DOCSLIB.ORG

What Was the Cuban Missile Crisis?

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
What Was the Cuban Missile Crisis? aol1 Revision for Spring Mocks A War of Words In 1947, Stalin and Churchill engaged in a ‘war of words’ which revealed that trust had completely broken down and misunderstandings were shaping policies. Source 1 - Churchill’s ‘Iron Curtain’ speech in March 1946 “From Stettin in the Baltic to Trieste in the Adriatic an ​ iron curtain has descended across the continent. ​ Behind the line lie all the capitals of the ancient states of Central and Eastern Europe… all these famous cities and the populations around them lie in the Soviet sphere and are all subject, in one form or another, not only to Soviet influence but to a very high and ​ increasing measure of control from Moscow.” ​ Source 2 - Stalin’s Response to Churchill’s speech, also in March 1946 “Essentially Mr Churchill now adopts the ​ position of the warmonger* and in this Mr ​ ​ Churchill is not alone. He has friends not only in Britain but in the United States of America as well. A point to be noted in this respect is that Mr Churchill and his ​ friends bear a striking resemblance to Hitler and his friends.” ● A person who wants war What was the impact of this ‘war of words’? In the light of these speeches, Truman and Stalin were very concerned about the possibility of a new war. Each leader asked for secret reports from their embassies, to help them understand what their opponents were thinking. Both reports were sent as telegrams. These ​ ​ reports were very important because they greatly influenced the thinking and policies of Truman and Stalin. 1 aol2 Source 3: The Long Telegram Source 4: Novikov’s Telegram This telegram was sent by George This telegram was sent to Stalin by the Kennan, America’s ambassador in Soviet Ambassador in American, Moscow. It reported that Novikov. It reported that: ​ ● Stalin had given a speech in ● Following the death of President Moscow calling for the Roosevelt, the American destruction of capitalism. government had no interest in ● There could be no peace with the working with the USSR. USSR while it remained. ● Truman wanted to use its power determined to resist capitalism. and wealth to dominate the ● The USSR was building up its whole world and eliminate military power, even though the communism. Second World War was over. ● The American public would Why would it be doing this if it support its government if a war had peaceful intentions? broke out against the USSR. How did the USSR become so powerful in Eastern Europe? After the end of the Second World War, the Red Army (the army of the USSR) Red Army remained in the Eastern European countries it had occupied. Thi was because Stalin felt the Soviet Union needed these countries to act as a ‘buffer zone. Stalin ​ ​ wasn’t prepared to allow these countries to have free elections and between 1945 and 1948 Stalin installed pro-Soviet ‘puppet governments’ in Poland, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria and Czechoslovakia. Stalin set up an organisation called ‘Cominform’ to control information in these countries. That was to be no freedom of ​ ​ speech and no alternative political parties in the satellite states. Stalin also set up an organisation called Comecon in 1949. Its role was to control the economies of the ​ ​ satellite states. Mainly it worked to nationalise and collectivise their agriculture and industries because these were the key features of a communist economy. What was ‘The Truman Doctrine?’ As a consequences of the Long Telegram, Truman was determined that America would remain more powerful than the USSR. He was concerned that Stalin would try to extend the influence of communism by offering support to communist groups in European countries. After the war, much of Europe was devastated and people in countries like Italy, France, Greece, and even Britain, were suffering great hardships. Truman understood that communism was highly attractive to poor people because it involved sharing the the money and land of a small group of people and and sharing it out amongst the majority. To make sure that there were no more communist revolutions, Truman in March 1947 set out a new policy that soon became known at “The Truman Doctrine”. 2 aol3 Key Ideas within the Truman Doctrine ● The world had a choice between communist tyranny and democratic freedom. ● America had a duty to fight for freedom and protect the world from the spread of communism, which, he said, was evil. ● America would give military and economic support to any nation which was threatened by a communist takeover because communism must not be allowed to spread to other countries. An example of this: In 1948, the United States gave $400 million to Turkey and Greece in an attempt to stop the communists in these countries winning the civil wars which were being fought between them and pro-Western governments. Why was the Truman Doctrine important? 