Operation Mongoose.
➢ DEC 2nd: Castro declares as Marxist/Leninist. For USA Castro's Speech greeted with
enthusiasm by locals. USSR didn't comment on Castro's speech.
• 1962
➢ FEB: US trade embargo (except food + medicine) + Cuba expelled OAS
➢ MAY: Cuba economic situation bad, signs trade agreement with China.
➢ JUNE: For Cuba sugar production 2 million tons lower than 1961. USSR new trade
agreement with Cuba.
➢ OCT 14th: US spy planes photo missile sites.
➢ OCT 16th: ExComm set up
➢ OCT 22nd: Kennedy publicly announced Cuban quarantine.
➢ OCT 24: USSR ships turn back
➢ OCT 26: Khrushchev sends first telegram + US spy plane shot down.
 18

➢ OCT 27th: Secret meeting Robert Kennedy + Anatoly. Khrushchev sends second
telegram.
➢ OCT 28: Khrushchev agrees withdraw missiles.
➢ NOV: Castro refuses UN inspectors into Cuba. In USA Democrats maintain control
mid-term elections.

BACKGROUND TO CUBAN MISSILE CRISIS

Why was the US opposed to Castro's revolution?

1959 Castro overthrew pro US Batista. Cuba only 145 km from Florida. As Cuba in US sphere of
influence wanted Cuban gov. be pro-US. In Economic arena US companies controlled most
financial, railway, elec, telegraph + sugar industries. Platt Agreement 1902 (USA and Cuba) gave
US rights naval base Guantanamo Bay. Also stipulates US create excuse to invade. Clear that US
administration intend decide whether Cuba acceptable.

Castro takes power

7th Jan. 1959, Castro realised Batista lost support of Cubans. US recognised new Fidel run gov.
(won 7-year guerrilla war campaign). US hoped control events in Cuba by economic interests +
large pro. US Middle class. At first Castro not Communist, just democracy + social justice. April
1959 Castro went USA in hope receive support for reform Cuba.

Castro's Rev. reforms involved nationalisation of US econ. interests. Most pro US Cubans
moved to USA. US tried restrict Castro by refusing funding. In Feb. 1960 USSR gave Castro
economic aid. The involvement of USSR came as threat to USA as was on US’ doorstep.

Who was Fidel Castro?

Was born in wealthy land owning-family. Graduated as lawyer in Havana. He hated how
everything was run by USA. Batista overthrew the Gov and stopped Castro. Planned attack
barracks. 1 time almost died. When Castro released from prison fought a war against Batista's
men. Marched into Havana and became new leader 1959.
 19

How did US deal with Castro ‘threat’?

US decided deal situation by:

- Economic embargo (all exports except food + medicine)
- Organising mili. Invasion of Cuba + overthrow.

Embargo failed as Castro signed more econ. agreements with USSR. Bay of Pigs ended
humiliation.

Why Bay of Pigs Invasion failure?

March 1960, Eisenhower approved CIA overthrow Castro. Trained Cuban exiles for Invasion at
Bay Pigs. Kennedy continued plan when elected. Invasion failure (1,214 of 1,400 captured).
Later released for $53 mil. of food + machinery.

Humiliation Kennedy + admin. Blamed by all parties for allowing take place. Now we know it
was fault CIA. Underestimated strength Castro. Invasion strengthened Castro's support. Exiles
lacked ammo + air support (Castro's fire power greater). US didn't supply US air support to
distance from involvement.

Results of failure Bay of Pigs Invasion?

Kennedy lost prestige in US + World. Set back his attempt identify US as anti-colonialism.
Castro support increased. Said US scared of 7 mil people country.
Khrushchev now had info criticise US. Other Latin countries outraged as feared US imperialism
in area.
Strengthened Cuba's relation USSR. After attack Castro Marxist-Leninist + signed defensive
alliance USSR. USA unable stop flow supplies + advisers from USSR.

USA (Operation Mongoose) attempted reverse Cuba Rev. Involved sabotage economic targets
(sugar + petroleum sites) + assassination attempts Castro + advisers + isolation Cuba (expelled
OAS 1962). US mili pressured Cuba by training near Puerto Rico.

Cuban Missile Crisis

 20

Why Khrushchev missiles in Cuba?

1962, Khrushchev put IRBMs in Cuba. Was provocative action, threatened US.

Khrushchev said that about time for US people to feel threatened. Justified as US missiles in
Turkey + was way redressing balance.

Khrushchev aimed seize Propaganda advantage after humiliating Berlin Wall + bargaining chip
against US missiles in EU.

Some historians believe missiles Cuba prevent another Invasion. Kennedy's failure showed
determination crush Rev. If US succeed would be defeat Comm worldwide. Turkey missiles
justified actions. Khrushchev concerned about future Comm.

Why presence missiles intolerable for US?

14th Oct 1962, U-2 spy plane found construction of launchpads for 64 IRBMs.

Cuban missiles not affect worldwide nuke balance. Increase USSR first strike capability
increased + warning time for US decreased. For US public felt like balance changed (End of
World!!!!!)
Prestige of Kennedy + USA at stake. Cuba close to US but also where Bay of Pigs failure.
Congressional elections take place early Nov. For Demc. Party elections with missiles Cuba
disaster for Kennedy admin. Kennedy had to take action!!!

How Crisis Resolved?

Kennedy summoned crisis management team (ExComm) deal with C. missiles. Known as '13
days’. Kennedy rejected mili. to air strike + invade Cuba. Instead naval blockade of island.
Kennedy made the quarantine public as said on TV. Khrushchev ignored quarantine + sent
USSR ships with warheads. 24th Oct, 6 USSR ships turned back. Dean Rusk, US Secretary State
said ‘we're eyeball to eyeball’. Missiles remained in Cuba.
26th Oct, Khrushchev sent telegram Kennedy saying to USSR remove missiles if US not invade
Cuba. At point Khrushchev thought US invade. Khrushchev warned US of MAD.

Before Kennedy respond, Khrushchev sent second telegram saying remove Turkish nukes as
well. U-2 spy plane shot down over Cuba without USSR permission. This increased chance mili.
action. US didn't know nukes were ready use.
 21

Kennedy saw mili. action last resort. Accepted first offer + refused second. At time Robert
Kennedy (brother) met Anatoly to agree US remove missiles Turkey.

28th Oct, Khrushchev cabled Kennedy + agreed remove all missiles Cuba if US not invade.
Turkey negotiation remained secret.

Kennedy effective handling CMC?

Orthodox View
Kennedy successfully used brinkmanship preserve peace. His brother + others supported this:
- Kennedy right respond in forceful way; the missiles were soviet threat (alter balance in
appearance/actuality).
- Blockade exerted max pressure on USSR with minimum risk war.
- Kennedy remained calm + in control. Resisted pressure from own mili. + was statesman
like as didn't humiliate Khrushchev.
- Results crisis helped preserve balance + peace.

Revisionist View
Kennedy unnecessarily raised level crisis + confrontation subjecting World to danger nuke war.
Supporting arguments:
- Missile not threat nuke balance, US not under great threat, was political problem.
- The blockade + how Kennedy made crisis public made unnecessary dangerous situation.
- Kennedy only interested personal + national prestige. Nov elections meant Kennedy
wanted sit. solve quickly, couldn't wait long negotiations.
- Aftermath caused US increase activity Vietnam.

New Interpretations
Recent evidence says Kennedy acted statesmanlike way, prepared compromise not motivated
by self-interest. Tape recordings ExComm meetings show Kennedy pushing for compromise
(aware dangers nuke war). Deceived ExComm by secret Turkish agreement. 1987 revealed had
other option. UN Secretary General ordered suggest Turkish-Cuba trade off Kennedy would
accept.

Conclusions about Khrushchev's actions?

Khrushchev able claim victory over CMC. Argued Kennedy promised not invade, existence
Socialist Cuba in USSR influence guaranteed. Khrushchev prepared back down if go to nuke war
 22

even though humiliating for USSR. USSR army angry as cuts, even more had withdraw Cuba +
US officials count missiles. Castro furious as wasn't consulted or involved in negotiation +
bombers removed. Castro left with Guantanamo base, US missiles removed from Turkey 1963.
Khrushchev had work hard rebuild relations Castro to prevent Sino-Cuban alliance from
forming. Khrushchev acted in “realist” manner like Stalin.

What Castro's role in Crisis?

Now know Castro played greater role developing CMC. Especially 24-26 Oct. He said he would
have used nukes in Cuba if US invaded. Shooting down of U-2 spy plane showed difficulties
Kennedy + Khrushchev faced.

What were results of Crisis for…

USA?
Kennedy's personal prestige increased. Shocked US into building mili. strength.

USSR?
Despite claim victory, CMC humiliating defeat Khrushchev (led fall from power 1964). USSR
itself didn't suffer.

Cuba?
Castro remained power, no threat US Invasion. Cuba followed own foreign policy independent
from Moscow. Havana centre for rev. activity + educating, training, spreading Rev. In Africa, C.
America. Castro regime continued rely USSR for aid + funding.

China?
Saw resolution of Crisis as USSR unwilling challenge US (proof of longer Rev state). Relationship
with USSR worsened. Independently developed nukes.

Wider international situation?

Orthodox View = world made more secure:
- Hotline established USA + USSR, immediate telephone communication easier.
- Both sides realised danger nuke war. Test-ban treaty Aug 1964 (forbid nuclear tests in
atmosphere, space, water) China + France didn't sign. Also, Nuclear Non-Proliferation
Treaty 1968 (how make non-nuke powers).
 23

Recent Interpretations point arms treaties not prevent arms race (intensified CMC even though
conducted under precise rules). World more secure after CMC (more stability, neither side
challenge other's sphere of influence.

*WHY WAS GERMANY SUCH A SOURCE OF TENSION?*

The two Germanys

By 1949, Germany become 2 countries. This division fuelled the Cold War until 1961.
Differences existed between West and East Germany in Economic + Political spheres.

Economic differences between East + West Germany

Economically, West larger with greater industrial output + population. West received Marshall +
1950-60s experienced ‘economic miracle’ + standards living for most W. Germans increased. In
E. Germany, leader Ulbricht's Post-1949 programme (forced collectivisation farms +
socialisation) disastrous for economy. Led to hardship + drop living standards in East. Many fled
to West via Berlin.

Political differences between West + East Germany

Politically, W. had democracy. E. had no free elections since 1946, 1950s was Stalinist,
authoritarian state. E. had riots 1953 against situation. Workers in E. + Europe rose up. Riots put
down by USSR tanks. Was first major rebellion in USSR.

Cause of differences E.+ W. gave up unite as 1 country. Changing situation riskier. Tension
remained in Berlin. Khrushchev described “fishbone in E. Germany's gullet.”

Why Berlin Crisis develop?

Khrushchev + Crisis 1958

Post-blockade Berlin divided US, British, French, Soviet occupation. Econ. + Pol. inequalities of 2
German's seen by differences W + E Berlin. West glittering + prime example what Capitalism
achieve. Also, political freedom + open lifestyle. These factors caused E. Berliners escape via
Frontier Berlin. Could travel to West by train, subway, emigration easy.
 24

Young + skilled E. Germans leaving, encouraged by West, 1945-61 about ⅙ Germán population
left via Berlin. Divided Berlin also allowed West keep Propaganda + espionage base 186km deep
into E. Germany.

1958, Khrushchev proposed peace treaty recognise existence 2 Germanys. 27 Nov. Same year
demanded Berlin demilitarised, W. Troops withdraw + become ‘free city’. If West not agree
within 6 months threatened close access to GDR (E. Germany). Dangerous situation. West
couldn't give up Propaganda base + lose face, resist Khrushchev could mean war.

Why was Khrushchev prepared create tension over this crisis? Below:
- USSR fear W. Germany getting nukes.
- Concern failing E. G. economy.
- Pressure from Ulbricht (leader GDR).

In face W. outrage to proposal, he dropped Ultimatum. Was successful forcing Allies discuss
German question. Feb. 59, agreed foreign ministers conference meet Geneva in Summer. At
Geneva both sides proposed unity, no agreement secured. Sept. 59, Khrushchev met
Eisenhower at USA. No agreement reached. Summit 1960 called off as U2 spy plane shot down.

Number refugees fleeing East increased Ulbricht frustrated as Khrushchev fail solve problem.
Wanted solved immediately.

Khrushchev hoped achieve better concessions with inexperienced Kennedy.

Kennedy + Flexible response

Elected 1960. Approach Containment was policy ‘Flexible response’ which involved:
- More spending conventional forces
- Enlarging nuke arsenal.
- Continuing CIA covert work
- Giving econ. aid to dev. countries resist Comm.
- Continuing neg. USSR

Kennedy broadened range options resist Communism, threat now more diverse. More
geographically diverse + Comm. Forces giving assistance Rev. Movements dev. World. With ‘flex
response’ Kennedy moving away Eisenhower's ‘massive retaliation’ policy
 25

Khrushchev, Ulbricht + Crisis 1960-61

Kennedy met Khrushchev at Vienna Summit 1961. Khrushchev believed exploit Kennedy's
inexperience in foreign affairs + his embarrassing Bay of Pigs Invasion.

Khrushchev renewed Ultimatum Berlin. Kennedy (appear tough with Soviets) not give
concessions. Said Berlin Island of hope surrounded by Comm. sea. Increased mili. spending +
defence programme shelters.

The Wall

Tension growing over Berlin, refugees from E. To W. Increased. 12 Aug. 1961 40,000 escaped.
Khrushchev bowed Ulbricht's pressure +closed border. 13 Aug. 1961, barbed wire erected then
wall.

What did construction of wall mean…

For Khrushchev?
Berlin wall was a defeat, visible admission propaganda failed as had built wall keep people in.
Meant he able regain control + free himself Ulbricht. When wall finished, Khrushchev went back
promise to Ulbricht. Didn't sign separate peace treaty with GDR.

For Ulbricht?
he didn't get peace treaty. Closed Berlin border + soviet assistance helped control GDR.

For the citizens Berlin?

Was horrific experience. Families, friends cut off no hope reunion. Were on front line of CW.

For Cold War?

Germany removed as key issue in CW negotiations. US complained about wall. Tanks
confronted USSR tanks at Checkpoint Charlie. War averted. CW moved from EU but Turkey US
nukes still problem.

Symbolism of the Wall

1961-1989 Berlin Wall stood. Iron Curtain had become a reality in form of wall. After Wall built
Kennedy went to W. Berlin + did “Ich bin ein Berliner” speech. Said W. Berliner strong people
against Communism.
 26

Over next 30 years hundreds killed attempting flee to W. E. German guards ordered shoot to
kill. In 1989 when USSR fell Berlin Wall torn down. Symbol of end Cold War.

*THE US AND CONTAINMENT IN VIETNAM AND TAIWAN*

Case Study: Taiwan

Containment Taiwan also success. US policy changed with outbreak of Korea. Before this USA
no intention help Nationalists resist Invasion Communist China. when N. Korea attacked South
Truman sent Seventh fleet Taiwan straits keep peace Nationalist + Communist Chinese.
Eisenhower withdrew 7 Fleet 1953 to unleash Taiwan Nationalist leader, Chiang Kai-Shek +
allow attack China mainland. Nationalists raided Coast China, used as excuse by Chinese
bombard Islands Quemoy + Matsu + invade Taschen Islands. Congress passed Formosa Res,
allowed Eisenhower take military action defend Taiwan. Threatened China use nukes if invade
Taiwan. Also made USSR pressure China back down.
China bombed Quemoy + Matsu 1958, 7 Fleet ordered Taiwan states + US threatened with
Nukes. China backed down. US unhappy dragged into conflict, USSR worried Mao taking risks.

Containment success in Taiwan?

Brinkmanship by US stopped war. Taiwan continued maintain independence, help US.

Case Study: USA + Containment in Vietnam

Worst failure US Containment, Vietnam. N. Vietnamese Communist not contained. 10 years

military involvement. US left 1973. Feared Asian countries falling Domino effect Communism
like Cambodia + Laos.

How did US get involved?

Indochina (Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos) was French Colony, occupied WW2 by Jap. Nationalist
movement grown during time, Vietnam no desire returns French Post 1945. Ho Chi Minh
(Nationalist) led Vietminh movement (active against Japanese). During defeat Japan, 1945
declared independence for Democratic Republic Vietnam.
 27

French denied, hostilities between French + Vietminh 1946. Roosevelt pressured France give
up. US opinion Ho + Vietminh hardened, Truman President. Due to developing international
situation EU. + Asia (1949). Cold War intensified so did Ho's Communist views, seen by US as
directed by Moscow.
March 1950, military aid sent to French. Continued by Eisenhower. Believed in Domino Theory.

Idea of countries falling dominoes to Communism entrenched US thinking. ‘Domino effect’ =

Vietnam key Domino not allowed to fall. If did fall Laos, Cambodia, Thailand, Burma, Malaya,
Indonesia, Singapore, Japan follow.

US funding 80% war by 1954, Eisenhower no intervene, 1954 French defeated Battle Dien Bien
Phu. Same year Geneva accords agreed, decided that:
- French withdraw Indochina.
- Temporary division Nam at 17th parallel. Ho Chi Minh control North.
- Free elections unite Vietnam 1956.
- No foreign bases.
- Laos + Cambodia independent states

USA no sign Geneva Accords. US strengthened South 17th parallel, non-Communist gov.
Capable resisting Invasion North. Established SEATO. Countries involved agreed meet + take
unanimous vote to take action whether one invaded. Geneva accords, Laos Cambodia remain
neutral. With SEATO US include S. Vietnam + Laos + Cambodia as “protected areas”. Became
legal basin future US action Vietnam.

US backed Ngo Dinh Diem (Catholic educated USA) to lead gov. in south. Oct. 1955, he
established Republic of Vietnam (S. Vietnam) himself being president. millions of US $ sent to
Diem. US began training S. Vietnamese army. 1960, 1000 American military advisers in South.

US presses Diem carry out reform In S. Diem turned out be ruthless leader, with brother (police
chief) crushed opposition brutally. Land reform not happen, Catholic faith promoted even
though most Vietnamese were Buddhist. Became clear brutal family dictatorship emerging S.

1956, Diem, US support, refused elections. Claimed no feel bound by Geneva Accords, not trust
Communists hold elections. Diem + US afraid elections result United, Communist Vietnam.
Estimated Ho Chi Minh win 80% votes if election.
 28

Elections not option, military opposition Diem only option. Groups of “Vietcong” formed into
military units with political arm “National Liberation Front” (NLF). N. Namese supported VC,
much of S. also as become disillusioned with Diem's gov.

USA concerned with ally, Diem, doubted ability maintain preferred option of two ‘Vietnams’
policy.

Ho Chi Minh (1890 1969)

Became Communist while Paris 1917 1923, campaigned unsuccessfully Nam independence at
Versailles Peace Conference 1919. Worked as agent in Asia, then founded Indochina Communist
Party 1930. WW2 formed resistance movement, Vietminh vs. Japanese, received secret US
support. After defeat Japanese 1945 declared ‘Democratic Republic of Vietnam’ in Hanoi. Had to
send Vietminh forces against French, then US. Became symbol nationalism, inspired Namese
resistance against US after death. Former Capital S. Vietnam, Saigon, called Ho Chi Minh City in
his honour.

How did Kennedy widen conflict?

After election Nov. 1960, his policy containing Communism = “Flexible Response”. Meant
administration expanded availability means fighting Communism. Expansion included:
- Increase number US military advisers South. 17,000 by time death Kennedy.
- Counter-insurgency operations against Communist guerrillas South. Included “search
and destroy” missions against Vietcong + defoliants like Agent Orange, destroy jungle
that gave cover. US also supported Strategic Hamlet Program (resettlement Villagers to
fortified villages “kept safe” Communists).
- Introducing Us military Counter-insurgency force, ‘Green Berets’ trained guerrilla
fighting.
- Encouraging Diem introduce social + political reforms.

None measures succeeded limiting growth success VC attacks on S. Strategic Hamlet Program +
spraying Agent Orange alienated local peasant pop. Diem didn't carry out reform programme to
win support, his unpopular actions generated mass discontent peaked 1963 crisis over anti-
Buddhist policies. Laws passed banning celebration Buddha's birthday, mass protests organised
(rallies, hunger strikes, self-immolations). Unrest caused international reaction, especially
when Diem's sister in law said, “Let them burn and we shall clap our hands”. Kennedy's Gov.
started cut of Diem funding. By end 1963 Diem + brother killed in coup. (US knew). Getting rid
of Diem not improve situation, further served increase U.S. commitment Saigon gov. Diem's
assassination morally locked US into Nam.
 29

Why did President Johnson continue Vietnam War?

Lyndon Baines Johnson = President, after Kennedy assassinated Nov. 1963. Inherited situation
no longer stable gov. in South, strength of Communists in S. increases. Inherited Kennedy’s
advisers. These factors increased chances Johnson continue war. He was determined prevent
“Domino effect” + Communism.
Deteriorating situation S. by 1964, Johnson needed increase US commitment to war. Also
needed justification to receive support US public + Congress. “Gulf of Tonkin” involved US in
war. Night August 1964, Maddox (US naval destroyer) was fired on by North Vietnamese while
collecting info. Two days later US said ships allegedly fired on. When returned no physical
damage to ship, ship radar said they were under attack. Johnson called it “open aggression”, US
immediately bombed N. Vietnamese installations. Next day Johnson addressed US Congress
asked to pass Gulf of Tonkin Resolution (authorised President take necessary action prevent
further aggression. Next six years Gulf of Tonkin used as legal basis Nam war.

Once Tonkin Resolution passed, US responded situation Nam by:

- Sustained bombing campaign N. Vietnam, Rolling Thunder.
- Sending 100,000 ground forces to S. Vietnam 1965.General Westmoreland led “Search +
Destroy” missions. 1968 = 520,000 troops Nam.

Bombing targets in S. Provide support ground troops + attack enemy supply routes + bases.
Rockets, bombs + napalm dropped on South, had devastating effects on locals.

The Great Society + ‘Credibility Gap’

Johnson actually wanted fight war at home. It was war against poverty + social justice.
Programme called “The Great Society”, improve civil rights, eradicating poverty, increase access
health + education + cleaner environment. Encouraged development “Credibility Gap”, was
difference in reality between what Johnson administration told Congress actually happening.

The Tet Offensive

1968, war reached turning point. General West. ‘s policy “attrition” not succeeded defeating
NLF. Anti-war movement growing in US due to casualties. Johnson told public end 1967 “light at
end of the tunnel” as US starting win war. Early morning Lunar new year 31 Jan 1968, 70,000
Communists surprise attack. They attacked +100 cities in South, also Saigon. Took 11 days US +
ARVN forces regain Saigon. At Hue half city destroyed + 5,800 civilian casualties. Commis
gradually pushed back from rest cities. Tet Offensive military failure for Vietcong. Popular
uprising hoped trigger in South not happen. Failed hold any cities + had 40,000 casualties.
 30

Public opinion in US against war. Public sickened as was first televised war. Saw police chief
execute VC prisoner + US embassy being attacked. Al showed US losing war + supported regime
flouted basic human rights.
Anti-war protests in US New Peak. Aftermath Tet Offensive changed US strategy. Bombing
North halted + peace talks initiated. 31 March 1968 Johnson addressed on TV not standing for
re-election.

Did President Nixon achieve “peace with other?

He was elected Nov. 1968. Wanted US withdrawal war, not prepared accept peace at price.
Wanted peace with honour. No way for US leave Vietnam without defeated. He wanted
settlement which guarantee S. chance survival. Took 4 years (300,000 VC + 20,000 US died).

Achieve “Peace + honour”, Nixon selected Kissinger as foreign policy adviser. Man prepared use
force get N. reach peace agreement. 14 month Bombing campaign begun Ho Chi Minh Trail.
Didn't force N. agree terms. Nixon introduce ‘Vietnamisation’ policy. Gradual withdrawal of US
troops + handling of S. (1969-1973). June 1969 Nixon Doctrine, nations responsible for own
defence + country.

Paris Peace Talks

13 May 1972 until Jan. 1973. Kissinger negotiated with N. V (also determined Peace with
Honour). Neither side compromise, N. Demanding have representation in S. Gov., all sides
trying advantage negotiating table, upper hand on Battlefield. For US = airpower to pressure
Communists. Nixon + Kissinger pursued ‘detente’ with USSR + China (develop better relations,
use to pressure N. V. to agree peace settlement.

Peace settlement signed 27 Jan 1973. All US troops withdraw Vietnam + N and S respect 17
parallel line. Last US troops left 2 weeks after peace agreement. Vietnam no peace. North took
Saigon April 1975.

End 1975, Vietnam, Cambodia + Laos fallen Communist forces. Containment failed, dominoes
Indochina fallen.

Vietnam failure US policy Containment?

Dominoes falling, first used Eisenhower 1953. Vietnam War failed contain Communism
Indochina. US’ biggest failure. Cambodia Laos spread.
 31

Other view 1998, US broader aims keep Capitalist semi-democracies S.E. Asia from falling
Communism. Nam allowed other countries (Malaysia, Thailand, Singapore faced Commi
threats) breathing space. The US accomplished Asia stability + prosperity. Singapore Lee Kuan
Yew supported this.

Conclusions US policy Containment Asia

Up to 1949, US Containment policy successful. Berlin airlift failure USSR 1948. Marshall plan
revived EU economies stop Comm parties Italy + France. Containment Asia less successful, as
communism Asia more diverse. EU linked strong Nationalist movements. Mao + Ho had support
in countries as local circumstances + struggles independence. USA ended fighting local
movements + national feeling than USSR imperialism. Explains why USA never able successful
containing rev. movements as had been in EU.

*NEW LEADERS AND NEW IDEAS*

1954-1950, developments Cold War affected by Europe events. Post 1950, course influenced
by:
- Events Asia
- Nuclear Arms Race
- Change leadership + better relations USA + USSR

Eisenhower + Dulles in USA: roll back, Brinkmanship + New Look

Eisenhower (Republican) elected 1952. Nickname = ‘Ike’, had distinguished mili. background
(Commander Normandy 1944). After WW2 was US Army Chief Staff + Commander in Chief
NATO.
His background unlikely weak on Communism. He + Dulles (Secretary State) anti Communist.
Dulles loud in condemnation USSR system

1952 pres. Election campaign, Dulles talked ‘roll-black’, liberating countries held by USSR in E.E,
never happened. Eisenhower never attempted free countries from USSR control. US
encouraged rebellions E.E. 1953-56, not use opportunities extend ‘US sphere influence’.

Eisenhower developed “New Look” policy of Containment. Was preventing extension USSR
outside areas already established, without opportunity expand, soviet system collapses on
itself.
 32

Eisenhower put “New” Containment policy practice by:

- Setting alliances encircle USSR, like SEATO.
- Using mili. Power protect vulnerable areas, like W. Berlin.
- Assisting forces fighting Comm (like Diem in S. Nam).
- Using CIA for covert operations more extensively.
- Increased reliance nukes. National security doc. 1953. Conventional weapons smaller
role defence.
- Brinkmanship. Threats massive retaliation Containment. Brink of nuke war as intimidate
aggressor back down.

Dulles said take chances achieve peace + war.

Eisenhower aware of danger nukes + prepared negotiate with USSR. US-Soviet Summits 1955-
59.

Activities of CIA

Set up 1947 by US gov. as Intel collecting body, undertook anti-Com operations. Involved
overthrowing left wing Govs. 1953 helped overthrow gov. Mohammed Mossadegh Iran + 1954
overthrow Jacobo Arbenz Guatemala.

Khrushchev + Coexistence

US-Soviet Summit 1950s as Eisenhower willing negotiate + attitudes new leaders USSR.
Following death Stalin 1953, removal secret police chief Beria, Soviet Foreign policy controlled
by Malenkov, Khrushchev, Bulganin (collective leadership). Malenkov created ‘New Course’
view with the West. Khrushchev renamed it ‘Peaceful Coexistence’ after winning.
Move away inevitable war. It meant capitalism + Communism accept existence of one another
rather than force to kill. US believed Com. collapse as not able expand. Khrushchev believed
capitalism collapse as own inner weakness. No need for nuke war.

Other factors that encouraged change international relations

Winston Churchill also supported idea more communication East + West avoid Nuke holocaust.
Econ. factors also role pushing superpowers friendlier. USSR approx. ⅓ economy towards mili.
consumer goods scarce + living standards low. Econ. of US better shape, 12% GNP on mili.
Economies improve if reduce mili spending for both.
1954 Korean War over, remove source conflict USA + USSR.
 33

East-West relations 1950s in reality

E.g. Improved US-Soviet relations post 1953 agreement Austria. April 1955, USSR proposed
formal peace treaty with Austria. Austrian State Treaty ended four power occupation Austria +
created independent + neutral country. Geneva Summit occurred July 1955 (first meeting of
heads gov. Since 45). Little achieved at Summit arms race + Germany not agreed on.

Soviet proposals:
- Disbandment NATO + Warsaw Pact.
- Withdrawal all foreign troops Europe (European Security Treaty)
- Free elections for reunified Germany

US reaction:
- Hostile. Ideas unacceptable to West European Govs, no agreement

US proposals:
‘Open Skies’ proposal. Each side exchange plans of mili. installations + allow mili. surveillance.

Soviet reaction:
- Hostile. Didn't bother formal reply. Dismissed as bold espionage plot. Khrushchev said
“like seeing into our bedrooms”. US used U-2 reconnaissance plane.

Was Geneva Summit a Failure?

Failure progress Germany or disarmament. Was breakthrough create atmosphere cordiality.

Led better trade, exchanging science info. + cultures. ‘Spirit of Geneva’ events around 1955.

Why East-West tension increase after 1955?

Feb. 56, Khrushchev de-Stalinization speech, challenged soviet rule. When Khrushchev
problems Hungary, West involved Suez Crisis. Both Crises dissipated good feeling achieved
Geneva. Suez raised fears growing Soviet influence M. East, led to Eisenhower Doctrine 57.
Stated US help country M.E fight Comm.
 34

Technology race

4 Oct. 57 USSR launched first artificial satellite - Sputnik. Month later Sputnik 2. US state panic
as convinced USSR superior missile tech. Khrushchev reinforced worry by Sputnik proves
Socialism won + USSR can wipe out any US/EU City.

Missile Gap

US Congress + media promoted “missile gap” idea. They recommended:

- Increase offensive defence power, missile dev.
- Build up conventional forces capable fighting limited war
- Massive building programme fallout shelters.

Reality spy plane found no gap. Eisenhower established NASA 1958 promote missile dev. +
space exploration not arouse suspicion spying. provided federal aid promote science edc.
schools.

How did events 1958-60 affect East-West relations?

By 58 Eisenhower confident US nuke superiority, wanted ban atmospheric nuke testing. US

stopped testing Oct. 58 followed by USSR. Hoped lead formal test-ban treaty. Khrushchev
heightened East-West tension by issuing Ultimatum West leave Berlin 6 months. West stand
firm, Khrushchev back down. Early 59, Berlin Crisis over + talks about another summit meeting.
Khrushchev accepted visit US Sept. 59. (first USSR leader go USA) arranged summit meeting
Eisenhower Paris May 1960.

U-2 incident

US meeting produced few concrete results, talks success as created positive atmosphere.
Optimism short lived, days before summit meeting US plane shot down over USSR 1 May 1960.
US tried say weather plane off course. Soviets knew spy plane. Pilot Gary Powers confessed.
Eisenhower admitted + took personal responsibility.

At Paris Summit Eisen. refused apologise as said necessity. Khrushchev cancelled Eisen.’s visit
USSR + no progress made Berlin or test-ban treaty. 1962 any Thaw achieved at end as USA +
USSR conflict Cuba.
 35

*THE IMPACT OF THE ARMS RACE ON THE COLD WAR*

Arrival of nukes + Hiroshima bombing crucial impact on CW as:

- Started arms race between major powers, maintained hostility.
- Caused powers rethink strategy + ways conflicts handled.
- Put economic strain on US + USSR

KEY JARGON

A-bomb: nuke launched by missile/plane

H-bomb: thermonuclear bomb more powerful than A-bomb
Strategic bombers: planes capable carrying nukes
ICBM: range 3000 nautical miles carry nuke warheads
SLBM: Submarine launched ballistics
ABM: Used intercept incoming missiles
MIRV: allows several warheads used guided different target.

How did nuke arms race develop during CW?

Nuking Hiroshima + Nagasaki by Truman cause of arms race.

US saw nukes necessary defend from larger USSR. Soviets developed nuke 1949. Arms Race
begun. USA hydrogen bomb 1952 + USSR 1953.

1950s ICBM developed. Missile gap problem for US after sputnik launched. U2 spy plane by
Eisenhower showed no gap. US built more ICBMs. Pressured USSR respond having less nukes.
1968 USSR had ABMs. US built MIRVs and USSR as well 1975.
 36

Timeline arms race

First Second

1945- US A-bomb
1949- USSR A-bomb
1952- US H-bomb
1953- USSR H-bomb
1957-USSR ICBM
1957-USSR Sputnik
1958-USSR warning radar
1958- US ICBM
1958- US satellite
1960- US warning system
1960- US SLBM
1968- USSR SLBM
1968- USSR ABM
1970- US MIRV
1971- USSR Sea Cruise Missile
1972- US ABM
1975- USSR MIRV
1982- US Sea Cruise Missile

Why was arms race so intense during CW?

Stockpiling nukes necessary by US + USSR safeguard interests. Constant advances in tech made
each side vulnerable. Secrecy + need to stay ahead or catch up fuelled arms race. Until 1980s
both sides developed.

What strategies developed for use of nukes?

Both sides had many nukes yet couldn't use. Military's purpose now to avert wars as ‘MAD’.
Total war victory no longer possible.

US + USSR leaders saw danger of nukes. Stalin said nukes can't be used without ending the
world. Following H-bomb test Eisenhower said it end civilisation. Khrushchev pushed ‘Peaceful
co-existence’ policy. Leaders still had strategies.
 37

Eisenhower and ‘massive retaliation’

Eisenhower's advisers worked towards limited nuke warfare. He believed in massive retaliation
(US use every weapon to destroy enemy). Policy criticised. Possible Eisenhower used as bluff
prevent war. Limited nuke war problematic.

McNamara and ‘counterforce’

Kennedy determined widen options. Formed ‘flexible response’ policy (more limited than MR).
McNamara (Ks secretary defence) developed ‘counterforce strategy’ aimed destroy mili bases
instead of civilians. Problems with strategy:
- Issue successfully hitting bases so early in missile dev.
- Mili bases being so close to cities.
- That USSR also follow policy.

USSR angered by policy, implied US make ‘pre-emptive strikes’ in crisis:

- USSR saw as way of US taking out surprise attack on USSR.
- In US public saw to make nuke war more likely.

Impact CMC: ‘MAD’

It highlighted problems of counterforce strategy. Idea targeting mili objectives changed.

McNamara believed both sides now follow ‘massive retaliation’ + maximum casualties by
targeting cities. Idea was if no side could win nuke war averted. Became known as ‘MAD’.

US + USSR accepted MAD. Continued stockpile + modernise weapons. Also saw need
agreements on how to manage. CMC followed by:
- Test-Ban Treaty
- Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty
- SALT Agreements

Eisenhower's ‘open skies’ agreement allowed satellite reconnaissance minimise surprise attack.
ABM treaty banned nuke defence systems, kept MAD key strategy. If defences allowed maybe
think have advantage. “Arms Race exchanged destruction for duration.”
 38

Impact of Reagan and Gorbachev

Reagan changed stability of nukes. He caused biggest arms build-up in history US. New dev like
stealth bomber, neutron bomb, 1983 cruise missiles shipped Europe. Strategic Defence
Initiative (SDI) upset USSR. Criticised as US given first strike capabilities as destroy nukes before
hit. MAD now AD. USSR couldn't compete as economy verge collapse. Arms talks successful
cause of SDI.

Gorbachev argued nuke war not possible, security gained through political rather than mili.
Negotiations as important as build up.

Role of conventional weapons

Nukes not be used except as last resort. Both sides needed large conventional forces. Korean +
Vietnam showed how conventional arms important stay ahead. USSR in lead with conventional.
1970s Warsaw Pact countries twice as many men + tanks in Europe as NATO.

*NUCLEAR WEAPON DEVELOPMENT AND TREATIES (1950-1975)*

● 1951 - China and the Soviet Union sign an agreement whereby China would supply
uranium ore in exchange for technical assistance in producing nuclear weapons.

● 1952 - October - The United Kingdom conducts Operation Hurricane, the first test of a
British nuclear weapon. The plutonium implosion-type nuclear weapon was detonated
in a lagoon between the Montebello Islands, Western Australia.

● 1952 - November - The United States test the first fusion bomb, "Ivy Mike".

● 1953 - The first nuclear-tipped rockets are deployed by the United States. The MGR-1
Honest John is such as example.

● 1953 - August - The Soviet Union conducts its first test of a hydrogen bomb, nicknamed
Joe 4 by the Americans.

● 1954 - February - The United States detonates its first deliverable thermonuclear
weapon at Bikini Atoll, Marshall Islands. The device had a yield almost three times as
 39

large as expected, leading to the worst radiological disaster in US history.

● 1956 - France establishes a secret committee for the Military Applications of Atomic
Energy.

● 1956 - The Pakistan Atomic Energy Commission is established. This commission is

responsible for the development of both the nuclear reactors and nuclear weapons in
Pakistan.

● 1957 - July - The International Atomic Energy Agency is founded.

● 1958 - The United States and the United Kingdom sign the 1958 US-UK Mutual Defence
Agreement. This is a bilateral treaty on nuclear weapons cooperation signed after the
United Kingdom successfully tested a hydrogen bomb during Operation Grapple.

● 1960 - February - France successfully tests a nuclear weapon, called "Gerboise Bleue", in
the French Sahara.

● 1961 - The Israeli Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion informed the Canadian Prime
Minister John Diefenbaker that a pilot plutonium-separation plant would be built at
Dimona, the location of the nuclear reactor built with the aid of France and Great
Britain. Intelligence would indicate from this and other information that Israel intended
to produce nuclear weapons.

● 1961 - October - The Soviet Union detonated “Tsar Bomba”, the largest, most powerful
nuclear weapon ever detonated.

● 1963 - Partial Test Ban Treaty set up. Banned testing of nuke weapons in atmosphere.
Only US and USSR signed. Not really effective.

● 1963 - Hotline set up after CMC. 24h communication between D.C and Moscow to
prevent another Cuba.

● 1964 - October - China successfully tests an atomic bomb at Lop Nur.

● 1965 - January - The Soviet Union detonates Chagan as part of their Nuclear Explosions
for the National Economy series to study the peaceful use of nuclear explosions.
 40

● 1966/67- Israel makes first atomic bomb.

● 1967 - February - Treaty of Tlatelolco signed. Banned the use of all nuclear weapons in
Latin America and Caribbean. Took effect in 1968.

● 1967 - June - China successfully tests a hydrogen bomb.

● 1967 - October - Outer Space Treaty signed by all countries + US and USSR. Banned
testing + stationing of nukes in space. Saved countries money.

● 1967 - December - Japan, under Prime Minister Eisaku Satō, adopts the Three Non-
Nuclear Principles. Japan not possess, manufacture nukes. Promote alternate use +
global disarmament.

● 1968 - France tests hydrogen bomb.

● 1968 - July - The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty opens for signatures. This treaty is
intended to limit the spread of nuclear weapons. To date, 189 countries have signed the
treaty, including the five permanent members of the UN Security Council. Only India,
Israel, Pakistan, and North Korea have not signed the treaty (as sovereign states).

● 1969 - Beginning of Strategic Arms Limitation Talks (SALT) in Helsinki. Involved US and
USSR.

● 1969 - Nixon's Safeguard Programme. US increase number of ABMs. Increased tension

between US and USSR.

● 1972 - Zulfikar Ali Bhutto launched Pakistan's atomic program by making Munir Ahmad
Khan as the program head.

● 1972 - SALT 1 agreement signed. It reduced the number of missiles US and USSR.
Ordered dismantling of ICBMs and Limitation of nuke weapons.

● 1974 - May - India tests its first nuclear device, "Smiling Buddha", at Pokhran.

● 1974 - May - Pakistan's Project-706 is established under command of General Zahid Ali
Akbar.
 41

*HOW AND WHY DID COLD WAR SPREAD OUTSIDE OF EUROPE AFTER 1950*

What were the US’ motives for becoming involved in the Globalisation of the
Cold War?

US determined protect own economic interests (primary factor). Determined avoid repetition
Great Depression - they required end to isolationism + development/protection overseas
markets. Saw Capitalist ideology threatened by Communism, must be stopped at all costs. Fall
China to Communism 1949 led US perceive USSR forming for Communist World Domination.
Was perceived as political and economic threat. Japan key trading partner for US so
involvement SE Asia seen as protecting US economic interests. US intervention Cuba began pre-
Soviet involvement + Castro seen as threat to economic interests in Cuba.

Oil key factor USA's involvement Middle East. Involvements in Africa as need for markets, raw
materials + mineral wealth. USA's overreacted real aims Communism. Led to Containment,
Rollback, Domino theory. US involvement in Korea, Vietnam, S.E. Asia, Latin America, Africa +
Middle East. Series regional conflicts caused by impact decolonization. Argued superpowers
forced involve to protect own interests + prevent Cold War rivals extending own influence.

Stalin aware Soviet weaknesses compared to US, confined direct activities to Europe. US
overreacted, incorrectly perceived fall China Communism as Soviet attempt World domination.
US policies (Containment) based flawed logic. US seeking protect economic + strategic
interests, more responsible globalisation as actions in Korea, Vietnam, S.E. Asia, Latin America,
Africa, Middle East = good evidence.

Decolonisation more genuine cause globalisation.US + USSR drawn into regional conflicts for
own strategic, diplomatic + prestige reasons. Fears enhanced after fall China communism 1949;
US saw USSR + PRC forming Comm bloc, posed genuine threat US interests. They adopted
containment, NSC 68, Roll back, the Domino theory + became directly involved series regional
conflicts, causes more do with postcolonial nationalism than Comm world domination.

Unwelcome US intervention led countries seek help + support from USSR, spreaded CW.
Globalisation occurred as fear + need USA + USSR maintain respective political, economic
strategic + prestige interests. US fears 'monolithic comm attempt world domination misguided,
US attempted contain something which over exaggerated. Argued US over-reacted which led
Containment, Roll back, NSC-68 + Domino theory.
US involved in series regional conflicts, causes postcolonial nationalism in Korea, Vietnam,
Cambodia, Laos, Cuba, Chile, Mozambique, Angola etc. Unwelcome US intervention led
 42

countries support from USSR. Spreading CW US support unpopular + undemocratic regimes in

countries + actions CIA across globe. US more responsible globalisation CW determined
preserve econ influence, US incorrectly perceived comm plot take world. Enhanced
Containment policy through NSC 68, Roll-back + Domino theory, US involvement Korea,
Vietnam, SE Asia, Latin America, Africa + M-East. In pursuing policies encouraged emergence
comm regimes like Cambodia +Laos.

'Red threat' led US involvement Korea, Vietnam, the Middle East, Africa and Latin America,
globalising CW. US directly involved Korea + Vietnam, USSR was not. CMC caused by US over-
reaction to Castro. In name protecting world communism, supported non-democratic govs. The
US nuke programme globalise CW. US interpreted USSR actions Korea + Nam 1950. 1950's US
believed Comm expansionist monolithic bloc, leaders seen as puppets MOSCOW. In M-East +
Guatemala US failed distinguish nationalism + Communism, misinterpreted USSR policy as
monolithic bloc controlling leaders in region, Eisenhower used CIA to replace leaders. Nasser
labelled comm, was nationalist exploited rivalry US + USSR. Built Aswan Dam + modernized
Egypt.