1. The Truman Doctrine was important because it was a fundamental change in the foreign policy of the United States. This new policy was called ‘containment’. Before being dragged into the Second World War, America had maintained a policy of ‘isolationism’. Isolationism meant that the United States did not get involved in international affairs unless it absolutely had to. Containment meant that now the United States would do all that it could (apart from actually going to war) to stop the spread of communism. 2. The Truman Doctrine was important was because it formally ended the Grand Alliance and started what became known as the Cold War. It was Truman’s way of telling the world that there could be no co-operation between the superpowers so long as the USSR remained a communist country. 3. The Truman Doctrine was important because, ss far as Stalin was concerned the Truman Doctrine was an act of aggression. Stalin saw it as a declaration of war against the Soviet Union, since Soviet Union was the only Communist country at this time (China didn’t ‘turn’ Communist until 1949). The Death of Joseph Stalin 1953 Stalin died in 1953; this was bound to lead to some kind of change as he had been in charge of the USSR since the 1920s. How did the death of Stalin affect the relationship between the superpowers? 1. Soviet policies under the new leader, Nikita Khrushchev, initially seemed less harsh than Stalin’s. 2. This was known as ‘the thaw’ in the Cold War. 3. Khrushchev said that he was in favour of ‘peaceful co-existence’ ; he met with President Eisenhower of America at the Geneva Summit in 1955. 4. Khrushchev agreed to withdraw Soviet troops from Austria at the same time as the US, France and Britain. He also freed many political prisoners and reduced censorship 5. Finally, in 1959, despite events in Hungary in 1956, he became the first Soviet leader to visit the USA suggesting that the thaw in the Cold War was real. 3 aol4 What happened in Hungary in 1956? Hungary had suffered a lot under Stalin’s control. Instead of the Soviet Union helping Hungary recover from the effects of the Second World War, food and industrial products were taken FROM Hungary and shipped off to Russia. All non-communist political parties had been banned and Russian officials controlled the government, the police and the army. Matyas Rakosi was made the Dictator of Hungary and the people gave him the nickname ‘the Budapest Butcher’. Under his rule, 387,000 Hungarians were imprisoned and more than 2,000 more were murdered. In 1956, the new Russian leader, Nikita Khrushchev made a very important speech. Although it was called ‘the Secret Speech’ it didn’t remain secret for long. In this speech, Khrushchev promised an end to the brutality of Stalinism, under which around 20 million people had died. The people of Eastern Europe looked forward to a far less oppressive style of government. Encouraged by the hope of reform, students in Budapest rioted and attacked the police and army. The police lost control and the protests spread to other major cities. Rather than crush the protest, Khrushchev stopped in and agreed to the replacement of the hated Rakosi by a more liberal leader called Imre Nagy. Nagy began to introduce reforms but in November 1956 he want too far. He promised to: ● Turn Hungary into a Western style democracy with free elections. (Nagy was himself a communist but he believed in a less repressive form of communism) ● Withdraw Hungary from the Warsaw Pact ● Ask the United Nations for protection from Russia What was Khrushchev’s Response?. 1. Khrushchev believed that if he allowed this to happen, other Eastern European countries would copy Hungary and soon the Soviet Union’s ‘buffer zone’ would be gone. He couldn’t allow this to happen so he sent in 200,000 Soviet troops and 5,000 tanks to crush the anti-Communist movement. In the two weeks of bitter fighting which followed around 20,000 Hungarians were killed. Nagy was arrested, put on trial for treason and found guilty. He was hanged in June 1958; Khrushchev said that Nagy’s fate “was a warning to the leaders of all socialist countries”. 2. A new leader, called Janos Kadar who was loyal to the USSR, was installed as leader of Hungary. 3. Kadar promised to: re-establish communist control of Hungary, use Hungarian troops to stop attacks on Soviet troops; keep Hungary in the Warsaw Pact; negotiate for the removal of Soviet troops once the crisis was over. 4 aol5 Although the West protested, it ignored the pleas of the Hungarians for military help. American President Eisenhower did offer $20 million worth of food and medical aid to Nagy’s government and praised the bravery of the Hungarian people, encouraging them to fight on.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Revolt and Crisis in Greece