US interpreted Stalin + Ho Chi Minh as expansionist. US changed policy as supported French

control Nam, aided war effort paid 80% until Dien Bien Phu in 1954. Eisenhower Doctrine 1957,
M-East strategic national importance + Congress gave Eisenhower carte blanche protect region
in belief USSR expansionist. Eisenhower sent $10 million to Jordan + 10 000 troops Lebanon
1957 contain Comm. US saw as defender ‘free world’ from Comm infiltration.

What were the aims of Soviet policy makers and why did they get involved in
certain areas?

Stalin's overt statements world Comm rev. USSR support Comm takeover China. USSR
involvement Korea, Cuba, Vietnam, Africa, M-East. Statesmen exploit CW for own benefit.
Khrushchev distanced USSR from Marxist world rev concept, key factor deterioration Sino-
Soviet relations. USSR not supply N. Korea, own involvement in K. War limited, less than US
involvement. Stalin gave permission N invade S. on basis that US not involve as avoid direct
confrontation. USSR support Comm S.E Asia low-key.

Cuba attempt redress nuke imbalance as US missiles Turkey. USSR presence M-East attempt
protect econ + strat interests. USSR's Cuba actions attempt protect vulnerable comm state self-
interested US aggression, not USSR expansionism. USSR not directly involved Korea. Khrushchev
said nukes in Cuba restore balance US nukes Turkey. USSR responsible globalisation as
supported comm regimes Korea, Africa, M-East. Stalin said statements world rev.
 43

Stalin recognised Ho Chi Minh leadership Vietnam. He feared Mao as potential challenge his
leadership world comm. Truman announced defensive perimeter 1950, Stalin felt little risk US
involvement Korea as pressure from Kim + only recognised Ho Chi Minh because Mao
recognised first, Stalin warned Mao not recognise before victory as now prestige required
support for victory in response. Mao challenge for leadership world comm reason USSR
intervention.

How far were Soviet motives expansionist?

Stalin openly spoke world comm rev. USSR support comm takeover China. USSR attempts gain
influence in UN (supporting new independent states + Veto). Involvement Korea, Cuba, Africa,
Middle East. Actions Cuba genuine attempt support new + vulnerable Comm state. Stalin's
statements regarding world revolution (Khrushchev also believed) USSR support takeover China
+ involvement Korea, Vietnam, Cuba, Africa, M-East similar. Khrushchev distance USSR world
domination view. USSR provided equipment + military 'advisers' N. Korea, gave permission
attack S.

Gave support comm Nam + S.E. Asia. Installation nukes in Cuba USSR expansionism L. America.
USSR involved M-East. Nukes Cuba direct USSR threat to US. USSR involved regional disputes
protect own political, diplomatic, strategic + economic interests, responsible spreading CW.
Khrushchev’s ‘peaceful coexistence', not mean given idea comm dominate world, merely
arguing what not possible by war possible by giving aid to neutral states + new states.

Khrushchev + Brezhnev expansionist, determined spread Comm to 3rd world 1956-79.

Khrushchev Secret Speech 1956 ‘Peaceful Coexistence’, commitment world comm via
expansionist policy in 3rd world, no US misinterpretation. Khrushchev expansionist,
demonstrated Cuba as saved Castro post US trade embargo, bought Cuban sugar + supplied oil
1960. 1980 CW spread Africa, USSR aided Lumumba in Congo (caused CIA intervention).

Brezhnev continued Africa expansionism during detente 1970s, spread Comm Angola (MPLA) +
Ethiopia determined survival Brezhnev Doctrine 1968, committed USSR ensure no country leave
Comm camp. CW global post 1953 as USSR policy, not US misinterpretation. Dev globalisation
as Khrushchev + Brezhnev expansionist, nukes meant world rev not achieved inevitable war as
Lenin predicted. Mao pressure leader of world Comm pressurized USSR also be expansionist,
both competed for level aid sent to Nam defeating US 1973. S. Vietnam fell Comm 1975, Saigon
made Ho Chi Minh city.
 44

Conflicts that occurred outside of Europe

Timeline
Caribbean and Latin America

● 1954 – Guatemala – CIA funds coup

● 1959 – Cuba becomes communist – major event, Cuba enacted trade deal with USSR +
nationalised all US industries. US stopped trading with
● 1961 – Bay of Pigs – CIA-sponsored invasion of Cuba (tried overthrow regime but failed)
● 1961 – Alliance for Progress – US sends $22.3 billion in aid to Latin America 1962-1967
(seen as dollar imperialism)
● 1962 – Cuban Missile Crisis – major event USSR played role in globalising CW.
● 1964 – Brazil Coup – coup was supported by US
● 1965 – Dominican Republic – US invaded (example of aggressive rollback policy) and
provided aid to local anti-Communist groups.
● 1971 – Bolivian Coup – dictator Hugo Banzer supported by USA
● 1973 – Chilean Coup – Salvador Allende overthrown by Pinochet with USA help

point to US involvement through financial backing intelligence to anti-communist regimes

hoping overthrow comm governments. Policy of rollback.

Middle East

● 1953 – Iranian Coup – supported by US and was example of rollback. Was called
operation Ajax. US overthrew Iranian PM to bolster (monarch) Mohammad Reza Shah’s
power. Iran had nationalised its oil industry previously (communist-leaning policy).
● 1955 – Baghdad Pact – Iraq, Iran, Pakistan, Turkey, UK form pact
● 1956 – Suez Crisis – major event. rare show of cooperation. Both USA and USSR
together condemn invasion of Egypt by UK/France/Israel.
● 1957 – Eisenhower Doctrine – US promises to help any Middle East country resisting
communism (Containment).
● 1958 – Soviets fund Aswan Dam – USSR gives aid to Egypt. Own form of “dollar
imperialism”.
● 1958 – Iraq withdraws from Baghdad Pact – grows closer to USSR. Middle East Treaty
Pact (METO) modelled after NATO + meant to contain USSR influence. US didn't join. UK
acted as ‘Western Power’ over matter.
● 1973 – Yom Kippur War – US aids Israel, USSR aids Egypt. Was proxy war.
 45

Region hotly contested both sides attempting carve own blocs of influence. Greater use
diplomacy/persuasion rather than aggressive policies gain influence here (little rollback
compared to Latin America)

ASIA

● 1950 – USSR funds Hukbalahap rebels in Philippines – rebels are communist. (rollback)
● 1951 – ANZUS Pact – USA/New Zealand/Australia sign collective security pact
● 1953 – Korean War
● 1954 – SEATO formed – a NATO for Asia. included Thailand, Philippines, Pakistan, US,
UK, France, New Zealand, Australia. US intervention through creating pacts.
● 1960 – Pathet Lao Communist Revolution – took place in Laos + had little formal
influence from USSR. USA scared as Domino Effect.
● 1955-1975 – Vietnam War – major event

Africa

● 1960-1965 – Congo Crisis –100,000 were left dead. Patrick Lumumba, democratic leader
of the Congo, requests help from the UN because a region of the Congo known as
Katanga wants to separate off. The UN rejects his request for help, so Lumumba turns
to USSR for assistance instead.
● 1964-1974 – Mozambique Civil War –In the Mozambique Civil War, the USSR provides
aid and arms to FRELIMO, a party that fought for independence of Mozambique from
Portugal.
● 1969 – Somalia Coup – USSR helped coup and made Somalia satellite state until 1977.
● 1975-2002 – Angolan Civil War – The war was used as battleground for USSR, Cuba, S.
Africa + US. War began after gained independence from Portugal.
● 1963-1974 – Guinea-Bissau War of Independence – USSR intervene in helping gain
independence from Portugal.

Notes

Guatemala Coup
1954 Guatemalan coup d'état was covert CIA operation, deposed P. Jacobo (democratically
elected) + ended Guatemalan Rev 1944-1954. Replaced with Carlos who mili dictatorship.
Revolution began 1944, popular uprising toppled authoritarian Jorge Ubico +brought Juan Jose
Arevalo to power via Guatemala's first democratic election. New president introduced
 46

minimum wage + near-universal suffrage, aiming turn Guatemala into liberal democracy.
Arévalo succeeded by Árbenz 1951, instituted popular land reforms granted property to
landless peasants.
Revolution disliked by US Fed gov, seen as Comm. Arbenz legalized Comm party, United Fruit
Company affected so asked US to overthrow. Harry Truman authorized Operation PBFORTUNE
topple Árbenz 1952; operation aborted.
Eisenhower elected 1952, promised hard line V.S. comm, US gov exaggerated comm
involvement. CIA armed/funded, trained force 480 men led by Carlos Castillo Armas. Coup
preceded U.S. efforts criticize + isolate Guatemala internationally. Castillo Armas' force invaded
Guatemala 1954. Included radio station broadcast anti-gov propaganda + bombings Guatemala
City + naval blockade. Invasion force fared poorly militarily, most offensives defeated.
Guatemala army refused fight, Árbenz attempted arm civilians instead, Castillo Armas replaced.
Coup destroyed democracy, was criticized internationally, contributed long lasting anti-US
feeling in L. America. Castillo Armas became dictator, banned opposition parties, imprisoning +
tortured political opponents, reversed social reforms of rev. Caused 40 years of Civ.War
followed.

Brazil Coup
1964 Brazil events overthrow P. Goulart by Brazil Armed Forces (US backed). Brazil Congress
support coup + endorsed declaring vacant the office of the presidency. Coup ended gov of
Goulart, democratically elected Vice President.

Quadros resigned 1961, in clumsy political manoeuvre increase popularity. Anticipated mass
demonstrations demand his return office + strengthen position, didn't happen. Goulart
diplomatic trip to PRC, accused of being Comm + unable take back office. Goulart's supporters +
right-wing reached agreement, parl. System replace PS in country. Goulart continue as head but
Parl. run country.

1963, referendum re-established PS with Goulart as president. Took office with full powers,
during rule problems came evident like: Basic Reforms Plan. Coup made puppet country for US.

US Invasion of Dominican Republic

1965, young military officers’ revolt in DR. Four days later US troops invaded country. first US
military intervention Latin America in more than three decades. US invasion + 8-year US
occupation paved the way for dictatorship Rafael Trujillo (1930-1961). Country emerged trauma
Trujillo at time US scared of second Cuba. Dec 1962, DR held 1st free elections. Juan Bosch
 47

(won), established gov characterized by administrative probity, political freedom + promise

social reform. Kennedy administration said he soft on Comm. Bosch overthrown 1963 replaced
with de facto gov corruption.

No social reforms + free elections, revolt 1965 tried return Bosch to power, people supported.
US attacked rebels + defeated, rebels retook country. Said comm ran revolt, Johnson sent
troops, caused stalemate in 1965 Prov gov formed. Elections 1966, people doubtful whether
free gov + elections. Docs show that became dictatorship country.

Bolivia Coup
1971, General Banzer, successful military uprising erupted in Santa Cruz, had many supporters.
Plotters gained control La Paz garrisons, with considerable bloodshed. US + Brazil involved in
coup as supported. General Banzer emerged as strong man of new regime, Aug gained full
power president. President Juan José Torres forced take refuge in Buenos Aires, 5 years later
kidnapped + assassinated by Banzer. For next 7 years ruled as Dictator.
Banzer banned left parties, closed nation's universities. Dictator ruled with measure civilian
support until 1974, main parties realized not intend hold elections, instead used as power.
Banzer banned political activity, exiled leaders, solely ruled cause of mili.
Human rights groups said many Bolivians sought asylum, 3,000 political opponents arrested,
200 killed, some tortured. Selich accused plotting overthrow Banzer + died. Two other leaders
killed as well while in exile.

Chile Coup
1973, Pinochet rose power, overthrew democratically elected Allende. Some evidence that US
helped Pinochet. US refused intervention, they knew date of coup didn't do anything to stop
Chilean coup as said Chilean internal matter.
Transcripts phone conversation between Kissinger + Nixon reveal didn't have a hand in the final
coup. Do take credit for creating the conditions that led to the coup.

Iran Coup
1953 Iranian coup, overthrow PM Mosaddegh to strengthen monarch rule of Pahlavi 1953, US +
UK wanted overthrow foreign gov. Mossadegh sought audit documents to Anglo-Iranian Oil
Company. UK boycotted Iran oil, going to overthrow with force but Clement Attlee instead
increased economic boycott, used Iranian agents to undermine Mosaddegh gov.
 48

Rather than US + UK invasion US used CIA to help coup, following coup 1953 now Zahedi gov
relied US support to keep power. Mossadegh imprisoned, 300 killed during coup. Shah
continued rule until Iranian Rev in 1979.

Baghdad Pact
Central Treaty Organisation (aka Baghdad Pact) formed 1955 by Iran, Iraq, Pakistan, Turkey +
UK, dissolved 1979. US pressure + promises mili + econ aid key to negotiations leading to
agreement, US not allowed participate.

Suez Crisis
See notes in UN involvement.

Aswan Dam

Cost $1 billion, ended cycle of flood in Nile region, completed 1970. Had environmental impact,
provided valuable irrigation but caused rich sediment to be trapped behind dam. US + UK
backed funding, cancelled when realised USSR helping as well. Nasser nationalised Suez Canal
which caused crisis.

Soviet loans allowed Nasser build dam 1960, 1970 completed, Nasser died + lake named after
him 1971. Made peasants have to migrate as flooded land, resulted in massive floods. Snail
disease increased + fertility Nile delta decreased.

Iraq Withdraws from Bagdad

On July 14, 1958, the Iraqi monarchy was overthrown in a military coup. The new government
was led by General Abdul Karim Qassim who withdrew Iraq from the Baghdad Pact, opened
diplomatic relations with Soviet Union and adopted a non-aligned stance. The organization
dropped the name 'Baghdad Pact' in favour of 'CENTO' at that time.

Yom Kippur War

Yom Kippur War 1973, coalition Egypt + Syria against N. Israel. Egypt war objective capture E.
bank Suez Canal + use negotiate return of Sinai.
 49

Began when Arab coalition launched joint surprise attack Israeli positions, during Yom Kippur
(holiest day in Judaism) Also occurred during Ramadan. Egypt + Syria forces crosses ceasefire
lines + entered Sinai. US + USSR initiated massive resupply to allies. Began with Egypt successful
cross of Suez Canal. Syria + Egypt attacked Israel, Israel forces countered and pushed back.
Heavy casualties both sides.

UN ordered ceasefire as Egypt + Suez encircled, caused tension US + USSR. Egypt gradually left
USSR sphere of influence + peace pacts signed to not repeat.

1973 Oil Crisis- began as members of Organisation of Arab Petroleum Exporting Countries
proclaimed oil embargo. Was targeted at nations perceived as supporting Israel in Yom Kippur
War. Initial nations targeted:
- Canada
- Japan
- Holland
- UK
- US
Later included:
- Portugal
- Rhodesia
- South Africa
By the end of the embargo in 1974 price of oil risen from $3 per barrel to $12 globally.

US Funding of Rebels in Philippines

In 1950 CIA saw President Quirino lead political upheaval + Philippine police + military incapable
maintaining law/order in country or stopping Hukbalahap raids in Luzon. Later Huks attempted
a rebellion. After rebellion attempt, US made priority terminate Huk resistance. 1951, Huks
weaker as no armed support. Election 1951 honest one + big effect population of Philippines.
Huks tried stop voting with slogans like "Boycott the Election. Many Huks turned selves in.
1952, support for Huks close to non-existent.

Huks withdrew forces from old heartland in Northern Manila province. Main Huk forces
retreated S into jungles where set up camps + new HQ. Huks believed safe from Philippine
forces + time rebuild. Philippine army + US army hunted Huks in jungles, forced rebels relocate.
 50

By time Magsaysay died 1957, completely undermined Huk movement, changing from strong
movement thousands armed insurgents to few hundred with little public support.

CIA trained counter guerrilla forces + psychological warfare.

Anzus Pact
Anzus Pact, Australia, New Zealand, US, signed in San Francisco 1951, purpose providing mutual
aid in event aggression + peaceful means. Came into force 1952. Initials provide name of pact.
US offered pact to Aussie as compensation for prospect of Japan.

1980s New Zealand instituted antinuclear policy, banning including those of the U.S. Navy. In
response, US suspended treaty obligations to NZ 1986. 3 nations remained formal parties to
treaty, Anzus inoperative from then on.

Pathet Lao
Pathet Lao (left nationalist group in Laos 1975) formed 1950 with Vietminh against French rule
of Indochina. 1956 Lao Patriotic Front founded + participated several coalition govs. 1960s +
70s Pathet Lao fought civil war V.S. Vientiane (US backed) won control N + E. 1975 Pathet Lao
forces consolidated power in country. Vientiane gov fell May 1975, Pathet Lao leaders formed
new gov.

Congo Crisis
Look at UN notes further ahead.

Mozambique Civil War

1977-1992, Mozambican Civil War possessed local dynamics, exacerbated greatly by effects of
CW. RENAMO (right-wing) opposed FRELIMO’s (left-wing) socialist 1 party state. Anti-Comm
govs in Rhodesia + S. Africa used RENAMO as proxy to erode FRELIMO. 1 million Mozambicans
killed + 5 million displaced.
Destroyed Mozambique's critical rural infrastructure, hospitals, rail lines, roads, + schools.
FRELIMO's security forces + RENAMO insurgents accused committing human rights abuses,
child soldiers, landmines in countryside. Zimbabwe, Tanzania, Malawi deployed troops protect
econ from RENAMO attacks.
 51

Civ. War ended 1992, following collapse USSR + S. African support FRELIMO + RENAMO. Direct
peace talks 1990, formally ended hostilities. Rome General Peace Accords units demobilised.
UN involved to reconstruct.

*SINO-AMERICAN RELATIONS*

1950s - increasing tension

Tibet 1950
1950 People's Liberation Army (PLA) invaded Tibet. Mao saw as domestic concern, not foreign
policy. Chinese saw as reunifying former Chinese territory.
Outside world saw as brutal Invasion and Dalai Lama fled Tibet + called Maoist regime ‘Cultural
Genocide’.

Korean war 1950-53

Mao was taken by surprise by N. Korea's Invasion as the US. PRC not particularly concerned
Korea divide as focused on Taiwan + Tibet.
USSR boycott UN as US refusal see PRC as official country. USSR didn't use Veto stop US UN
troops defend South.
US justified actions by saying N aggressors even though S as well
Mao threatened US with war if cross into North. 1950 Douglas MacArthur crossed 38th parallel,
by 1953 PLA lost 1 million men.

Taiwan, 1954 + 1958

K. War altered US perspective towards Asia + Communist Chinese, included policy on Taiwan.
US didn't want intervene over Taiwan.

By 1953, Taiwan key territory in US policy Containment Asia.

PRC not take Taiwan earlier as:

- Taiwan well defended, PRC not confident.
- US navy Seventh Fleet present in area
- US promised protect Taiwan after K. war

1954 Mao bombed Islands Quemoy and Matsu, test US commitment. Eisenhower said if Taiwan
attacked would nuke China. US had look tough for allies in region, though USSR not back PRC.
 52

1958 Mao bombed Quemoy and Matsu again + more PLA troops. US vessels fired at in straits.
US prepared for war, Mao backed down.

US saw PRC as expansionist + gave leadership Rev countries. PRCs aims linked to Domino
theory. Perceived as threat to West. US followed Containment policies in China:
- US trade embargo PRC.
- obstruction PRC into UN
- Massive econ + mili aid Taiwan
- Aid programme for region
- SEATO
- Defence treaties with Asian states PRC threat.

Sino-American Cold War 1960s

Kennedy continued isolation + Containment China. US used failure ‘Great Leap Forward’ show
public Marxist economic experiment + PRC willing sacrifice millions of Chinese for ideology.

KEY issues US + PRC 1960s:

- Taiwan
- Vietnam
- Decolonization movements
- Chinese Cultural Rev.

US, PRC + Taiwan

1960s PRC persisted demands reunify Taiwan. 1958 crisis didn't cause war, issue important to
Chinese. Two Chinas not acceptable. Improvement relations with US only possible when Taiwan
part China.

US, Nam, PRC

Nam war heightened tension US + Asia-Pacific region + US allies. PRC said US involvement =
imperialist like in Taiwan. Mao said UN dominated imperialist policies West

PRC + decolonisation
PRC supported Rev + deco. movements in dev world. Aimed replace USSR as world leader
international Rev + end Western imperialism, supporting anti-colonial movements.
 53

Bandung conference 1955, PRC said US danger World peace. Conference held as response to
SEATO. 29 Asian + African states neutral.

1966 Dean Rusk said US policy towards China to Congress:

- US not seek overthrow PRC
- US objects PRC inv. other countries encour. Rev forces + training.
- PRC more violent in word, not underestimate.

Despite PRC support Rev movements not resources help dev. world. When China made nuke
didn't have delivery system. Threat of PRC by US Dean Rush 1966 exaggerated.

US + PRC Cultural Rev

GLF + Cultural Rev led collapse PRC ability conduct foreign policy. US + USSR same view of out
control lack stability + coherence Mao leadership. PRC danger to region + US Domino theory.
Chinese increased ferocity US attacks during Cultural Rev. PRC leadership nervous (first years of
Rev) as feared US + Soviet attacks.

Sino-American detente 1970s

Key areas relations:

- Taiwan
- Vietnam
- UN
- USSR

Detente began 1969 US eased trade restrictions. Patrols by Seventh Fleet in T. straits halted.
Major turning point US changed policy towards PRC + UN.

‘Ping pong’ diplomacy occurred where US player got on well with PRC player. Joint
communique established 1972 between US + China. Nixon went Beijing meet comm leadership
+ sick Mao.

Why US want detente with PRC?

Many reasons US believed correct time detente with PRC:

- Nam situation led US believe Containment not possible, needed PRC help for exit
strategy.
 54

- US pressure Soviet-American attempts at detente.

- Nixon wanted ‘make history’
- US public support, more constructive strats.
- PRC had ICBMs, us saw no contact as more dangerous.
- US hoped reduce commitment Asia, retaining bases in Pacific.

These reasons changed US perspective global communism. US administration understanding

Communist movements not as Monolithic as thought. Nixon said US deal with countries over
actions, not ideologies. US no longer able control vote for PRC membership UN. Both sides give
up hegemony in Asia.

Why China want detente USA?

Many reasons correct time:

- 1960-70s PRC saw USSR as main rival, needed reduce tension with US.
- China gain concessions on UN membership, Taiwan, US withdrawal Nam + Indochina in
general.
- PRC worried about Japan so power limited.
- PRC said detente temporary, remain vigilant US imperialism + aggression. Mao argued
that necessary do whatever defeat main enemy.
- Moderation of stance against West improve PRCs standing in third world.

What China gain from detente US?

PRC attained some objectives + benefits:

UN membership: unrealistic for PRC hope join UN in 1950s as dominated by Western countries.
Every year defeated in votes. 1961 support by US meant only need ⅔ majority vote.

1965 US ambassador to UN said why PRC not member UN:

- CCP not legit gov of China, came to power by force, not democracy. Used force keep
power.
- Record of aggression, not peaceful nation.
- Sponsorship of rev groups in dev world hinder UN work.
- Taiwan honourable record.

As Un membership grew, dev countries began dominate assembly. 1970 General assembly
voted China UN seat but not necessary ⅔ majority. 1970s US began ‘two Chinas’ policy. Beijing
 55

take security Council and Taiwan representation general assembly. Solution rejected by both
Chinas.

1971 Nixon announced visit PRC + US no longer restrict Beijing admission UN. US failed prevent
expulsion Taiwan.

Result of UN membership PRC: PRC had power Veto in security Council. Could block resolutions
like Bangladesh UN 1971. With links through UN gained dev countries. Able increase prestige,
present views world stage + publicly support allies denounce enemies.

Taiwan: always Chinese comm view Taiwan belonged to. 1972 Nixon said matter isn't US
decision. Key foreign policy objective for PRC + main pursuit detente. US wasn't comfortable
give up Taiwan so process slow.

1980 Reagan commenced protecting Taiwan again. Sino-American relations weak again. China
not object as feared USSR tension.

Japan: improved relations with US impacted relations Japan. 1978 friendship treaty signed
China + Japan. Relationship developed. China became trading partner with Japan. Benefit for
PRC as further pressure on USSR. Soviets concerned two enemies becoming friends, fear USSR
encircled grew.

What US gain from detente with PRC?

US gained:
Vietnam: used PRC help get out of Nam. Useful for negotiations with N. Vietnamese. Drawback
for US never convinced China stick to word + stay out Vietnam like in Korea. Led to US half
measures in Nam as fear provoking Chinese intervention.

Wider contacts: US policy China pressured USSR maintain Detente US. US in willing play China
card with USSR. Feared more instability with Soviets. Relieved US commitment with Asia. Less
aggressive stance towards Asia. Made up for US letting PRC seat in UN.

PRC and CW

China significant factor dev of CW. Importance changed over time. PRC's influence grew with
nuke status, hostile relationship with USSR + growing rapprochement with US. Shift in balance
made CW tri-polar conflict (US, USSR, PRC)
 56

Tiananmen Square, PRC + US 1989

Following death Mao 1979, removal of gang of four + modernisation initiatives, relations PRC +
US more co-operative. Countries now less tension. Didn't move ahead either though.

1989 Tiananmen Square pro-democracy protest crushed by China gov. Led to protests in West
as well. Public wanted tough response to PRC handling. The protest did little change int.
position China + relation US. No econ sanctions or diplomatic isolation. US not want damage
trade links PRC.

US, PRC and end CW

Early 1990s, New Russian gov withdrew forces Pacific. Same time US not renew lease naval
base Philippines. China left dominate western Pacific. PRC leader of Comm nations. Former
satellite states E. Europe Communist regimes collapsed. Comm on way out.

New China leadership focused dev as World power. Established econ power than ideological
concerns. 1992 US gave PRC most favoured nation status. US + China now good trade links +
economic partners.

*SINO-SOVIET RELATIONS*

China becomes Communist Nation

Mao (Chairman of CCP) 1 October 1949.

Background
China + Russia troubled history, mainly cause shared border. Unequal treaties + ineffective gov
came to power in 1911 China. China grateful as new Bolsheviks regime.

Civil War in China

Encouraged by Bolshevik USSR success. Chinese Communist party grew. Wanted unify China.
After Japan withdrew China 1945 GMD + CCP turned + caused brutal civil war. 1949 CCP
victorious.
 57

Stalin and Mao: 1945-1953

Difference in USSR + CCP ideology. Stalin said Mao used peasants as basis rev. isn't genuine
Marxism. Should feature workers leading urban class-based war.

Ideological difference not only reason Stalin failed support CCP in civil war:
- Feared Mao as rival
- Not want CW spread Asia
- GMD recognise USSR claims over border
- Underestimated CCP, saw GMD as stronger.

Mao saw Stalin as self-interest divide + weaken China. Stalin told Mao in 1945 collab with GMD.
Stalin saw Mao as another Tito.

Sino-Soviet Treaty Alliance

When CCP won Civil War, Mao invited Moscow 1950. When there Sino treaty signed. Stalin
struggled to sign. US said treaty was USSR making puppets out of Chinese.
Khrushchev said treaty insult to Chinese people as poorly treated. USSR aimed take advantage
China using loans with interest.
Soviet construction and tech implemented into China even if less effective than West.

Sino-Soviet Relations after Stalin: 1953-1956

Mao some respect for Soviet leader, tension + suspicion building. Suggested Stalin delayed end
of Korean war exhaust PRC. After Stalin's death 1953 new Soviet leaders more equal with
China.

Mao, Khrushchev + ‘the split’: 1956-1964

3 issues undermined potential easing tension USSR + PRC when Khrushchev:

- Khrushchev’s ‘Secret Speech’ (Stalin’s crimes against party).
- Crushing of Hungarian uprising
- Khrushchev’s ‘peaceful co-existence’

Mao + PRC considered issues as clear departure Marxist Doctrine + USSR dominated by
‘revisionists’.
 58

Khrushchev's visit Beijing 1958

Attempted ease tension USSR + PRC by visiting Mao. Mao made Khrushchev feel
uncomfortable. His hotel full of mosquitos, no AC in summer. Khrushchev hated swimming,
wore tight shorts + rubber ring.

Taiwan

1958 Mao decided test US over Taiwan again. Without USSR intervention built up troops near
Taiwan for Invasion. US responded by preparing for war with PRC.
Mao backed down as too weak + no support USSR. Khrushchev called Trotskyist and USA called
Fanatic.
Soviets withdrew economic advisers from China + cancelled commercial contracts with PRC.

Sino-Soviet Relations + ‘Great Leap Forward’

What was it?

Initiated Mao 1958. Idea to rapidly develop China agri + industrial sectors. Hoped use China pop
+ no longer USSR aid. Grain and sell production basis. Hoped create proletariat class.

Mao introduced backyard steel furnaces every commune. Areas burnt scrap metal to make
steel. Crops rotting in fields while people made rubbish pig iron. Often melting pans etc…

Followed furnace policy until 1959. Steel only possible in factory. Didn't want crush Rev. spirit
of workers.
Agri techniques used primarily failed, lead to starvation of millions.

Failure + starvation
1959 vast famine in China. Mao continued export grain to not make Com look weak. 1961 GLF
terminated. Canadian + Australian grain imported.
14-30 million Chinese died in famine. Mao backed down leader PRC + became leader CCP.

USSR denounce GLF

1959 USSR called plan faulty in design. Mao furious, plan called unorthodox as millions dying
while Mao fat. Mao eager prove PRC better than USSR.
 59

Albania
USSR aid to Albania. PRC offered give aid instead. Tension grew between USSR + PRC.
Khrushchev refereed to Mao as Asian Hitler.

Sino-Soviet Relations + Cultural Rev 1966-1976

Mao wanted eliminate bourgeoisie thinking + behaviour. Believed reignite Rev. class struggle.
Many think as way of re-launching himself after GLF.

Main tool was Young to denounce family + elders to send to re-education centres. Mao's little
red book. Teachers etc… attacked.

No clear directives of how old culture disposed of, got out of hand + ½ million died. 1969 ended
cultural Rev to stop anarchy that endured. Young Maoist sent to learn off peasants.

Khrushchev finished in 1964. USSR still isolate PRC. USSR called Mao a fanatic for leading his
country into anarchy.

USSR used propaganda to attack PRC:

- Trading illegally with apartheid in S. Africa
- Receiving assistance W. Germany for nuke research.
- Worldwide opium trade
- Sending supplies US in Vietnam
MAO CALLED ACCUSATIONS ‘FAKE’

China, USSR + Nukes

Continuing dispute between China + USSR was nukes. 1957 USSR superior US as Sputnik. Mao
saw as chance engage US in Brinkmanship + undermine them. USSR feared nuke war. Mao
didn't as saw as unavoidable.

Khrushchev wanted use USSR superiority convince US ‘Peaceful Coexistence’. Test Ban Treaty
intensified tension PRC + USSR. Mao saw as USSR abandoning role of leader Rev.
 60

Khrushchev said Mao want US + USSR destroy so PRC number 1. USSR not willing give China
nuke programme.

Dev of nuke programme in China proved to USSR didn't need help. Both US + USSR worried PRC
capabilities nukes.

Invasion of Czechoslovakia, 1968

Brezhnev Doctrine said USSR maintain order E. Europe satellite states. When C tried gain
independence Doctrine put into practice, tanks sent crush Prague Spring.

Mao condemned USSR, no longer socialist behaviour + maybe turn against China.

Sino-Soviet border war, 1969

PRC said USSR no different from previous Tsar rule, as not returned Chinese land 19th Century.
Disputes + 1969 war. Mao dug tunnels in case nuke war. Both sides pointed missiles each other.
Rivalry between 2 main Communist countries.

PRC, USSR + Indochina

Strategic for China as on border. PRC involved peace talks 1954. US refused acknowledge PRC
representative.

Vietnam war
China moral + diplomatic support Ho Chi Minh. Said US involvement ‘naked American
imperialism’. USSR + PRC fighting to support Vietnam. USSR won. 1978 Soviet-Vietnamese
friendship treaty signed.

Sino-Soviet clashes Cambodia + Vietnam

PRC lost influence with Nam to USSR. pol pot ran Cambodia, followed Cultural Rev worse than
China. Vietnam tried invade + overthrow Chinese. China called Nam Invasion Soviet
expansionism. PLA invade Vietnam as USSR in Cambodia. PLA lost as heavy casualties but said
won.
 61

*WHY DID DÉTENTE END IN A SECOND COLD WAR?*

Period started around 1968-1980 with Ronald Reagan becoming president. Means relaxation of
tension, 1970s used to describe attempts by US + USSR establish cooperative relationship. Also
used for (USA + China) (W. Europe + USSR). After 1980 detente replaced by ‘second Cold War’.

Reasons Soviet-American rapprochement?

Improvement of relations as growing awareness nuke war. Early 1960s US + USSR ready take
step reduce nuke. By 1969 USSR reached nuke parity with US so equal when negotiate.

Also had individual reasons for relaxation:

USSR's reason detente

Its economy was stagnating. Order deal with economic problems + improve standards living for
USSR needed able transfer econ resources from weapons to consumer goods. Also import tech.
from West.

Also cause USSR's relationship PRC deteriorating. Sino-Soviet split almost led war. Crucial keep
China isolated + improve relations West.

US’ reason detente

Detente initiated by Nixon + Kissinger. Need way to end Nam war + wanted US follow more
realistic foreign policy which change int. sit. Pursuit of realpolitik.

Realpolitik is a system of politics or principles based on practical rather than moral or

ideological considerations.

Nixon hoped use detente get USSR + PRC put pressure N. Vietnam end war + retain US’ global
rule by negotiation instead confrontation. Arms control free resources for US economy.

Reasons PRC-USA rapprochement?

China relation with USSR low late 1960s. China worried about international isolation + saw
improved relations with US way prevent + payback to USSR. For US improved relationship China
part of realpolitik foreign policy. Attempt US show trying for peace.
 62

US knew China give extra leverage with USSR.

Reasons improved East-West relations Europe?

Pressure for detente from Europe. 1968 events = political instability both E + W Europe with
USSR Invasion Czechoslovakia + student riots France. Willy Brandt (W. Germany Chancellor)
took lead try improve both Germanys. Believed whole continent benefit reduction tensions +
greater links. Known as Ostpolitik.

Ostpolitik was the foreign policy of western European countries of detente with reference to
the former communist bloc, especially the opening of relations with the Eastern bloc by the
Federal Republic of Germany (West Germany) in the 1960s.

From USSR side impetus improved relations Europe. Formal peace treaty after WW2 never
signed. Soviets wanted win Western acceptance division Germany.

Successes of Detente?

Arms agreements US + USSR: SALT I

After CMC, US + USSR signed control agreements. Most significant arms agreement was SALT I
in 1972. Treaty covered agreement in:
- ABM Treaty: ABMs only allowed two sites each, each site only 100 missiles. Deterred
MAD.
- Interim Treaty: limited number ICBMs + SLBMs.
- Basic principles Agreement: laid rules conduct nuke war + dev weapons. Committed
sides work together Peaceful Co-existence. 1973 followed PNW treaty.

Jason Mason said SALT I reduced tension between powers. Co-operation spirit in 1972 + 74
Nixon visit + 1973 Brezhnev visit.

Severe criticisms SALT I not going far enough limit nukes as didn't mention MIRVs. Said that
freezer cavalry but not the tanks

SALT II
Areas discussion still remained + SALT II negotiations began 74-79. Treaty agreed:
- Limit n0 delivery nuke weapons (ICBMs, SLBMs, heavy bombers)
 63

- Ban testing deployment new types ICBMs, heavy ICBMs + rapid reload systems.

Most extensive + complicated arms agreement negotiated. By time signed, Democrats +

Republicans criticising arms control that benefit USSR. Never ratified by US senate.

Agreements between 2 Germanys + USSR

Number treaties between USSR, E. Germany + W. Germany 1970s:

- Moscow Treaty: signed 1970 USSR, Poland, FR Germany. Recognised border E + W
Germany + accepted Post WW2 border E. Poland.
- Final Quadripartite Protocol (1972): agreed maintenance status quo in Berlin, West
legal access to routes to city. W. Berlin greater degree security.
- Basic Treaty (1972): signed by E + W Germany. Accepted existence 2 Germanys +
increase trade.

These agreements reduced EU tension. Criticised by some in US giving legal recognition to USSR
over E. Europe.

Agreements US + China

Areas improvement between 2 countries:

- US dropped objections China seat in Security Council.
- Trade + travel restrictions lifted.
- Sport events increased such as ping pong diplomacy event in Beijing.
- Nixon visit China

Detente between US + China as deterioration China + USSR relations. Gave US more leverage +
bargaining power arms agreements USSR. Known as triangular diplomacy. US continued protect
Taiwan.

High point Detente: Helsinki Agreement

At Moscow summit 1972, Nixon agreed participate EU security Conference. Helsinki 1973.
Attended 33 countries + final agreement 1975. Took form as ‘THREE BASKETS’:
- Basket 1: security basket. Followed ‘Ostpolitik’ negotiations USSR + EU borders not
altered by force. E + W Germany recognised.
 64

- Basket 2: Co-operation basket. Called closer ties + collaboration economic, scientific +

cultural.
- Basket 3: Human rights basket. All signatories respect HR + individual freedoms,
conscience/religion, freedom of travel.

Basket 3 most controversial as USSR disagree. W hoped undermine USSR control in S. States +
organisations set up Monitor USSR action against Helsinki agreements. Brezhnev important of
Helsinki Basket 1 + 2, prepared sign agreement despite 3.

Detente caused cooperation in space. 1975 1 US astronaut + 2 USSR cosmonauts met when
spacecrafts docked 225 km above earth. Space race seemed symbolic improved international
atmosphere.

Why did Detente put US + USSR under pressure

Came under pressure as US believed arms agreement benefiting USSR. USSR building strategic
superiority based on ICBMs.

Actions in Middle East + Africa indicate USSR still expanding influence.

- Yom Kippur war 1973, US suspected USSR known Egypt's surprise attack Israel.
Agreement said US + USSR not keep treaties.
- USSR involved Civ. W Angola, supported Liberation Angola with mili aid. USSR + Cuba aid
key to success MPLA.
- USSR + Cubans supported Ethiopia V.S Somalia 1977. Scale USSR intervention worrying
for US. Seemed USSR Scheme World expansion. Case USSR randomly assisting Marxist
rebels. Didn't benefit USSR in long run.

Was disillusionment over USSR attitude towards basket 3 made at Helsinki. Under Jimmy Carter
1976 US tried link economic deals, improve human rights when trading USSR. USSR allowed jew
emigrate. Resented by USSR.

Factors meant end 1970s, complexities/contradictions Detente explosive.

Why Detente collapse?

Already struggling survive late 1970s, collapsed completely when USSR invaded Afghanistan
1979. For US seen as final proof. Carter said serious threat world peace. He responded to
Soviets by refusing approve SALT II, stopping all e. exports + US athletes 1980 Moscow
 65

Olympics. Announced Carter Doctrine (committed US intervention if USSR threatened Persian

Gulf) + increased defence.

Detente fails? + Historiography

Writers 1970s + autobiographies Nixon + Kissinger said Detente reduced tension + nuke war.
Supported by Post-revisionists. Detente necessary to find ways to prevent war.

Gadis says Detente meant make dangerous situation more predictable + prevent rivalry in dev.
World. Relations 1960-70s less dangerous than prior.

Right Wing US say Detente weak as allowed USSR continue strengthen + access W. tech. It
failed as it helped keep USSR going when should have collapsed prior.

Know a bit about Carter

Second Cold War

Reagan elected on wave anti-Communist feeling + belief US reassert power in world. Also
thought Detente failure.

US involvement Central America 1980s:

- Guatemala: US aid military coup 1989 that failed.
- El Salvador: US supported repressive right regime 1980-90 CivW.
- Honduras + Costa Rica: Training ground CIA activities.
- Cuba: Com state under Castro distrusted Reagan.
- Nicaragua: CIA destabilised Sandinistas, rev gov believed aiding rebels in El Salvador.
- Grenada: US marines invade 1983 remove pro-Com mili leader.
- Panama: General Manuel Noriega captured as drug trafficker by US forces Invasion
1989.

Reagan introduced tough anti-Soviet policy n0 ways:

- Defence spending increased 13% 1982 +8% every following years.
- New strategic Defence initiative announced 1983.
- Reagan Doctrine announced. Gave assistance anti-Communist insurgents fighting
against Comm gov like Nicaragua. Look above.
- Used aggressive language towards USSR, calling evil empire.
 66

Renewed tension CW not helped by USSR situation with infirm ill leaders preventing initiative.
Brezhnev died 1982 replaced by Andropov and Chernenko who died fast.
Most dangerous point CW2 era shooting down Korean airline in Soviet airspace. All passengers
killed + W. annoyed. USSR said was CIA spy plane. Reagan called brutes.

1983 Andropov denounced US actions of being expansionist and too militarily power hungry.

Bleak situation Soviet-American relationship changed radically when Gorbachev come power
USSR 1985.

*THE IMPACT OF NON-ALIGNED STATES ON THE COLD WAR*

Non-Aligned countries = ones that rejected alliances + ties to superpowers.

Group viewed as “Third World” as decided 3rd path not in line with US or USSR. Avoided part
CW politics, saw as potentially destructive. Most important aspects of CW connected to social +
political dev. Third World.

“Third World”
Term that grew out of dev Western Cap. world bloc + Communist bloc to describe countries
belonging neither Cap. or Comm. Third World later meant lack econ. dev. which confused. Not
correct way describe Non-Aligned, quickly obvious econ. differences between country. Non-
Aligned movement idea pioneered by Yugoslavia.

End WW2 CW developed simultaneously with decolonization Africa + Asia. European Colonial
powers exhausted so colonial powers took opportunity independence. Key factor unity Non-
Aligned States desire support anti-imperialists.

Non-Aligned States also anti-American CW. US accused of ‘neo-colonialism’ even though

condemned European colonial powers. US created Spheres of influence around globe as CW
intensified. Seen by some as extension of neo-colonialism.

Some important leading members Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) anti-Soviet as believed guilty
as US of ‘Imperialism.
 67

Aims of Non-Aligned Movement?

“Non-Aligned” comes from Indian Prime Minister speech 1954. At meeting 1961 using points
from speech criteria established. States took advantage of USSR + USA as both sides competing
for them. If pressure too high with one power threaten side with other.

As more independence colonial power Non-Alignment bloc grew. 1960s Dev World +½ UN
members. Many States Non-Aligned, NAM gained importance in Dev World shifting power from
US. These States backed by Comm bloc countries.

Many smaller in UN believed Non-Aligned States brought “Fresh Debate” to General Assembly
made up by 2 groups:
Non-Alignment Movement 115 states, Yugoslavia 1961
Group of 77 established after UN Conference Trade + Dev. in Geneva

Non-Aligned bloc sometimes works with UN General Assembly. 77 group worked gain support
dev. countries putting pressure industrial nations. Necessary as many states desperate for econ.
aid + modernisation. Attempted exert influence during K War, Congo, Suez Crisis, Afghanistan,
Falklands War, Iran-Iraq War.

Growth of Non-Aligned Movement

Why did PRC join NAM after Sino-Soviet split:

- Wanted avoid hegemony over China by US/USSR
- keen to present as leader of new liberated colonies.
- Believed that movement work with Marxist ideology.

First Non-Aligned States conference April 1955 Bandung (Indonesia). Main aim increase
membership in independent bloc. Principle of ‘peaceful resolution’ established.