    REVOLT AND CRISIS IN GREECE BETWEEN A PRESENT YET TO PASS AND A FUTURE STILL TO COME How does a revolt come about and what does it leave behind? What impact does it have on those who participate in it and those who simply watch it? Is the Greek revolt of December 2008 confined to the shores of the Mediterranean, or are there lessons we can bring to bear on social action around the globe? Revolt and Crisis in Greece: Between a Present Yet to Pass and a Future Still to Come is a collective attempt to grapple with these questions. A collaboration between anarchist publishing collectives Occupied London and AK Press, this timely new volume traces Greece’s long moment of transition from the revolt of 2008 to the economic crisis that followed. In its twenty chapters, authors from around the world—including those on the ground in Greece—analyse how December became possible, exploring its legacies and the position of the social antagonist movement in face of the economic crisis and the arrival of the International Monetary Fund. In the essays collected here, over two dozen writers offer historical analysis of the factors that gave birth to December and the potentialities it has opened up in face of the capitalist crisis. Yet the book also highlights the dilemmas the antagonist movement has been faced with since: the book is an open question and a call to the global antagonist movement, and its allies around the world, to radically rethink and redefine our tactics in a rapidly changing landscape where crises and potentialities are engaged in a fierce battle with an uncertain outcome.
    [Show full text]
  • Reagan and the Soviet Union: Competing Military Strategies, 1980-1988
    4 Reagan and the Soviet Union: Competing Military Strategies, 1980-1988 David M. Glantz This essay evaluates the policies and military strategy introduced by U.S. Pres- ident Ronald Reagan vis-à-vis the Soviet Union, within the context of over forty years of intense strategic competition called the Cold War. The Cold War remained “cold” because the two competing countries emerged from the World War as victorious superpower with unchallenged military capabilities and un- precedented territories either under their control or within their spheres of in- fluence. Despite sharply differing ideologies and political systems, the United States and Soviet Union understood the risks and potential costs of war, espe- cially after both became atomic powers by the late 1940s. Both recognized that deliberately unleashing a world war was no longer a rational act. Given this unique constraint, the ensuing completion became a prolonged game of strategic “cat and mouse,” as the two counties jockeyed with each other for a more advantageous position militarily, politically, and economically. The instruments of this game were specific military strategies governing the nature of the competition and setting limits on the countries’ military actions, all of which acknowledged that the nuclear balance was quite literally a mutually-rec- ognized balance of terror. David M. Glantz, “Reagan and the Soviet Union: Competing Military Strategies, 1980-1988,” Essay, Enduring Legacy Project, John A. Adams ’71 Center for Military History & Strategic Analysis, Virginia Military Institute, 2014. 2 Conventional wisdom concerning the Cold War maintains that this “cat and mouse” game played out successfully, that is, relatively peacefully, because neither side was willing to violate the constraints imposed by this balance of ter- ror.
    [Show full text]
  • The United States, Brazil, and the Cuban Missile Crisis, 1962 (Part 1)
    TheHershberg United States, Brazil, and the Cuban Missile Crisis, 1962 The United States, Brazil, and the Cuban Missile Crisis, 1962 (Part 1) ✣ What options did John F. Kennedy consider after his aides in- formed him on 16 October 1962 that the Soviet Union was secretly deploy- ing medium-range nuclear-capable missiles in Cuba? In most accounts, his options fell into three categories: 1. military: an attack against Cuba involving a large-scale air strike against the missile sites, a full-scale invasion, or the ªrst followed by the second; 2. political-military: a naval blockade of Cuba (euphemistically called a “quarantine”) to prevent the shipment of further “offensive” military equipment and allow time to pressure Soviet leader Nikita Khrush- chev into withdrawing the missiles; or 3. diplomatic: a private overture to Moscow to persuade Khrushchev to back down without a public confrontation. Kennedy ultimately chose the second option and announced it on 22 Octo- ber in his nationally televised address. That option and the ªrst (direct mili- tary action against Cuba) have been exhaustively analyzed over the years by Western scholars. Much less attention has been devoted to the third alterna- tive, the diplomatic route. This article shows, however, that a variant of that option—a variant that has never previously received any serious scholarly treatment—was actually adopted by Kennedy at the peak of the crisis. The United States pursued a separate diplomatic track leading not to Moscow but to Havana (via Rio de Janeiro), and not to Khrushchev but to Fidel Castro, in a secret effort to convince the Cuban leader to make a deal: If Castro agreed to end his alliance with Moscow, demand the removal of the Soviet missiles, and disavow any further support for revolutionary subversion in the Western hemisphere, he could expect “many changes” in Washington’s policy toward Journal of Cold War Studies Vol.