Cold War + Non-Aligned Movement 1960s + 1970s

As group, N. Aligned more influence General Assembly UN by 1960s. Key political content:
- Encourage solidarity of member states
- Warn superpowers against spreading CW into 3rd world.
- Pressure against war to settle disputes
- Counter imperialism
- Commit to restructure World economic order
 68

NAM held summit meeting in Belgrade 1961. Coincided with Berlin Crisis. Non-Aligned State
heads sent letter Kennedy + Khrushchev warning nuke war + promoting ‘peaceful solution’.

In 1960s Non-Aligned movement had taken seriously as more power than superpowers in
Assembly.

Nam continued grow but idea bloc began collapse. 1962 Sino- Indian border war undermined
NAM cred. Big blow to solidarity + ‘peaceful resolution’ principle when NAM formed. By end
1960s Non-Aligned leaders gone as overthrown.

By 1970 enthusiasm over NAM evaporated, many post-colonial African regimes failed + moved
towards USSR. Cuba's role in NAM questioned as had ‘alignment’ with USSR.

US not support NAM as members anti-colonial which lead US into conflicts EU allies. US focused
preventing spread Comm. US not accept 3rd world countries back USSR regimes. Kissinger saw
1970 Chile election as fixed.

States chose USSR as provided econ dev, + aid, modernisation. US wanted to crush. Even if
states nationalistic, turned to Soviets.

1979 NAM Summit meeting Havana

Initiated by Chairman NAM, Castro. Ha Anna Summit considered natural alliance with USSR.
Jamaican Prime Minister made pro USSR speech + praised Castro for strengthening forces V.S.
West imperialism.

CW + Non-Aligned Movement 1980s 1990s

1979 NAM members turned each other as USSR Invasion Afghanistan. Non-Aligned States ally
USSR supported Invasion. Muslim states strongly opposed.

End 1980s Third world ceased exist. Dramatic eco, pol changes 1970s moved African, Asian +
Latin countries different direction. E. Asian countries rapid dev while Latin stagnated. Political
Islam on the rise.
Non-Aligned Movement began focusing solution economic problems instead political issues.
NAM members increased until year 2000.
Was called “Child of CW.”
 69

*CHALLENGES TO USSR CONTROL IN 1945-1980*

Challenge of Yugoslavia

Yugoslavs organised successful resistance against Germany in WW2 + liberated country 1945.
Marshall Tito (resistance leaders) elected leader new republic 1945. Tito popular as stopped
Germans, made Communism popular, not because of USSR influence. Tito wanted free trade
West + USSR. Yugoslavs unhappy Stalin's lack support formation Balkan Federation.

Max tension 1948. Stalin expelled Yugoslavia from Cominform + cut off economic aid. Failed
topple Tito as continued without USSR support. Regime maintained Comm, involved trade with
W + aid from International Monetary Fund (IMF).

Why Tito Survive?

Resistance against Nazis WW2 made pop leader, didn't depend USSR support keep power. Gov
not installed by Red Army as left 1944. Received US mili + econ aid from US in 1950. Enabled
him maintain independence from USSR.

Stalin's reaction to Tito?

Stalin failed remove Tito, took revenge by carrying purge trials in E. Europe on ‘Titoists’. Using
fabricated charges, leaders like Hungarian foreign minister Laszlo Rajk, demoted, tried,
imprisoned, executed in late 1940s.

Got rid of open Tito sympathisers, secret ones remained. Repressive nature regimes in satellite
states meant USSR rule resented by ordinary people, never achieved pop support. From 1945
onwards more challenges: E. Germany 1953, Poland + Hungary 1956, Czechoslovakia 1968,
Poland 1980s.

Challenge East Germany, 1953

Relaxation controls + continuing repression helped cause E. German riots 1953. EG facing crisis
at time as mass exodus E. Germans to West through Berlin. Beria (Deputy USSR P. Minister)
suggested get rid unstable + expensive GDR by selling to West. Didn't occur, colleagues believed
possible towards unified Socialist Germany. Walter Ulbricht (EG leader) forced USSR gov take
conciliatory approach in policy forced collectivisation farms + socialization. Softer approach too
late + no attempt reduce high production targets, set for the workers. Created dangerous
 70

situation + 16-17 June, Berlin workers + elsewhere EG Rose up in revolt. Was first time anything
like this happened in USSR sphere influence, Uprising suppressed by Red Army troops. Revolt
embarrassing for USSR. Beria arrested + executed being Western agent. Idea of friendly neutral
Germany abandoned. Repression continued and Ulbricht + Khrushchev concentrate building up
GDR as separate state.

US felt had do something help EGs. Called for 4-power foreign ministers’ conference discuss
future Germany, continued provocative broadcasts from radio stations W. Berlin try prolong
unrest EG.

Challenges USSR Control Under Khrushchev

Khrushchev + de-Stalinisation
1956, at 20th Congress of Comm Party, he Proclaimed policy de-Stalinisation. For time
strengthened position at home, weakened authority over Comm elsewhere. Had use more
force than Stalin ever done to keep control Hungary.

1956, Khrushchev gave speech to Twentieth Congress Comm Party, denounced Stalin.
Criticised Stalin's regime, his crimes + ‘cult personality’. Comms not used mistakes admitted
on such large scale.

Khrushchev + Tito
Khrushchev said Stalin made major error with Tito in Yugoslavia. Argued Stalin understood Tito,
Yugoslavia never break away. Restored relations with Tito as visited 1955 + 1956. Tito
maintained Non-Aligned status with USSR.

Khrushchev + Poland
He not intend revise USSR's relations other satellite states. Many satellite states saw
Khrushchev approach Yugoslavia as sign he accept find own way with Comm.

End June 1956 Poland, industrial Poznan workers revolted. Gomulka brought back as First
Secretary (without approval Khrushchev) + implemented rapid de-Stalinisation programme. Oct
1956, Khrushchev went Warsaw + USSR mili forces positioned. Gomulka refused Khrushchev
intimidation + threatened arm Polish workers. Gomulka also said to Khrushchev, no intention
removing Poland from Warsaw Pact. Calmed Khrushchev + agreed allow Gomulka remain
power (was first compromise). Gomulka became ally Khrushchev + freedom of Poles gradually
removed.
 71

Khrushchev + Hungary
Did not compromise, was determined as Stalin maintain USSR control in satellite states. Polish
success spread to Hungary, people repressed by Matyas Rakowski. Crowds demonstrated swap
for Nagy. Khrushchev agreed by riots continued. Sent Red Army restore order, failed + Nagy
negotiated withdrawal forces 28 Oct 1956. Also said Hungary leave Warsaw Pact + plan share
Hungary power with non-Comm groups.

Khrushchev not tolerate, West focused on Suez so launched offensive against Hungarians.
20,000 Hungarians died + 3,000 Soviets. Nagy executed + Janos Kadar replaced.

Suez Crisis occurred after Nasser (Egypt) tried nationalise canal. British, French + Israelis
invaded try regain control. Condemned by US + USSR. Britain + France forced withdraw +
Nasser maintained control.

US actions?
Hungarian revolt encouraged by CIA via radio. People thought US support. US said not save
Nagy. No proof Eisenhower considered involve. Though Khrushchev risk nuke war than lose
state.

USSR act differently Hungary + Poland?

Poland Comm Party retain control, Hungary lost control. Nagy’s choice make country neutral
meant weakening defensive ring of states W border since 1944. Khrushchev prepared use force
keep power.

Result of Khrushchev + USSR?

His position in USSR strengthened by Hungary + Suez. Meant USSR confident US not intervene
in USSR are control. Also, that USSR not rely loyalty satellite states so force sometimes
necessary.

Brezhnev + Czechoslovakia challenge, 1968

1960s dissatisfaction of Czechs peaked as repressive regime. Dubcek (first Secretary Comm
Party 1968) began ‘Prague Spring’. Aimed create “Socialism with human face”. Introduced
measures modernize + liberalize economy. Also, wider power t. unions, expansion trade with W
+ freedom travel. Abolished censorship + encouraged criticism gov. Assured Czechoslovakia
remain Warsaw Pact remembered Hungary 1956.
 72

USSR actions?
Brezhnev + other Warsaw Pact leaders worried about Prague, USSR decided use force. Aug
1968, USSR troops invaded + ended Prague Spring. Husak replaced who subservient Moscow.

Results Invasion Czechoslovakia?

To justify Czechoslovakia actions, Brezhnev did ‘Brezhnev Doctrine’ (Said that all Socialist
countries responsible one another + ‘entire Comm movement’ + whoever disagree negatively
affecting USSR).

Action seen as justified + necessary, clear that any attempt ‘liberalisation’ in E. bloc not
tolerated. Reform plans abandoned which disastrous for future economy Soviet bloc.

Invasion Czechoslovakia damaged USSR rep. Yugoslavia, Albania + China condemned actions.
Comms stopped looking Moscow for guidance. Slowed down Detente process.

Poland Challenge 1980s

Late 1970s, industrial unrest, food shortages + strikes as poor econ situation. Gov opposition
centred port city Gdansk + 1980 workers strike. Led by Lech Walesa + successful securing
economic, political rights + right strike + trade unions. Led establishment Independent trade
union ‘Solidarity’. 1981 claimed 10 million membership + seen as threat USSR. Red Army sent
troops Polish border, not invade. Kania (leader Poland) convinced Brezhnev restore order
himself, possible US warnings stopped use USSR force. Polish army seized control gov Dec 1981.
Jaruzelski installed as prime minister + declared martial law, banned Solidarity + arrested
activists. 1983 gov in control, econ problems + Solidarity support remained.

Declaration martial law Poland + Afghan Invasion weakened detente.

Catholic Church Poland unique position E. bloc. Marxism = religion banned. Attempts curb
power Polish Church boosted among support of people. 1970 leader Gierek allowed religion in
schools. John Paul II visit Poland 1979 boosted Catholicism. Undermined atheist concept of
Comm.
 73

Did USSR leaders follow Stalin's structural legacy?

No fundamental change relations USSR + satellite states under Stalin. Less so under Brezhnev:
- Power remained Moscow, satellite states economically developed to suit USSR. After
Brezhnev Doctrine introduced, all economic experiments aimed at modernisation +
competitiveness ended.
- Leaders satellite states remained loyal Moscow.
- Any attempts dealt with ruthlessly by Red Army, Brezhnev Doctrine called necessary
preserve Socialism.

Afghanistan Challenge

Brezhnev Doctrine used as reason USSR invade Afghanistan 1979. USSR anxious prevent spread
‘Islamic extremism’ into USSR.

Instability near USSR borders 1980s

● 1979: Muslim Rev in Iran overthrow Shah.

● 1979-1980: USSR Invasion Afghanistan.
● 1980-1988: Iran-Iraq border conflict.
● Strait of Hormuz, key strategic passageway for oil to W. nations.

Why USSR Intervene Afghanistan?

April 1978, PDP of Afghanistan seized power. Was pro-Soviet + received econ assistance
Moscow. New gov's social + economic policies:
- Land reform
- Women's rights
- Secular education

Resisted by fundamentalist Muslim groups + factions within PDP. One faction led by Amin
which came power coup 1979.

Continued instability in country as anti-Muslim policies + Afghan Muslims joined Mujahedin +

declared jihad on supporters of Amin. His regime dependent on aid USSR. His relation with
USSR strained, he began contact with CIA. To USSR only option intervene militarily + replace
Amin with Babrak Kamal.
 74

Official USSR reasons invade Afghanistan:

● USSR not want ‘Afghan Revolution’ defeated + country turned into Sha's Iran.
● USSR believed victory ‘counter-rev’ result ‘bloodbath’ caused by religious zealots +
vengeful feudal lords.
● USSR believed victory for counter-revolutions allow massive US mili involvement
Afghanistan. Was threat as bordered USSR.
● USSR said would cease be great power if turned away from making ‘unpopular but
necessary decisions.

Unofficial reasons for invasion:

● Moderate W response Invasion Czechoslovakia possibly encourage USSR decision
Afghanistan.
● Detente already in difficulties, impact of Invasion on Soviet-American relations not a
concern.

Following, New Kamal regime dependent Soviet mili strength maintain control against rev
troops of Afghan Islamic forces. Afghan Communists already ‘self-destructed’ before USSR
Invasion.

Impact Rev in Iran on USSR

Jan 1979 Shah of Iran (US backed) removed in Islamic uprising + replaced Ayatollah Khomeini
(Muslim fundamentalist). New regime threatened USSR security. Central Asian Republics of
USSR bordering Afghanistan had Muslim pop + spread Islamic fundamentalism destabilise
areas.

US response to USSR Invasion Afghanistan?

USSR totally miscalculated impact of actions on W as was seen as Soviet expansionism. P. Carter
said Invasion pose most serious threat world peace since WW2. Imposed actions against USSR
in Carter administration:
● ‘Carter Doctrine’ announced, pledged US intervention Persian Gulf if USSR threatened.
● Carter's National Security team resist USSR Invasion by providing Mujahedin rebels with
weapons.

After 1981 Reagan begun aggressive more direct approach in Afghanistan towards USSR.
Increased levels aid + mid-1980s began supply Mujahedin + Afghan allies mainly via Pakistan.
1985 supply of Stinger missiles turned tide Afghan War as challenged USSR aircrafts.
 75

As war attrition continued end Brezhnev's rule + Andropov and Chernenko, impact US aid gave
rebels upper hand.

Afghan War cost +1,000,000 Afghan lives + 25,000 Red Army soldiers. Cost USSR $8 billion per
year. USSR pulled out as political thinking of new Gorbachev different. Believed money needed
for domestic reforms. The war didn't fit his new foreign policy. USSR no longer pay bill of world
Communism. Gorbachev announced intension remove troops 1988. By same time 1989
complete withdrawal carried out.

Afghanistan + Impact on Detente

Right-wing view in US, Afghan Invasion key example USSR perusing ‘Marxist-Leninist’
expansionism. USSR responsible for breakdown detente.

Post-revisionist view, USSR responding defensively genuine threat to security. US response

cynical + intended take advantage unstable situation caused by Islamic fundamentalism
Afghanistan. Changes US foreign policy by Carter's adviser + Reagan's gov caused CW2 rather
than Afghan Invasion.

*THE UNITED NATIONS AND THE COLD WAR*

UN + Emergence Cold War

Cold War defining impact on UN. potential for UN viable world force peace making difficult, two
superpowers (core of UN) working against one another.

UN was powerless to intervene over many conflicts between US + USSR. As CW developed late
1940s fear UN marginalised/irrelevant in disputes. UN's only way not become irrelevant was
pursue peacekeeping during CW.

UN + Global Cold War, 1950s

As hostility increased viability UN further decreased. International relations determined aligning

of individual countries with superpowers.
 76

April 1950, NSC-68 said USSR ‘slave society’ + claimed resist Comm spread with force.
McCarthyism led to US UN workers seen as USSR spies. Many saw UN as tool to fight
Communism + maintain interests.

USSR saw UN as tool by W. Capitalists, US refusal 1949 recognise PRC gov. USSR boycotted UN
when Korea War begun 1950 cause of PRC refusal.

Korea 1950-53
Security Council responsibility decide which crisis threats to peace or ‘acts aggression’ then
decide action. UN sent mili to Korea as N invaded S 1950.

USSR vetoed S. Ks joining UN + not recognise legitimacy N. Korea gov. 25 June 1950, Security
Council found out invasion + decided what UN do. US faith in UN strong as sent troops fight
under flag.

USSR not present as boycotted, S. Council only pro-W. powers. USSR not present use veto.
Made mockery of UN.

After SC resolution 25 June 1950, 27 June resolution passed for UN members protect S. US Air +
7th Fleet bombed K. 30 June, Article 51 justified US troops take back Korea.

Anglo-French resolution 7 July for unified fight K. MacArthur entered as General UN army. At
first under control US. Other people from NATO fought. Sit of UN changed as USSR joined +
gained presidency SC.

US objective take N + reunify K with W Gov. UN didn't give US permission. US knew USSR would
Veto so did alternative.

US transferred UN power to General Assembly where had major support. 3 Nov 1950, GA
passed ‘Uniting Peace’ resolution. Said decisions over security that vetoed by SC transferred to
GA.

Main reason USSR joined UN as power Veto. US peace treaty made useful. When USSR vetoed
China withdraw K, US passed as GA made final choice.

Mili situation intensified as China PLA 1951. US no longer push for unification, MacArthur
sacked + armistice agreed July 1953.
 77

UN K action successful in W. In USSR seen as US manipulation of UN. Khrushchev said never

trust security of country if run by foreigner.

View in Washington that UN not faithful maintaining peace.

Suez Canal Crisis, 1956

UN role more favourable than K. 1953, UN Secretary General was Swede, was more
‘independent’ as previous pro-W. Had new vision UN in CW. wanted UN peacekeeping forces
focus prevent conflict.

Nasser (P of Egypt) actions began crisis. Was offered US funds for Aswan Dam. Accepted
weapons from Czechoslovakia so US stopped funds. Nasser nationalized Suez Canal. Was vital
waterway for British + French shipping. British initiated plan with Israel retake canal from Egypt.

Plan = Israel attack canal, Brit + French troops enter prevent conflict + ‘protect’. Oct 1956 Israel
attacked (US didn't know plan).

US furious over attack + called SC meeting day after attack. US resolution ordered withdrawal
Israelis + criticised Brit + Fr, called for UN members not intervene. Britain applied veto.

Crisis passed to GA 4 Nov, Assembly passed resolution creating UN peacekeeping force called
UNEF. Force kept independence as only allowed county forces not in SC.
UNEF had follow tight restrictions on authority:
● Temporary occupation to establish stability in conflict zone.
● No role in regions political + mili conditions.
● No power in Egypt, only situate on ceasefire lines. Costs borne by individual
contributors.

USSR still concerned transfer power to GA + worried how UNEF develop. USSR tolerated as was
embarrassment to US as UK + Fr started it.

UNEF forces arrived Egypt 15 Nov 1956. Before Dec UK + Fr troops left. Peacekeeping force
successful as US + USSR not working against each other.

Impact CW on UN's 1st Decade (aka 1950s)

Had negative impact early years UN. Korea broadened confl it into War with China, went
beyond UN's principle mandate. Suez success as both powers work together.
 78

UN failed act in Hungary 1956. Also failed stop US interference in states 1950s. US involved
1953 Iranian overthrow + Guatemala 1954.

UN + Cold War in 1960s

Congo Crisis
1960s African states escape colonial domination, nationalist movements caused ideological
battle W + E. Former colonies needed support as economically vulnerable like Congo when
Belgium left June 1960. Didn't want conflict with Congolese nationalist groups. Not prepared
for independence as: no Congolese trained docs, lawyers, Mili officers weeks before
independence.

Lumumba (PM) + Kasavubu (Pr) asked UN help over domestic crisis.

National army (ANC) mutinied, in Congo remained largely Belgian ANC pop that rampaging.
Belgian gov sent troops protect nationals from chaos.

Tshombe (leader mineral rich S. province Katanga) declared territory independent. Lumumba
believed Tshombe made decision under influence that Brit Fr want riches in region.

Many problems for UN dealing Congo Crisis:

● How achieve withdrawal Belgian forces
● Restore public order
● Defend Un force, Congolese national gov not in control
● Avoid interference local pol. Difficult as UN helping Lumumba gov against group that
seceded
● Prevent crisis drawing superpowers.

UN response sending peacekeeping forces remove Belgian troops. Resolution passed in SC of

Tunisia. Brit + Fr not use Veto to block resolution. UN forced called ONUC set up. Most difficult
mission for UN since creation.

Lumumba turned to superpowers for help. Both US + USSR referred him to UN. Suggests
initially neither power saw Congo as vital interest. Possibly saw potential risk of conflict in
country.
Convincing Belgians withdraw crucial for UN success. Wanted stability before withdraw. To do
this ONUC have disarm ANC. Belgians encouraged Katanga's declaration independence. UN not
want attack as troops go beyond peacekeepers.
 79

USSR interest, attempt limit UN involvement caused Lumumba anger. Said UN tool for
imperialists. Accusation picked up by dev countries. Dev in Congo attracted USSR as use UN as
excuse. Lumumba anti-Western. Sit more chaotic 1960 as Kasavubu dismissed Lumumba,
Lumumba dismissed President as response.

ONUC force caught in Congo Pol. Andrew Cordier (SG Congo) closed air fields + state capital's
radio as response chaos. Actions strengthened Lumumba's enemies. Now could not move,
deploy troops, persuade people support him via radio. His actions anti-Lumumba. UN pro-
Western.

For USSR Un troops = tools for W. Congo C becoming more ideological as USSR more involved.
USSR accused ONUC as pro-W for culture + pol. Sept SC denounced UN failure confront
imperialism in Congo. USSR said UN against radical aspirations of 3rd World + countering
interests new Afr + Asia nations. Even said SC responsible pro-W in Congo.

1960 Khrushchev told SC of UN, ONUC's failings in Congo. Challenged SG role, said too much
power for W. He said office replaced by ‘troika’ (body of 3 representatives from W, Comm,
Afro-Asian). He said make neither side in CW exploit others in office. USSR hoped exploit Afro-
Asian as anti-US.

Little support for ‘troika’, would have formalized bi-polar structure of CW int system. USSR
dropped troika plans. USSR eager follow direction of Afro-Asian regions as lost influence in dev
countries cause of Sino-Soviet.

Swedish SC of UN survived Khrushchev attack, still seen as pro UN. UN causing intervention of
other powers.

Sept, Mobuto (ANC Comma) announced a Mili coup. Expelled USSR + E bloc diplomats from
Leopoldville. USSR believed W planned. Lumumba appeal USSR direct involvement. Mobuto +
Kasavubu formed alliance, made Lumumba ask UN for aid.

Nov 1960 GA accepted delegation from Kasavubu + Mobutu, indirectly accepted regime.