    [Show full text]
  • Cuban Missile Crisis: Applying Strategic Culture to Gametheory
    Utah State University DigitalCommons@USU All Graduate Plan B and other Reports Graduate Studies 5-2013 Cuban Missile Crisis: Applying Strategic Culture to Gametheory Chelsea E. Carattini Utah State University Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/gradreports Part of the Political Science Commons Recommended Citation Carattini, Chelsea E., "Cuban Missile Crisis: Applying Strategic Culture to Gametheory" (2013). All Graduate Plan B and other Reports. 236. https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/gradreports/236 This Report is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate Studies at DigitalCommons@USU. It has been accepted for inclusion in All Graduate Plan B and other Reports by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@USU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Introduction Game theory applied to political situations offers a unique approach to analyzing and understanding international relations. Yet the rigid structure that lends itself so well to mathematics is not practical in the real world . It lacks a built in mechanism for determining a player's preferences, which is a key part of an international "game" or situation. Strategic culture, another international relations theory, is quite the opposite. Critics claim it suffers from a lack of structure, but it captures the spirit of international actors and what makes them tick. This paper explores the idea of pairing the two otherwise unrelated theories to bolster both in the areas where they are lacking in order to provide a more complete understanding of international states' behavior and motivations. Brief Summary of Major Theories The theories presented in the following pages are drawn from distinct schools of thought; consequently it is necessary to provide some background information.
    [Show full text]
  • THE LAND WARFARE PAPERS Perestroika and Soviet Military
    THE LAND WARFARE PAPERS No.5 OCTOBER 1990 Perestroika and Soviet Military Personnel By Robert B. Davis A National Security Affairs Paper Published on Occasion by THE INSTITUTE OF LAND WARFARE ASSOCIATION OF THE UNITED STATES ARMY Arlington, Virginia PERESTROIKA AND SOVIET MILITARY PERSONNEL by Robert B. Davis THE INSTITUTE OF LAND WARFARE ASSOCIATION OF THE UNITED STATES ARMY AN AUSA INSTITUTE OF LAND WARFARE PAPER In 1988 the Association of the United States Army (AUSA) established within its existing organization a new entity known as the Institute of Land Warfare. Its purpose is to extend the educational work of AUSA by sponsoring scholarly publications, to include books, monographs and essays on key defense issues, as well as workshops and symposia. A work selected for publication as a Land Warfare Paper represents research by the author which, in the opinion of the editorial board, will contribute to a better understanding of a particular defense or national security issue. Publication as an AUSA Institute of Land Warfare Paper does not indicate that the Association of the United States Army agrees with everything in the paper, but does suggest that AUSA believes the paper will stimulate the thinking of AUSA members and others concerned about important defense issues. LAND WARFARE PAPER NO. S, OCTOBER 1990 Perestroika and Soviet Military Personnel by Robert B. Davis Mr. Robert B. Davis is a research psychologist with the U.S. Army Foreign Science and Technology Center in Charlottesville, Virginia. Mr. Davis received his undergraduate degree from Arkansas College and his advanced degree from Troy State University, Alabama.