Lumumba left protection of UN in capital. Intended reach supporters + organise attack on new
regime. Was captured by ANC troops. Was brutally murdered few weeks later.
 80

For ONUC failed mission as didn't protect Lumumba. Appeared that UN troops intended lose
him as convenient for US + W. Believed CIA involved.

Indonesia + Morocco removed contingents from ONUC, others threatened. USSR demanded
dismissal SG.

1961 SC authorized ONUC use force if had to prevent Civ.War. Went beyond peacekeeping
principle. US had P. Kennedy who more sensitive towards Afr + Asian nations, hoped calming
influence.

Katanga focus of crisis after Lumumba dead. Tshombe's admin stable + ONUC not interfere.
Katanga's success cause of EU + Afr white support. Maj UN member states hated Katanga
regime. ONUC's role Katanga unclear.

1961 superpower pressure decreased as wanted unify Congo. Swedish UN guy under pressure.
Katanga ignored unification attempts, could do so as backed by EU mercenaries + advisers.

Aug 1961, next Congo Crisis commenced, Conor Cruise (SG representative) ordered ONUC
forces arrest + expel Katanga foreign forces that back Tshombe. Ended in complete failure
ONUC, gave Tshombe more confidence.

Few weeks later Conor launched larger attack, at first told ONUC successful crushing Katanga.
SC furious as not consulted. W bloc countries not support mission, ONUC forces pulled back. UN
wanted assert dominance as supers less like involve.

Sept 1961, Swedish guy met Tshombe in N. Rhodesia, attempted resolve. Plane crashed +
Swede killed. Replaced by U Thant of Burma (SG).

Division of UN over Congo now about ‘Imperialist C’ V.S. ‘Afro-Asian’. US moving against EU
position.

‘Non-aligned’ bloc gaining influence in UN. Attacked UN failure against Katanga regime. Nov SC
passed res authorising ONUC use more force crush Katanga regime. End 1962, UN in control of
Katanga + Congo reunified. 1964 ONUC withdrew.

Tshombe elected as PM of Congo. Mobuto replaced Kasavubu as Head State 1965. Mobutu
wielded real power in Congo. Remained power for +30 years. His regime formed by UN
extremely corrupt.
 81

Impact of CW on UN 1960s
Congo series failures for UN. 1960s engaged in more peacekeeping missions. UN worked in non-
strategically important regions. UN only successful when not threaten US + USSR interests.

UN not involve in Cuba after ‘Bay Pigs’ 1961. Avoided involve in sphere influence of powers. As
CW gone global, philosophy meant any country where powers got interests.

UN + Detente 1968-1979

Detente relaxed Superpower tension. US + USSR scared of conflict escalate into MAD. Both
eager work with UN for ‘peace’.

Late 1960s, UN changed. Power shifted from W to ‘non-aligned’ states. US no longer have own
way in GA. UN more comfortable as power balanced.

Changes caused many successes for UN like, Kashmir, India, Pakistan + Cyprus.

UN still useless when come to superpower aggression. USSR forces invaded Czechoslovakia
1968. SC attempted pass resolution condemning action, vetoed by USSR. UN powerless stop
USSR.
UN powerless when US involvement Chile. Oct 1970, Allende elected as Head Office of Marxist
Salvador gov. CIA involved trying ruin his chances in elections, still made it though. Nixon
authorized CIA unseat him by destabilising gov next 3 years. 1973 Mili coup took control of
Chile. Allende dead, replaced by Pinochet (anti-Comm General). UN not involves.

UN + Second Cold War

1980s, US + USSR left Detente + continued pressure and hostility. UN's dependence on S.
powers revealed again. Peacekeeping missions ended as unable agree in SC. Argued that UN
response to conflict possible when not done via SC.

At end of CW UN possibly able act freely without CW superpower restrictions. At CW UN

launched more peacekeeping missions. More launched post 1988 that 30 years after WW2.
Didn't mean end of S. power influence on UN.
 82

Somalia
Both US + USSR in/directly involved in Afr states, mainly 1960-70s. Little impact on course CW.

Somalia drawn interest by S. powers after WW2 as strategic position. War commenced Somalia
(former USSR ally) + Ethiopia (Marxist regime) in 1977, US involved. US supported Somali
regime as USSR backed Ethiopia rev. regime. When CW ended both S. powers lost interest.

Bad news for Somali + Ethiopia gov. as both unpopular + needed support to keep control.
Somalia regime fell 1991. UN involved 1992 when clear 1.5 million people starving. UN mission
protect aid workers failed, US offered send 30,000 troops crush armed factions. Dec 1992 SC
voted for Unified Task Force under US command.

Brutal televised fighting. No central authority to protect. In dev World remained hostility +
suspicion US, May 1993 UN resumed control Somalia mission. After deaths 100 peacekeepers
US withdrew Somalia March 1995.

UN intervention Somalia not credited as US dominant. Limitations of UN exposed. Without

previous balance by USSR, UN become tool for US. Also meant US ignore UN with impunity.

*THE COLLAPSE OF THE USSR AND THE END OF THE COLD WAR*

Impact of Mikhail Gorbachev

For USSR Stalin's Legacy mean politically remained authoritarian, one party + Economically
focused producing mili hardware than housing, transport, healthcare etc… Gorbachev aimed
change this (was first Uni educated leader since Stalin).

Sinatra Doctrine- This was introduced by Gorbachev as a way of showing how the USSR now
granted its allies permission to decide their own future without USSR involvement. It was a
break away from the Brezhnev Doctrine which gave the USSR an excuse to crush attempts for
freedom and revolutions. Called ‘Sinatra Doctrine’ as he made song called “I Did It My Way”

He introduced 2 reforming ideas- ‘Glasnost’ and ‘Perestroika’.

- Glasnost (openness): principle that every area of regime open to public scrutiny.
- Perestroika (restructuring): aimed at restructuring economy.
 83

Represented radical change in USSR politics, involved greater democratization, more people in
Comm Party + political debate.

Gorbachev intended make USSR system more productive/responsive, realised had reduce mili
spending. If reforming ideas going to work, Soviets not rise challenge matching Reagan's SDI.
Decided abandon arms race + try reduce arms with US. Did as said no winners in nuke war +
econ purposes.

Chernobyl disaster (Ukraine) heightened his awareness danger nukes. Anatoly said Gorbachev
knew dangers war. Even without war nuke power destroy mankind.

Reagan interested disarmament + previously proposed “Zero Option” to USSR which eliminate
all Intermediate missiles in EU. Gorbachev willing to follow + resulting 4 Summit meetings to
discuss:
- Geneva Summit (Nov 1985): not a lot of progress, leaders agreed no winner in nuke
war.
- Reykjavik Summit (Oct 1986): ended without agreement as disagreement SDI.
Gorbachev said SDI remain in lab while Reagan disagree. Talks also covered most arms
control proposals between two powers.
- Washington Summit (Dec 1987): Intermediate Range Nuclear Force Treaty (INF) signed,
agreed abolish weapons like Intermediate + Short range missiles. First important step
reduce stockpile. Agreement for inspections destructive missiles.
- Moscow Summit (Dec 1987): Disagreement over SDI, arms reduction negotiations
continued. Reagan confessed no longer believed “evil empire”.

Gorbachev's foreign policies reassuring to West. 1988 said withdraw USSR Afghanistan +
removed aid dev World.

Thawing CW continued under Bush at Malta Summit US - USSR leaders 1989. Soviet minister
said buried CW.

Role of Reagan?

Gorbachev willing tackle issue nukes, new style politics + doing business with West caused
breakdown CW. Some say his approach USSR 1980s crucial pushing them into arms
negotiations. Others say he played important role as influenced by anti-nuclearism which
convince Gorbachev halt arms race.
 84

Long-term Factors for End of CW

Role of USSR Economy?

Actions Reagan + Gorbachev important but long-term also end CW. Death Brezhnev 1982,
caused USSR pol + econ policies crisis.

Foreign policy resources high under Brezhnev. He achieved parity with US in nuke field. His
period known as stagnation as lack spending consumer goods + domestic economy as whole.
Left his successors with outdated Stalinist regime. Grain imported US + many below poverty.
High alcoholism.

Gorbachev inherited troubled economy. Forced to make internal + negotiations with West.

Role of Nationalism + People Power?

Late 1980s, resurgence nationalist movements develop in most satellite states. Occurred as
living standards poor + USSR less involved as Gorbachev's reforms. Said not use force.

1988 UN announced USSR cut 500,000 men in Warsaw Pact. Gorbachev made clear Brezhnev
Doctrine not applied. 1889 many revs in satellites which led collapse.

Events 1989

- May 1989: Fence Hungary + Austria (not Communist) dismantled by H gov.

- June: Solidarity majority in Polish elections.
- September: E. Germans on holiday Hungary + Czechoslovakia refused return home.
- October: Gorbachev visits E. Germany + makes clear not use force.
- November: E. German gov eases borders. March to Berlin Wall + force to let out. Wall
destroyed.
- December: Demonstrations Bulgaria against comm. gov.
- March 1990: Latvia declares independence USSR + Baltic states follow.

Events in Poland
‘Solidarity’ (Union Movement) suppressed in 1981. Declared state martial law. Continued be
popular support ‘Stagnation’ as failure gov economic stagnation from Catholic C. Solidarity
 85

legalised 1988 + some reform attempts. Solidarity won free elections 1989, major Comm
defeat. Gorbachev didn't intervene to stop so Polish Comm Party collapsed.

Events East Germany

Erich Honecker was Comm leader East Germany since 1971. Living standards lower than West.
Sport focus for nationalism but people still want reunification Germany. Stasi (E. German secret
police) repressive. By 1980s growing pressure remove Honecker.

Hoped control comm during 40th Anniversary GDR. People openly demanded reforms. People
in Hungary fled to Austria. ‘New Forum’ group stated to resist instead of fleeing West. Honecker
wanted use force, Gorbachev forced to not to. East German revolts increased, Nov 1989 gov
eased travel to West. Lack clarity in statement caused thousands East Berliner went Checkpoint
Charlie, forced to open. East + West Germany reunified 1990.

Events Hungary
Reform came from Hungarian Comm Party. Encouraged new policies, sacked hardliner leader
(Kadar) + dominated gov. Oct 1989 Matyas declared Third Hungarian Republic + became
interim president. First free elections 1990.

Events Czechoslovakia
‘Velvet Revolution’ (downfall Communism Czechoslovakia) occurred with very little violence.
People power + mass demonstrations caused gov reform. Campaign co-ordinate by ‘Civic
Forum’ organisation, 1989 Vaclav elected. Warsaw Pact nations called 1968 Invasion
Czechoslovakia illegal + promised never intervene internal affairs.

Events Romania
Romania more violent. President Ceausescu + regime most repressive E. Europe. December
1989, inspired by Hungary + killing demonstrators Timisoara, uprising against him + wife. When
appeared at rally in Bucharest (1 week after 71 killed) soldiers refused protect. He + wife
captured, arrested by army, executed Christmas Day, 1989.

End of USSR

Gorbachev's policies admired, 1990 given Nobel Peace Prize. In USSR was unpopular as failed
improve econ situation. 1991 Soviet empire collapsed as unable support. August Baltic states
Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania claimed independence. Rest left later on.
 86

Break up USSR intensified hostility Gorbachev. August 1991 attempted coup against him by
Comm hardliners, defeated by Yeltsin but now lost authority. December 1991 Gorbachev
resigned, USSR collapsed +’Commonwealth of Independent States’ established.

Impact of Collapse USSR + End Cold War

Collapse impacted International politics + economic situation of counties dependent USSR for
aid.
People in US, saw as winners as now only country capable having military alliance around
world. Capitalism triumphed, Communism official ideology Cuba, N. Korea, Vietnam. Changes
econ controls allowed impact of free-market forces.

Cuba, no Soviet Aid + US trade embargo, caused econ crisis. Other regimes in Africa also
suffered. Countries were focus superpower conflict, like Afghanistan, conflict continued. 911
led to US foreign policy focus = “fight Islamic extremism!!!!!”
1

How to Answer a Paper 3 Style Essay Question

Section C: Topic 3: The Origins and Development of the Cold War, 1941–1950
Cambridge International AS and A level History 9389

How to begin?

Read the extract 2 times and underline the historian’s interpretation and approach of ‘who was
to blame for the Cold War?’

❖ Interpretation: What the historian says in the extract, the nature of his claims and
overall conclusion. Must decide whether he/she is:
- Traditionalist
- Revisionist
- Post-revisionist
- Post-post revisionist

How to Know which Interpretation to use?

TRADITIONALIST

● He/she really hates the USSR

● He/she really likes the USA

HISTORICAL CONTEXT
Interpretation began post-WW2 / beginning of CW. McCarthyism strong in US,
Stalin hated as invading EU. Perfect environment for anti-USSR belief to flourish.

MEANING
CW started solely because of the USSR, may say US had nothing to do with it.
Historian might not directly say USSR but hint with examples.
2

DIFFERENT STRAINS
❖ The Neurotic Bear: Heavy losses during WW2 + failing consolidate security
after 1917 Revolution. This made USSR paranoid and cautious. Seeked
territory in E. Europe as buffer zone to protect themselves from invasion.
These actions caused CW.

❖ Communist Ideology & World Revolution: USSR expansion motivated by

ideology - desire destroy Capitalism + World Communist Revolution.

❖ The Traditional Great Power: Wasn't insecurity or ideology that caused

USSR expand. Was simply normal behaviour to want expand influence
everywhere. Post-WW2 say Europe as ‘spoils of war’.

REVISIONIST

● He/she thinks America sucks

● He/she thinks the USSR might not have been a saint, but they were just
responding to the Americans!

HISTORICAL CONTEXT
It took traction in 1960s. US involvement in Vietnam made people realise that it
was very possible that the US were to blame for everything.

MEANING
US started CW. If USSR did anything bad was because reacting to US problems.
Some historians might hint with examples that US blame.

DIFFERENT STRAINS
❖ Economic Imperialism: US wanted make world friendly to Capitalism.
Marshall Plan was to promote Capitalism abroad. Technical Assistance
Programme (aid to Asia) had ulterior motives.
3

❖ The Atom Bomb: US dropped on Hiroshima + Nagasaki. Did this to threaten

USSR + deter their expansion. This triggered the CW + drove arms race.

❖ USA Untrustworthy Ally: Failed to quickly open second front during WW2,
clear that US not be trusted. Wanted to weaken USSR by making take brunt
of war before open W. front. Created Soviet-American tension.

POST-REVISIONIST

● He/she thinks that both sides are to blame or neither are to blame
● He/she suggests that the causes of CW were complex and multi-causal

HISTORICAL CONTEXT
It appeared around the 1970s, possibly steeped by the Détente atmosphere.

MEANING
The blame is balanced on both sides or neither side as it was ‘inevitable’. He/she
might say “The Cold War inevitable”. Could also say “There were multiple factors
that sparked the

DIFFERENT STRAINS
No particular strains, be familiar with John Lewis Gaddis (post-revisionist who
changed to post-post).

He believes that misperception drove to conflict. US’ incapability to assess Stalin’s

motives and goals successfully.

The USSR’s behaviour was based on survival. The USSR misinterpreted the US’
change in foreign policy when abrasive Truman replaced FDR.

Discrete events and individual mistakes were to blame, not the aims of policy
makers.
4

POST-POST-REVISIONIST

● It is similar to the Traditional interpretation but Stalin takes most of the

blame
● He/she may place greater focus on ideology
● May reference the ‘opening of the Soviet archives’ brought unknown
information out into the open

HISTORICAL CONTEXT
It Began after the opening of USSR’s archives in 1991 (same year as collapse).
Historians now had a clear picture of Soviet leader’s roles during the CW.

MEANING
Post-post Revisionism is likely to pinpoint the blame specifically on Stalin’s
character and actions (grabbing territory, references to USSR’s archives, arguing
against post-revisionism).

If you label his/her interpretation as Traditionalist you will only lose some marks.
Nevertheless, Be CAUTIOUS.

Approach: What the historian brings to study and what is focused on, such as:
- Time period
- Where he is from
- tone , maybe biased towards one country
- Begins by saying one thing then changes
5

Structure of my Essay

Introduction

Main Idea 1

Main Idea 2

Main Idea 3

Conclusion

Introduction

1. Write 1 sentence explaining the historian’s broad interpretation.

2. Write 1 to 2 sentences explaining what the historian’s interpretation means (keep
specific to extract).
3. Write 2 to 3 sentences highlighting the historian’s key approaches in the extract.
4. Write the 3 main ideas that the historian focuses on in the extract (Firstly, Secondly,
Lastly).
5. Highlight the main conclusion that can be drawn from the historian’s 3 main ideas. ”
Overall, these 3 ideas come together to prove an overarching message, that is….”

Main Ideas

1. Group the 3 to 4 main ideas from the introduction into their own individual paragraphs
(sometimes the ideas are muddled up, sometime they are in chronological order).
2. Begin each paragraph by immediately saying the idea “the historian’s first main idea is
that both sides simply mistook the other’s motives”.
3. After doing so, explain what it actually means such as “Basically, the historian argues
that defensive actions were interpreted as aggressive motives ……”
4. Paraphrase and summarise the historians logic behind this idea.
5. Analyse examples that the historian mentions to reach the conclusion that … is to
blame, add my own subject knowledge where possible. For example, “To prove this, the
historian cites the example of Marshall Aid, using it to show that a well-intentioned
6

motive was misinterpreted…” “This may be true, but it is also important to note other
US policies in that era with a more aggressive anti-communist bent, for example…”
“Moving on, the historian then adds to this argument by mentioning…”
6. Finally, conclude the main idea, maybe even try to link to next paragraph. “Ultimately,
the historian concludes that misperception was one key factor behind the escalation of
the Cold War. Yet the author also notes that misperception itself could not escalate the
Cold War, it was merely one ingredient…. ”
7. After concluding the point move on to the next paragraph and repeat steps 1-6.

Conclusion

1. Sum up my main ideas and tie them together to show the Big message that I mentioned
in the introduction.
“In conclusion, the historian identifies 3 ingredients that sparked the Cold War: initial
misperceptions, historical grievances that entrenched those misperceptions, and strong
ideological believes that tainted all actions and mistakes by the opposing superpower as
deliberate acts of malice”
2. Summarise the historian’s approach as well if have time.

Basic Tips

● Analyse + Evaluate, in relation to historical context, how aspects of past interpreted +

represented in different ways.
● Recall, select + use historical knowledge only where necessary.
● Insert subject knowledge by citing examples that historian allude to. If historian says,
“tensions were high in the late 1950s between the USA and USSR” I can say “The
historian notes that tensions were high in the late 1950s, a possible reference to the
Berlin Crisis of 1961 and the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962”.
● Cite examples to support historian’s argument. If he says “Deep distrust between both
powers were forged in WW2” I can say “The historian argues that distrust stemmed
from shoddy cooperation during WW2. There is some credence to this argument — the
delay of opening a second front and the end of Lend-Lease Aid arguably strained US-
USSR relations in that period”.
● Point out whether historian neglects historical context. If says “The change of leadership
from Roosevelt to Truman was the main reason for the dent in USA-USSR relations…” I
say “The historian argues that a change of American leadership dented relations. This
may be true, but it must be noted that such a leadership change took place in April
7

1945, where the war was already drawing to a close, straining a relationship arguably
only united by the war”.
● Don’t evaluate historian’s argument but do point out historical context behind
argument.

Do Not

● Don’t make my own arguments or disagree with historian. Purpose of paper is

understanding of historian.
● Don’t give opinion of historian’s view, just say what it is and that’s it.
● Don’t just repeat what the historian says, re-word + support with subject knowledge.

If you misinterpret the historian’s interpretation the highest grade that you can
receive on this paper is a C. Always remember to read the extract fully before
analysisng as it is likely that the historian may change his/her approach towards
the end. He/she may spend the first paragraphs saying why the US were to blame
yet say that their actions were inevitable towards the end of the extract. This
would make the interpretation ‘Post-Revisionist’ or even ‘Traditionalist’ even
though most of the extract appears to be ‘Revisionist’.
How effective were attempts during the 1960s to control the development and
proliferation of nuclear weapons?
Cambridge International AS/A Level – October/November 2016
Depth Study 3: International History, 1945–1991
Syllabus 9389
Paper 41

At the beginning of the 1960s attempts to control the Proliferation and development of nuclear
weapons were largely seen as ineffective or absent. For example, in 1960 and 1967 France and
China tested their first nuclear weapons without any repercussions. In the same decade, due to
the lack of development and proliferation restrictions, The USSR, China and France then
developed their own hydrogen bombs. Moreover, Israel were well on the way to gaining the
technology to produce its own atomic bomb due to the support of Great Britain and France.
Treaties such as the ‘Partial Test Ban Treaty’ and the ‘Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty’
primarily failed as they both did not reduce the proliferation of Nuclear weapon intelligence. On
the other hand, treaties such as the Hotline agreement in 1963 and the ‘Outer Space Treaty’ in
1967 helped reduce the development and spread of nuclear weapons. Furthermore, countries
such as Japan and those in Latin America agreeing not to develop nuclear weapons helped
reduce their spread. Ultimately, the first ‘SALT’ agreements in 1969 effectively reduced the
development, amount and spread of nuclear weapons.

Even though most attempts during the 1960s were ineffective some countries and treaties still
managed to reduce the development of nuclear weapons. In January 1965 the USSR began their
programme to peacefully study the use of nuclear explosions. They carried out many tests in
Chagan to see an alternate use of nuclear weapons such as creating canals, excavating,
powering their space crafts and much more. Two years later the ‘Outer Space Treaty’, which all
main countries signed including the USA and USSR, banned the testing and stationing of nuclear
weapons in space. This reduced the chances of a nuclear war as well as helped save money and
resources which could now be spent on improving their own economies and helping their
populations. The first ‘SALT’ talks which took place in 1969 were largely successful and were the
beginning to a safer world. They limited the number of strategic ballistic missiles that the USA
and USSR could have. Furthermore, it ordered the dismantling of ICBMs and a maximum of only
50 SLBM capable submarines and 800 missiles between them. The agreement also forced both
sides to remove all ICBMs that threatened eithers’ Northern borders.

The proliferation of nuclear weapons was also effectively controlled due to the formation of the
‘Hotline Agreement’, the same year as the Cuban Missile Crisis. It allowed for the USA and USSR
to communicate and come to a decision if an event such as Cuba were to ever repeat itself. It
reduced the chances of either side spreading their nuclear weapon technology as they had
learnt that it would inevitably lead to ‘Mutually Assured Destruction’. The signing of the ‘Treaty
of Tlatelolco’ in 1967 aimed to prohibit nuclear weapons in Latin America and the Caribbean to
reduce the recurrence of another Cuban Missile Crisis. It was largely effective as it banned the
testing, installation, storage and possession of nuclear weapons even to this day. In December
of the same year the Prime Minister of Japan, Eisaku Satō, adopted the ‘Three Non-Nuclear
Principles’. They were that Japan should neither possess or manufacture nuclear weapons as
they had already witnessed its devastation first hand of what it was capable of. Moreover, they
aimed to promote the use of nuclear power and for there to be nuclear disarmament on a
global scale.

On the other hand, most attempts at reducing the development of nuclear weapons was largely
portrayed as a failure primarily due of the lack of them. In February 1960 France carried out its
first nuclear weapon test “Gerboise Bleue” in the French Sahara. Four years later in October
China also successfully carried out its first nuclear test at Lop Nur. Even though the number of
countries with atomic weapons were increasing no attempts were made to reduce this.
Previously in 1961 the USSR had developed and tested the world’s most powerful hydrogen
weapon “The Tsar Bomb”. It only took China a further three years to successfully produce and
test their own followed by France in 1968. The announcement of Nixon’s ‘Safeguard Program’
in 1969 develops on the lack of attempts that were carried out to help preserve peace. The
program stated that an increase in ‘ABMs’ would be implemented into the USA’s defence policy
to make the USSR’s first strike futile if it came to a nuclear war. This led to an increase in
tension between the two powers and the continued development of nuclear weapons.

The proliferation of nuclear weapons was poorly controlled by the few attempts that were
carried out. In 1961 the Israeli Prime Minister, David Ben-Gurion openly said that a pilot
plutonium-separation plant would be built at Dimona with the aid of Great Britain and France.
It is now known that the country had nuclear weapon intentions as by 1966 they had built their
first bomb. The lack of attempts by Canada and other countries to investigate their intentions
shows how easily nuclear technology could spread. The ‘Partial Test Ban Treaty’ of 1963
prohibited the testing of nuclear weapons in the atmosphere. Nevertheless, it was a failure as
only the USA and USSR joined and did little to stop the proliferation of nuclear weapons by
other nations. France and China not joining and China successfully testing their atomic bomb
one year later proved the treaty to be a failure. The 1968 ‘Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty’ had
good intentions as it aimed to prevent countries with nuclear technology from dispersing it and
for countries without the technology from pursuing it. The same year the Disarmament
program was encouraged but ended up being a failure as a minority signed. The NPT did not
manage to stop the proliferation of nuclear weapons as the only two countries to not sign were
India and Pakistan. These two countries later went on to develop the technology to produce
their own nuclear weapons.

In Conclusion, attempts to reduce the development and proliferation of nuclear weapons was
largely a failure in the 1960s. Countries such as France, China, Israel, India and Pakistan
achieved nuclear weapons as a result of development and the sharing of the necessary
technology. Nixon’s ‘Safeguard Program’ led to an increase in tension and the number of
nuclear weapons. The ‘Partial Test Ban Treaty’ failed to reduce the testing of nuclear weapons
as only the USA and USSR signed. By this point they already had enough missiles to obliterate
each other many times over. Moreover, India and Pakistan not signing ‘The Nuclear Non-
Proliferation’ proved the treaty to be a failure from the beginning along with the ‘Disarmament
Program’. On the other hand, some attempts were successful such as the study of ‘PNE’ by the
USSR, the ‘Hotline Agreement’ and the signing of the ‘Treaty of Tlatelolco’ and the ‘Three Non-
Nuclear Principles’. Finally, the ‘Outer Space Treaty’ and ‘SALT Treaty’ helped reduce the
development of nuclear weapons allowing for more money to be spent on their countries’
economies.
 Detente did little to stabilise international relations in the 1970s. How Far do
you agree?
Cambridge International AS/A Level –May/June 2015
Depth Study 3: International History, 1945–1991
Syllabus 9389
Paper 41

Detente, a period which started when Richard Nixon became president in 1968 and finished in
1980, was largely seen as futile in controlling international relations in the 1970s. By many it
was merely seen as a change in tactics of superpower conflict due to the change in political and
economic circumstances. It failed to end tension as ‘The Second Cold War’ broke out in 1980
after Detente finally succumbed to its weaknesses. Hardly anything was achieved in the 1970s,
in fact armaments even increased despite the agreements made at the SALT treaties. Most
signed agreements were ignored such as the USSR not keeping their promise of improving
Human Rights which they agreed upon at the Helsinki Accords in 1975. Furthermore, tension
between China and the USSR remained high and conflict in Non-Aligned states such as Angola,
Mozambique, Somalia, Egypt, Benin, Ethiopia and Afghanistan showed how the USSR remained
expansionist. On the other hand, the SALT treaties showed both the USA’s and USSR’s desire to
move away from confrontation and the chances of a nuclear fallout. Basket 1 and 2 of the
Helsinki Accords led to greater links on both sides of the Iron Curtain through the means of
trade and technology exchanges. During the 1970s the USSR strongly relied on the US’ wheat
exports to feed its people. The stability of Europe drastically increased due to Willy Brandt’s
policy of Ostpolitik. The signing of the Basic Treaty in 1972 resulted in both West and East
Germany seeing each other as separate states, increasing trade links in the process.

To an extent, Detente Came under pressure as the US believed that the arms agreements
benefited the USSR as they were building a strategic superiority based on ICBMs. Some right-
wing historians even believe that Detente was seen as weak and ineffective as it gave the USSR
the opportunity to strengthen with the help of Western technology and supplies such as wheat
from the US. It helped sustain the Soviet Union for longer than it should have. Even the treaties
signed in the 1970s gave the USSR legal recognition over Europe and increased their power
resulting in greater tension between the US and USSR. The Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in
1979, to crush Islamic militancy, was the final proof for the US that Detente was ineffective at
keeping the peace. President Jimmy Carter described the invasion as a serious threat to world
peace and responded to the Soviets by ratifying the SALT II Agreement, stopping all exports to
the East and forcing all US athletes to boycott the Moscow Olympics in 1980. Prior to the
invasion of Afghanistan, the USSR helped the MPLA Socialists during the Angolan Civil war in
1975 as well as Ethiopia during their conflict with Somalia in 1977. Furthermore, the USSR’s
support of rebels during the Yom Kippur war in 1973 seriously damaged Soviet-American
relations. The US suspected that the USSR knew about Egypt’s surprise attack on Israel which
added to the tension. The USSR’s actions in the Middle East as well as Africa shows how the
country was still expanding its influence even during Detente. This intervention was seen as
worrying for the US as they saw it as the USSR trying to achieve world expansionism through
assisting Marxist rebels. Both sides were desperately trying to gain the support of 3rd world
countries to follow their ideologies. As a result of the Carter Doctrine at the end of the 1970s
the US increased its defence and threatened the USSR if they were to attack the Persian Gulf.
Many believe that the first Strategic Arms Limitation Talks Agreement did not go far enough to
limit the number of nuclear weapons as it failed to include MIRVs. The SALT II Agreement was
seen by many as more promising; nevertheless, it was not ratified as the US saw it as benefiting
the USSR’s nuclear weapon tactics. Furthermore, the USSR failing to sign the Basket 3
agreement from the Helsinki Accords showed how the USSR was fearful of US attempts at
trying to collapse their Union.

On the other hand, Detente did manage to stabilise international relations in the 1970s. The
Helsinki Agreements which began in 1973 and ended in 1975 took form as ‘Three Baskets’. Both
the USA and USSR signed basket 1 and 2. Basket 1 was the security basket and followed the
policy of Ostpolitik and enforced that negotiations between the USSR and European borders
not be altered by force. Furthermore, the basket also made both sides recognise East and West
Germany as Independent states. Basket 2 enforced the cooperation between both sides, it
called for closer ties and economic, scientific and cultural collaborations which drastically
reduced tension. SALT I helped reduce tension between powers as it led to Nixon visiting the
USSR in 1974 and Brezhnev visiting the USA in 1973. US relations with China improved due to
the Ping pong Diplomacy event in Beijing and Nixon’s visit to China. Nevertheless, the improved
relations between China and the US led to the USSR’s fear of both sides working against her.
The US saw improved relations with China as leverage and bargaining power over arms
agreements with the USSR. The US’ manipulation of China to negotiate with the USSR became
known as ‘Triangular Diplomacy’. The two baskets also helped the USSR’s economy from
stagnating, improved their standards of living and necessary resources and granted them
technology from the West. The USA’s new Realpolitik foreign policy led to improved relations
with China even though their intentions were to increase tension with the USSR. The SALT
Agreement marked a spirit of cooperation between the US and the USSR and a mutual desire to
move away from confrontation. US-Soviet trade increased; for example, the USSR came to rely
on American wheat imports.

Nixon’s and Kissinger’s autobiographies strongly stated that they believe that Detente reduced
tension and the chances of nuclear war in the 1970s. Detente was necessary to give both
powers the necessary time to discover an alternative to prevent further conflicts and war. Gadis
even says that it made dangerous situations more predictable and prevented rivalry in the
developing world among Non-Aligned states. The cooperation in space between 1 US astronaut
and 2 Soviet cosmonauts, when both their spacecrafts docked 225 km above earth, led to a
symbolic improvement in the international atmosphere between the East and the West. Willy
Brandt’s (West German Chancellor) Policy of Ostpolitik resulted in greater links and less tension
between both West and East Germany. Furthermore, under the Basic Treaty in 1972, signed by
both Germanys led to them accepting the existence of one another which resulted in less
tension and an increase in trade. The Moscow treaty of 1970 resulted in the USSR, Poland and
FR Germany recognising East and West Germany and East Poland’s borders prior to the Second
World War. The Final Quadripartite Protocol in 1972 agreed a maintenance of the status quo of
Berlin and gave Western states legal access to routes to the city, Berlin still remained with a
greater degree of security. All of these agreements helped reduce tension as well as improved
relations. Under Jimmy Carter in 1976 US trading with the USSR increased, to a certain extent
human rights in the USSR also improved as Jews were allowed to emigrate even though it was
resented by the USSR.

In Conclusion, I believe that Detente did little to stabilise international relations in the 1970s.
The USSR’s intervention in the following states in Africa and the Middle East: Angola,
Mozambique, Somalia, Egypt, Benin, Ethiopia and Afghanistan showed how their policies still
remained expansionist and proved Detente to be ineffective. Furthermore, the outbreak of the
Second Cold War in 1980 and the increase in armaments despite the agreements made in SALT
underlines how an improvement in relations was not possible under Detente. On the other
hand, Baskets 1 and 2 from the Helsinki Accords, Ping Pong Diplomacy, Triangular Diplomacy,
the policies of Ostpolitik and Realpolitik, the meeting in space, the Final Quadripartite Protocol,
and the Moscow Treaty show how Detente was not a complete failure at stabilising
international relations during the 1970s.
To what extent was President Johnson responsible for the US’ involvement in
the Vietnam War?
Cambridge International AS/A Level – May/June 2016
Depth Study 3: International History, 1945–1991
Syllabus 9389
Paper 41

President Johnson was not fully responsible for US involvement in the Vietnam War.
Presidents before and after him continued to involve themselves in the war. In fact, Truman
was the first president who intervened as he gave the French aid to help them maintain
control over their colony against socialist guerrilla fighters within the country. Eisenhower
continued this aid policy up until France’s defeat in 1954. Kennedy's flexible response policy
increased the US’ involvement as the number of US military advisers raised to over 17,000 by
his death in 1963. President Nixon escalated tension and finally withdrew US troops from
Vietnam due to social and political discontent amongst those in the US and Vietnam.
However, President Johnson did drastically intensify US involvement as he was the first
President to directly involve the US in the war.

President Johnson drastically increased US involvement in the war by the time he came to
power in 1963. As a result of France's defeat, he was determined to prevent the spread of
Communism to the rest of Asia. Johnson saw Vietnam as a keystone, if it fell to Communism
the Domino Theory would take place. By 1964, Johnson believed he had to increase US
commitment to the war to prevent this spread. He needed a justifiable reason for the US
public and Congress to support their involvement. The Gulf of Tonkin incident, where the
Maddox destroyer was allegedly fired at by North Vietnamese troops, gave Johnson the
perfect excuse to involve his country. He described the incident as an example of “open
aggression” by the North Vietnamese. The day after the Gulf of Tonkin Incident Johnson
signed the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, which gave him authority to take necessary action. In
retaliation the US bombed North Vietnamese installations and factories to damage their
supplies and help Diem in the South. This Bombing campaign was given the name, “Rolling
Thunder”. For the next six years this resolution was used as the legal basis for US involvement
in the Vietnam War. Furthermore, Johnson also sent 100,000 US ground forces to help Diem
win the war against North Vietnamese guerrillas. In 1965 ‘Search and Destroy’ missions were
carried out and by 1968 over 520,000 US troops were stationed in Vietnam. Johnson also
bombed targets in South Vietnam to serve as air support for ground troops fighting the Viet
Minh. This led to hatred towards Americans throughout Vietnam amongst the locals even in
the South. In 1967 Johnson stated that there was “light at the end of the tunnel” as the US
began to win the war. Nevertheless, as a result of the Tet Offensive, Johnson announced that
he would not run for re-election as he realised that Vietnam was a war that the US could never
win.
On the other hand, Johnson also wanted to fight a war in the US against poverty and the social
injustice that was occurring at the time. He aimed to improve conditions through his “Great
Society” programme. The programme stated that it aimed to improve social rights, eradicate
poverty, increase health and education access to those less fortunate and also create a
cleaner environment. Even though Johnson's intentions were good it led to the widening of
his credibility gap.

Truman is primarily to blame for US involvement as he was the first president to get involved
in Vietnam. He sent the French aid in 1950 to help them defeat Communist rebels throughout
Vietnam and prevent the spread of the Communist ideology. Eisenhower continued to send
this aid when he became president a year later. He strongly believed in the Domino Theory
which stated that if one country fell to Communism the surrounding countries will soon fall
as well. Just like President Johnson, he saw Vietnam as the keystone to prevent the rest of
Asia from becoming Communist. By 1954 he increased US funding of the war by 80% but did
not directly involve the USA. When the French finally lost their colony, the US aimed to
support and strengthen the anti-Communist dictator, Ngo Dinh Diem who ran the country
south of the 17th parallel. Furthermore, the US also established SEATO to prevent the spread
of Communism in Asia. Millions of US dollars in funding were sent by the USA to help defeat
the Communist North, led by Ho Chi Minh. At one point The US helped prevent elections from
occurring in 1956 which increased their involvement and hatred by the locals. By 1960 the US
had sent over 1,000 advisers to help train soldiers in the Republic of Vietnam.

Kennedy also played a key role in increasing USA's involvement in the Vietnam War due to his
new Flexible response Policy. His policy led to the increase in US military advisers reaching
17,000 by the time of his death in 1963. Kennedy implemented new Counter insurgency
operations against North Vietnamese guerrilla fighters South of the 17th parallel. The use of
Agent Orange and other defoliants were also implemented which led to most of the
Vietnamese people seeing the USA as the enemy. Strategic Hamlet Programs were also
introduced which meant that Vietnamese civilians in the South were placed into camps by the
US to be ‘protected’ from Communism. The infamous Search and Destroy missions were also
implemented by Kennedy. He started the Green Berets program which trained soldiers in
counter guerrilla tactics. Nevertheless, in 1963 he began to cut US funding to Diem as they
saw his way of rule as authoritarian and unjust. When Diem was finally assassinated the US
became morally locked into Vietnam as there was no longer a power in the south to
counteract the spread of Communism.

President Nixon's main aim was to withdraw US troops from Vietnam without it appearing
like a defeat and allowing South Vietnam to be invaded. He believed in the policy of “peace
with honour” which meant that he did not want the Withdrawal of troops to appear to be a
humiliating defeat for the US. This policy resulted in there being another 4 years of
unnecessary war where 300,000 Viet Minh and 20,000 thousand US soldiers lost their lives.
Kissinger, Nixon's foreign policy adviser, commenced a 14-month Bombing campaign over the
Ho Chi Minh trail as an attempt to finish the war. This campaign resulted in the formation of
more tension between countries such as Cambodia. It also failed to end the war and Nixon
eventually introduced his “Vietnamisation policy” to gradually withdraw the US from the war.

In Conclusion, Truman and Eisenhower are primarily to blame for US involvement in the
Vietnam War. Truman began US involvement as he supplied the French with aid to help them
prevent the spread of Communism. Eisenhower continued to send aid when he became
President in 1950. When the French lost, he began to send military advisers to the South and
brought in the anti-Communist ruler Diem. Johnson escalated US involvement in Vietnam as
he used the Gulf of Tonkin incident as an excuse for the US to directly intervene in Vietnam.
However, he was not primarily responsible for US involvement in the Vietnam War, he merely
built on the previous involvement of his predecessors.
 To what extent did relations between the USA and the USSR improve in the
period from 1953 to 1961?
Cambridge International AS/A Level – May/June 2015
Depth Study 3: International History, 1945–1991
Syllabus 9389
Paper 41

Relations between the USA and USSR improved after Stalin’s death during the period 1953
to 1961(Eisenhower's Presidency). This was primarily due to the enhanced views of the new
leaders. For example, Eisenhower was willing to negotiate with the USSR while Khrushchev
aimed to promote the idea of “Peaceful Coexistence” between the West and East.
Nevertheless, during this period tension also grew as a result of the leaders’ actions and
conflicts in South America, Europe and the Middle East.

On the one hand, relations between the two nations greatly improved as a result of the
death of Stalin on March 5th 1953. His secret police were dismantled and his Dictatorial rule
was now over. Khrushchev won the struggle to be the new leader of the Soviet Union and
followed the idea of “Peaceful Coexistence” with the West. This new policy aimed to move
away from the previous Lenin ideology which always would have resulted in an inevitable
war. Khrushchev's new ideology aimed to make Communism and Capitalism not see each
other as a threat but work together for a better future. Eisenhower was elected the same
year as Stalin's death. He was willing to negotiate with the USSR and agreed to Khrushchev's
new policy. The USA believed that if the Soviet Union's “Communist ideology” did not
expand it would result in the empire’s downfall. On the other hand, the USSR believed that
Capitalism would collapse due to its “inner weakness”. This resulted in there being no need
for nuclear war so a reduction in military spending was agreed on by both countries. This
primarily helped benefit the USSR’s economy as a ⅓ of the country’s budget was spent on its
military compared to 12% by the USA. Both countries’ economies greatly benefited from
this change in funding. Winston Churchill even believed that the idea was good for future
peace and to avoid Mutually Assured Destruction.

Also, by 1954 the Korean war had officially come to an end which resulted in there being
less tension between the two powers. In April 1955, the Austrian state treaty was signed
which ended the four-power occupation and allowed it to once again become an
independent and neutral country. In the same year the two powers also met at the Geneva
Summit. Although nothing was agreed upon, an atmosphere of cordiality was evident
between the two powers. Better trade exhibitions, cultural and scientific exchanges were
also later carried out as a result of this. In 1958 Eisenhower banned the testing of
Atmospheric nuclear weapons, the USSR agreed and soon followed in the USA’s footsteps.
Khrushchev accepted to be the first Soviet leader to visit the USA in 1959. While he was
there another Geneva summit meeting was agreed upon to be held in Paris 1960 for further
negotiation.

On the other hand, tension also increased between the USA and USSR during this period.
For example, the USA’s secret service, the CIA, helped overthrow the left-wing governments
of Iran in 1953, and Guatemala in 1954. This obviously made the USA come across as being
expansionist rather than following the policy of containment. Furthermore, at the Geneva
Summit in 1955 the two powers disagreed with everything that the other had so say. The
USSR proposed the Mutual disbandment of NATO, the Warsaw Pact, the withdrawal of all
foreign troops from Europe, the establishment of a European Security Treaty and for free
elections to be carried out for the re-unified German government. The US called the
proposal “hostile” as it was unacceptable for Western governments. The USA suggested the
“Open Skies Proposal” which implied that both sides would share their plans for military
installations and allow aerial surveillance of each other’s bases. Khrushchev described the
USA’s proposal as being “like seeing into our bedrooms” and therefore also refused to carry
out their offer.

Khrushchev's De Stalinization speech of 1956 resulted in there being problems in Hungary.

The USA also faced a problem in the Suez Canal. Both of the crisis dissipated the trust that
was achieved at the Geneva summit a year prior. The Suez crisis led to growing fears of
Communist expansionism. In 1957 the Eisenhower doctrine was therefore established which
stated that the US would help defend any country in the Middle East from Communism. On
4th October 1957, the Soviet Union sent their first Sputnik satellite into space and a month
later a second. Khrushchev gave a speech stating that everything developed faster under
Socialism. This terrified the USA as they believed that the USSR had superior missile
technology. Khrushchev’s speech backed up their worry as he stated that he could wipe out
any US city. The USA therefore, began improving their offensive defence missiles and built
fallout shelters to prepare for the worst. American U-2 Spy planes revealed that actually
there wasn't a missile gap and that the US had the same, if not more, missiles than the
USSR. Eisenhower created NASA to promote missile development and space exploration to
cover up their espionage. In 1958 the USSR issued an ultimatum for the West to withdraw
from West Berlin within 6 months. Two years later a US spy plane was shot down over the
Soviet Union. The pilot under interrogation admitted he was a spy and Eisenhower took full
blame for the issue. While at the Paris Summit Eisenhower refused to apologise as he
believed that he was justified. Khrushchev replied by cancelling Eisenhower’s visit to the
USSR which resulted in no progress being made.

In conclusion, we can see that during this period of the cold war there were both
improvements and a continuation of mistrust between the two superpowers. The death of
Stalin allowed the less hostile Khrushchev to take over. Eisenhower, the new president of
the US, was also open to the idea of peace and willing to negotiate with Khrushchev to
obtain it. Both sides were able to reduce their respective spending on arms, a positive move
for both. Nevertheless, there was still tension and both countries were involved in military
conflicts abroad. Moreover, there remained a underlying feeling of mistrust as both sides
continued to spy on each other. Finally, I believe that their relations were slowly improving
up until the US intervened in the Suez Canal and were caught spying on the USSR.
To what extent was the USA responsible for causing the Cuban Missile Crisis?

Cambridge International AS/A Level – October/November 2017

Depth Study 3: International History, 1945–1991
Syllabus 9389
Paper 43

In my opinion both the USA and USSR are to blame for the start of the Cuban Missile Crisis.
For example, after Fidel Castro overthrew Batista at the end of the 1950s the USA should have
funded him to prevent the USSR from getting involved. Nevertheless, they refused to lend
him funds so he sided with the USSR instead. The USSR should have known that by funding a
Socialist Government, only ninety miles away from Florida, would have created tension with
the USA.

On the one hand, the USA are to blame by the way they handled the matter after Fidel Castro
came to power in 1959. They should have tried to improve relations between the US and Cuba
by funding Castro and helping the Cuban Economy. Nevertheless, he was seen as a threat due
to his Socialist views and was isolated and refused support. The US even put embargoes on
all of Cuba’s exports, except food and medicine, in an attempt to destabilise the economy.
Moreover, the Bay of Pigs invasion, aided by the CIA, was seen as one of the major reasons to
why the US were to blame. 1,214 of the 1,400 soldiers that were sent over were either killed
or captured which resulted in the attack being a disaster for the US. The survivors were
released for 50 million dollars’ worth of food and machines which incremented Castro's
popularity and support amongst his people. Overall, the attack confirmed that the US were
anti-Cuba, resulting in Castro seeing them as an enemy and siding with the USSR. Now it is
known that the CIA were to blame for the massacre as the troops lacked training, ammunition
and air support. If the invasion was a success then Castro could have been overthrown which
would have then led to the Soviet nuclear warheads never touching Cuban soil.

The CIA continued to carry out covert operations to sabotage Cuba’s economic targets like its
sugar and petroleum deposits. Furthermore, they even attempted to assassinate Fidel Castro
and his advisers, and isolate Cuba from diplomatic decisions. These were all carried out under
‘Operation Mongoose’ which was mainly a failure. Furthermore, in 1962 the USA expelled
Cuba from the ‘Organisation of American States which once again created more tension
between the two countries. The US doing military exercises off the coast of Puerto Rico
definitely didn’t improve relations either. Moreover, by the Bay of Pigs Invasion it was clear
to the USSR that the US were keen to overthrow the now ‘Marxist’ Castro and remove the
ICBMs. Nevertheless, the Soviets were justified to keep the missiles in Cuba to help balance
their nuclear global power with the US. If they were removed it would have been seen as the
defeat of Communism, also the US could not be trusted not to invade Cuba if the nuclear
weapons were removed. Many historians believe that the nuclear warheads in Cuba were not
a threat to the USA as they had nuclear missile facilities in Turkey to retaliate with. The move
by the USSR was an attempt to balance military power with the USA.

On the other hand, the USSR is also to blame for the start of the Cuban Missile Crisis by how
they intervened in Cuba, knowing it would arouse suspicion and threaten the US. After the
Bay of Pigs massacre Fidel Castro claimed that he was now a Marxist-Leninist and finalised his
defence alliance with the USSR. It is clear that the USSR’s support now gave the extremist
Castro the confidence and military power he needed. Nevertheless, by the US no longer being
able to control Cuba’s exports and imports it created unnecessary tension with the USSR. This
escalated when in 1962 Khrushchev began to put ICBMs in Cuba to threaten US citizens and
establish the same power that the US had because of their weapons in Turkey. This therefore
had a psychological effect on Americans as the world seemed to be coming to an end. It didn’t
help that a US U-2 Spy plane discovered 62 ballistic missile launch sites on the island of Cuba
while gathering reconnaissance. The nuclear warheads were seen as a threat as the Soviet
Union now had a better advantage. The USSR’s missiles now had better range which could
have resulted in the US citizens having less time to get to their shelters and for the US to
retaliate. Furthermore, by the USSR continuing to send ships full of Soviet troops with more
nuclear warheads increased the US’ worries over the matter.

Another factor was the Soviets lack of trust in the US not invading Cuba after the Missiles
were removed. They therefore refused the US’ demands as they were unfair as they did not
include the removal of US’ weapons from Turkey. Furthermore, Cuba shooting down a US spy
plane without the Soviet Union's order to do so also created unnecessary tension. It is now
known that Fidel Castro was capable of launching a nuclear attack on the USA if they decided
to invade his country. Finally, if the spy planes had discovered that Cuban missiles were fully
functional, it could have led to a different and far more severe outcome.

To conclude, I believe that both the US and USSR were to blame for the start of the Cuban
Missile Crisis. The US was to blame as they isolated Fidel Castro, attempted to invade his
country and try to assassinate him on numerous occasions. Furthermore, they were also to
blame by how they spied on Cuba with U-2 spy planes and formed a navy blockade around
the island to prevent Soviet support. By the US having their own nuclear warheads in Turkey
created a global power imbalance which the USSR had to correct. On the other hand, the
USSR was also to blame because they got involved with a newly founded Socialist government
only 90 miles from Florida. Their support and Khrushchev putting ICBMs into Cuba created
tension and fear amongst the US. Finally, Cuba shooting down one of the USA’s U2 spy planes
also created unnecessary tension and also led to the Cuban Missile Crisis.
 How justified was president Truman’s claim that the Korean war ended
successfully for the USA?
Cambridge International AS/A Level – October/November 2015
Depth Study 3: International History, 1945–1991
Syllabus 9389
Paper 42

President Truman’s claim that the Korean war of 1950-53 was a success for the USA is
debatable. Some historians believe that it was a success as the USA achieved their goal of
Stopping the communist invasion by Kim Il Sung into South Korea. Other’s see the USA’s
involvement as a failure as the war ended in a stalemate even though the USA were far more
powerful. I will now discuss to what extent the USA’s results supports his claim.
His claim is justifiable as the USA achieved their goal of defending South Korea against the
invasion by the Communist North. Even thought the war ended in a stalemate at the 38 th
parallel, the US army still achieved their aim of containing the spread of Communism in Asia.
Furthermore, they prevented the expansionist Kim Il Sung from reuniting the country as a
Communist state. The USA only suffered when China got involved in the war after they had
pushed the North Koreans back to Pyongyang. US marines successfully managed to outflank
North Korean troops when they landed at the undefended port of Incheon. The USA’s NSC-
68 Policy resulted in them having a monolithic view of the USSR, which implied that every
communist event was connected to Moscow. The USA therefore saw Korea as Soviet
expansionism hence why they got involved and successfully defended the South. The USA
managed to push the Communists back to the Chinese border from Pusan in South Korea.
Truman dismissed MacArthur after the rollback policy failed as he was seen to be too anti
Communist and was willing to lose more US lives to invade the whole of Korea and make it a
Capitalist Democracy. After the war, the US’ military budget was tripled which allowed the
country to improve its defence against the spread of USSR’s Communism.
On the other hand, the USA’s intervention in the Korean war is primarily seen to be negative.
Even though they technically won the war as they achieved their aim, the USA lost as they
could not defeat a country that was much weaker than the mighty USA. The Americans failed
to follow their policy of Containment as when they successfully pushed the Communists back
to the 38th parallel they decided to continue and invade the North. MacArthur changed the
policy to that of “rollback” due to his hatred of Communism. This policy failed as China
intervened and pushed the USA back behind the 38th parallel. The world’s superpower failed
to defeat two poor countries even though their firepower and military were superior. The
rollback policy resulted in millions of unnecessary deaths as the USA had already achieved
their goal. MacArthur’s actions and extreme policy resulted in the deaths of thousands of US
troops and civilians. The USA were unable to sustain such large casualties without receiving
political pressure from back home. This would later haunt the USA both in Vietnam and the
Middle East. When the USA threatened China with the atomic bomb to force her to surrender
the Chinese knew that they were bluffing. The USA were not going to start a nuclear war with
the USSR over Korea. The fact that Truman dismissed General MacArthur after the war shows
that the US government saw it as a defeat for the US army. Moreover, the US’ defeat at Yalu
River and Osan, because of MacArthur’s rollback policy, further justified his dismissal as he
caused thousands more of unnecessary deaths. Many prisoners of war died in North Korea
from 1951-53. This loss of life could have been avoided if the US decided to withdraw after
their successful counter attack rather than going through with their new rollback policy. 40%
of prisoners of war died in 1951. As a result of the US’ partial defeat in the Korean war it led
to the country’s future involvement in both Vietnam and the Philippines. This intervention led
to greater tension being created between the USA and USSR which increased the chances of
Mutually Assured Destruction. Furthermore, it also led to the involvement of Southeast Asia
in the Cold War. Due to the USA’s humiliation in the war it resulted in China’s reputation
improving along with the USA looking dishonest and untruthful as they changed their policy
during the war. It was embarrassing for the USA as a weak North Korea and China were able
to defeat the superpower, USA. As a response to the humiliation the USA tripled their military
budget which also led to the USSR spending much more as well. This made relations between
them both even more dangerous and tense. The policy of containment could be used as a
reason to justifiably invade whatever country they desired. This led to the numbers
supporting the Russian Red Army to increase and further intensify the mistrust and hatred
between each other.

In conclusion, I believe that Truman’s claim is mainly unjustifiable as the war resulted in the
USA receiving heavy losses and humiliation. On paper the USA achieved their goal of pushing
the North Koreans back behind the 38th parallel. Nevertheless, the rollback policy resulted in
two more pointless years of trench warfare to gain back lost land. During these two years no
less than 40% of the UN’s POW died due to starvation. Moreover, very little was gained by
either side. The war finally resulted in a stalemate as very little progress was achieved with
high casualties on both sides. The stalemate represents the USA’s defeat as they were
ultimately the ones who tried and failed to invade the North and were repelled by a much
weaker power. Finally, North Korea, China and Communism in general humiliated the USA
which led to weaker Asian powers getting involved in the Cold war and the USA increasing its
military budget in preparation for future problems.
The League of Nations did nothing against Italy’s invasion of Abyssinia.’ How
far do Sources A to D support this view?
Cambridge International AS/A Level – May/June 2015
Section C: International Option
The Search for International Peace and Security, 1919–1945
Syllabus 9389
Paper 13
Q. B

Source A, a speech by the Italian dictator Mussolini given on 2 nd October 1935. Mussolini
was speaking shortly after the invasion and disagrees that the League of Nations did nothing
to help Abyssinia. He states that there is talk of sanctions against Italy as opposed to the
League recognising Italy’s rights to Invade. Furthermore, it can be suggested that Mussolini
was exaggerating the chances of the possibility of another war to gain support behind his
invasion of Abyssinia. Mussolini is also thought to make Italy look like the victim as he says
that they only got “a few crumbs” and that they were in the right to invade as they had
been defeated when they invaded in 1896. Abyssinia He goes further to state that he does
not believe that either France or Great Britain will agree on sanctions and risk putting
Europe back into a catastrophic conflict or war. Mussolini quotes, “an African country
universally branded as being without the slightest shadow of civilization.” This evidently
means that he feels that nobody will be willing to help the small African nation of Abyssinia.
He goes further to state that any economic or military sanctions placed on Italy will be met
by retaliation.

Source B, are the measures taken by the League of Nations after the invasion by Italy of
Abyssinia. They state that no arms, munitions or implements of war can be exported or re-
exported to Italy. This means the League did implement sanctions against Italy. Although
Italy was already well armed and such sanctions would do little to affect her power over the
small nation of Abyssinia. Much stronger sanctions could have been implemented. For
example, Britain could have blockaded the Suez Canal and prevented Italian troops invading
through her colony Egypt. Economic sanctions on the import of oil could have been more
affective. The weakness of the league was brought on by the fear of many European nations
mainly Great Britain and France of the conflict escalating into another world war.

Source C, a speech given to the League of Nations by the Emperor of Abyssinia, Haile
Selassie. He states strongly that the League did little or nothing to help his country from the
invasion by Italy. He believes that small states have the right to their independence and
should be protected through collective security led by a strong League. This was clearly not
the case in Abyssinia where the larger nations for their own interests turned a blind eye to
the invasion. Selassie is seen to almost beg for help with the knowledge that it will not be
given as a weak ‘unimportant’ African country is not worth risking a world war for.
Furthermore, it also implies that even though Britain and France believe that Abyssinia is
pointless he still believes that they will help as he has got no one else to rely on and is
desperate. Finally, he finishes his speech with a rhetorical question asking “what the league
intends to do” trying to make them realise that they are doing the total opposite of what
the League was created for.

Source D, an article written after the fall of Abyssinia and exile of Selassie by a ‘neutral’
Danish journalist. It is scathing in a sarcastic way against the ineffective actions taken by the
League of Nations against the larger more powerful countries. The writer says ‘Peace is
preserved by allowing one mighty robber after another to attack a defenceless population
with tanks, machine guns and poison gas’. The words used are strong mighty robber against
defenceless population states that to maintain peace justice can be forgotten. He is critical
of both France and Britain stating that their collective aim is to placate Mussolini so that he
will attend the next Locarno meeting. The author strongly points out that the League did
nothing to help the weaker country and this will set a precedent for future large nations
attacking weaker countries with little or no intervention from the members of the League.
The author was sadly proved right when another dictator Adolf Hitler decided to expand
Germany’s territory by invading bordering weaker countries only two years later.

In conclusion, it is clear that the actions of the League of Nations where small and
ineffective. The small nation of Abyssinia was successfully invaded and its leader sent into
exile by the might of a much stronger Italian military force. Source A, is scathing and angry
of the unjust intervention and implementation of sanctions against Italy. Furthermore, he
makes Italy look like the victim and that they had the right to invade even though Abyssinia
was weak and defenceless. Source B, mentions all of the measures taken by the League to
punish Italy after she unjustly invaded Abyssinia. The measures are believed to not be harsh
enough as Italy still managed to take over the country as they still had a powerful army and
lots of munition. Furthermore, many historians believe that the conflict could have been
solved if Britain prevented Italian troop’s access to the Suez Canal, and if the League placed
sanctions on oil just for Italy. Source C, mentions that Haile Selassie, the emperor of
Abyssinia, believed that the League did little or nothing to help out his country. In addition,
he believes that small states, such as his own, deserve the protection that they were
promised by the League and does so by begging for help. He also makes the League look
weak as it did nothing to fix the sort of conflict that it was it was created to solve. Source D,
states that the League did nothing to solve the situation and therefore looked weak.
Furthermore, he suggests that if the League continues to not care for “weaker countries” it
will cause many more unjust invasions in the near future.
 Lenin’s leadership was the main reason for Bolshevik success in October
1917. How far do you agree?
Cambridge International AS/A Level – May/June 2015
European Option: Modern Europe, 1789-1917
Syllabus 9389
Paper 21

Lenin can be seen as the major key figure in why the Bolsheviks seized power during the
October Revolution of 1917. Many historians believe that without his expert leadership and
his ability to give powerful speeches the Revolution would have failed or been delayed by
many years. Only two months before the Revolution Lenin still felt that a Marxist Revolution
would not be possible in his life time. Lenin’s return to Petrograd from exile in Switzerland
with the help of the ‘enemy’ Germany would enable him to take charge of the party. At this
time the Bolsheviks were a small party with opposition from other Revolutionary groups.
Many felt including many in his own party that Russia as a predominantly agricultural
society was not ready for a workers revolution. Many factors would play into Lenin’s favour
at the time and make an almost bloodless revolution possible.

Firstly, the Provincial Government was becoming increasingly unpopular. Their leader
Kerensky favoured the idea of moderate policies, meaning reforms were slow or non-
existent. The peasants were unhappy with the lack of land reforms and there was unrest
and violence throughout the countryside. The lot of the industrial workers in the cities had
not improved and violent strikes were increasingly common. Moreover, a new constitution
and an elected parliament had not been formed. In reality little had changed in Russia since
the fall of the Tsar and the people were becoming increasingly agitated. The nail in the
coffin for the Government would be the actions of the commander-in-chief of the army
Kornilov. The’ Kornilov Affair’ as it would be known was when Kornilov marched on
Petrograd with an army to put down the Bolsheviks by force. The attack was a failure with
many soldiers refusing to back the government and the Bolsheviks gained popular support
by leading the resistance among the workers. Kerensky was discredited and portrayed as a
German sympathiser and Kornilov was dismissed and accused of an attempted military
coup. The Military Revolutionary Council, dominated by Bolsheviks took control of
Petrograd and Lenin was able to return from exile. The Provincial Government lacked
support and were powerless to stop the certainty of a peoples Revolution.

Secondly, without the devastation of the First World War it is unlikely that the seeds of
Revolution would have been sown. The Russian army had suffered huge losses and an end
to war with Germany was remote. The Government with financial help from Britain and
France continued fighting. By 1917 the Russian people and the majority of the army wanted
to agree a peace. The war had been harsh on Russia both through loss of life but also
through the hardships the people at home suffered. There were shortages of food and
Lenin’s call for ‘Peace, Land and Bread’ in his ‘April Theses’ would be a popular slogan that
would appeal to many the people. It would seem he was the right person in the right place
at the right time.

In conclusion, without the strong charismatic leadership of Lenin the Bolsheviks may not
have been successful as early as 1917. It must be noted that the growing discontent with
the Government among the people and the strife caused by a disastrous war were major
factors in Lenin’s rise to power. Moreover, the lack of changes made by a weak Government
would cause both the peasantry and the workers to look for alternative ways to better their
lives. Finally, I believe that the Bolsheviks or a similar Revolutionary party would have been
successful but without the leadership Lenin, or a similar figure the Revolution may have
been delayed possibly for many years.
 The failings of the Directory explain Napoleon’s rise to power. How far do
you agree?
Cambridge International AS/A Level – May/June 2017
European Option: Modern Europe, 1789-1917
Syllabus 9389
Paper 21

The failings of the Directory can be seen as one of the main reasons for Napoleon’s rise to
power in 1799. The Directory was set up in 1795 and was a 5 member committee. It
governed France for four years until Napoleon overthrew it. The French economy was
continually at crisis during the time the Directory was in power. There was a lack of currency
and the treasury was bankrupt during the start of its rule. They stopped printing assignats,
the currency of the day, which caused prices to rise and wages to fall leading to a downturn
in the French economy. They also were unable to control religious conflicts throughout
France. The four years of their rule was a time of constant upheaval and problems with law
and order. The French people were tired of being forced to pay taxes to help France fight in
the many futile expensive foreign wars. By 1799 the people had lost trust in the Directory as
they believed that it was inefficient and corrupt. This is due to the directory fixing the
elections to favour themselves. Moreover, the Directory lost a lot of popularity with the
people of France as it had previously failed in several foreign campaigns. Due to this it was
seen as extremely weak this gave Napoleon the perfect moment to overthrow the Directory
and take power for himself.

Napoleon’s political connections were also a key reason that helped him rise to power in
1799. He had many connections and close personal relationships with leaders and key
figures involved in the Revolution. Due to this he was brought closer to politicians and
revolutionary leaders such as Robespierre, and Barras who was a director. As he got to know
them, it allowed him to find ways to exploit their weaknesses and introduce him into the
political world which helped his rise to power. Furthermore, Napoleon also learned new
skills of organising and addressing political meetings which helped him become a more able
politician who could control his people. He learned these skills from his connections that
made him attend most revolutionary rallies. His association with powerful leaders and
people won him support from Abbey Sieyes, a successful General in the army, member of
the clergy and member of the directory. Abbey Sieyes would later become pivotal in helping
Napoleon. The military coup of 1799 would bring an end Directory and an end to the ten
long years of revolution.

Napoleon’s pure luck should not be overlooked in his rise to power. Napoleon was born on
the Mediterranean island of Corsica. The island was previously governed by Italy but a year
before Napoleon’s birth was annexed to France. This therefore allowed him to be a
Frenchman by birth and set him on course to being a general in the French army.
Furthermore, his father through his connections was able to gain him a scholarship to study
in a military academy, normally only open to the children of nobles. Moreover, he survived
the reign of terror in France that killed or sent into exile most of the senior generals.
Importantly, he was lucky to escaped from the war against Britain in Egypt were he could
have easily lost his life. In addition, because the reign of terror removed many of the senior
military officers it gave him a better chance to rise to power with less opposition in his way.
Furthermore, he was extremely lucky that the Directory was weak in 1799 which allowed
him to carry out the coup de etait.

Finally, Napoleon’s Popularity helped him rise to power his successes on the field of battle
made him a hero in France and perhaps more importantly a hero in the eyes of his fellow
soldiers. The French people after ten years revolution were ready for change. Moreover, the
politicians at the time were seen to be ineffectual and corrupt. The Directory had shown
itself by its actions to want to continue the old ways. A new system was clearly needed and
Napoleon was the right man in the right place at the right time.

In conclusion, I believe that the main cause for the rise of Napoleon were the weaknesses
and corruption of the Directory. Their unwillingness to change and their in house fighting,
general weakness and corruption would eventually lead to their overthrow. Although, it
should not be overlooked that without somebody with the strengths and popularity
amongst the French people like Napoleon it still would have been difficult to end the Ten