    [Show full text]
  • Timeline of the Cold War
    Timeline of the Cold War 1945 Defeat of Germany and Japan February 4-11: Yalta Conference meeting of FDR, Churchill, Stalin - the 'Big Three' Soviet Union has control of Eastern Europe. The Cold War Begins May 8: VE Day - Victory in Europe. Germany surrenders to the Red Army in Berlin July: Potsdam Conference - Germany was officially partitioned into four zones of occupation. August 6: The United States drops atomic bomb on Hiroshima (20 kiloton bomb 'Little Boy' kills 80,000) August 8: Russia declares war on Japan August 9: The United States drops atomic bomb on Nagasaki (22 kiloton 'Fat Man' kills 70,000) August 14 : Japanese surrender End of World War II August 15: Emperor surrender broadcast - VJ Day 1946 February 9: Stalin hostile speech - communism & capitalism were incompatible March 5 : "Sinews of Peace" Iron Curtain Speech by Winston Churchill - "an "iron curtain" has descended on Europe" March 10: Truman demands Russia leave Iran July 1: Operation Crossroads with Test Able was the first public demonstration of America's atomic arsenal July 25: America's Test Baker - underwater explosion 1947 Containment March 12 : Truman Doctrine - Truman declares active role in Greek Civil War June : Marshall Plan is announced setting a precedent for helping countries combat poverty, disease and malnutrition September 2: Rio Pact - U.S. meet 19 Latin American countries and created a security zone around the hemisphere 1948 Containment February 25 : Communist takeover in Czechoslovakia March 2: Truman's Loyalty Program created to catch Cold War
    [Show full text]
  • The Cuban Missile Crisis: How to Respond?
    The Cuban Missile Crisis: How to Respond? Topic: Cuban Missile Crisis Grade Level: Grades 9 – 12 Subject Area: US and World History after World War II; US Government Time Required: 1-2 hours Goals/Rationale: During the Cuban Missile Crisis, Kennedy's advisors discussed many options regarding how they might respond to the installation of Soviet missiles in Cuba. In this lesson, students examine primary source documents and recordings to consider some of the options discussed by Kennedy's advisors during this crisis and the rationale for why the president might have selected the path he chose. Essential Question: Does an individual's role in government influence his or her view on how to respond to important issues? Objectives Students will: discuss some of the options considered by Kennedy’s advisors during the Cuban Missile Crisis; identify the governmental role of participants involved in decision making and consider whether or not their role influenced their choice of option(s); consider the ramifications of each option; discuss the additional information that might have been helpful as of October 18, 1962 for Kennedy and his staff to know in order to make the most effective decision. analyze why President Kennedy made the decision to place a naval blockade around Cuba. Connections to Curriculum (Standards) National History Standards US History, Era 9 Standard 2: How the Cold War and conflicts in Korea and Vietnam influenced domestic and international politics. Standard 2A: The student understands the international origins and domestic consequences of the Cold War. Massachusetts History and Social Studies Curriculum Frameworks USII.T5 (1) Using primary sources such as campaign literature and debates, news articles/analyses, editorials, and television coverage, analyze the important policies and events that took place during the presidencies of John F.
    [Show full text]
  • Gunter Bischof, Saki Dockrill, Eds.. Cold War Respite: the Geneva Summit of 1955
    Gunter Bischof, Saki Dockrill, eds.. Cold War Respite: The Geneva Summit of 1955. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 2000. x + 319 pp. $60.00, cloth, ISBN 978-0-8071-2370-6. Reviewed by Kathryn Statler Published on H-Diplo (December, 2000) A Very Brief Cold War Respite tion of resolving outstanding issues at the cost of While much attention has been devoted to the undermining their own interests. A fourth theme, origins and the numerous conflicts of the Cold not explicitly mentioned yet apparent throughout War, possibilities for an easing of East-West ten‐ the essays, is how domestic politics (and especial‐ sions have received far less scrutiny. Conferences ly the internal Soviet power struggle) helped devoted to diplomacy, such as the 1954 Berlin and shape the outcome of the summit. While the pur‐ Geneva conferences and the 1955 Geneva summit, ported goal of the summit was to address the Ger‐ remain underexplored. Gunter Bischof and Saki man problem, European security, and disarma‐ Dockrill thus make an important contribution to ment possibilities, no concrete discussion of these Cold War scholarship with their international his‐ issues occurred. At the same time, all the partici‐ tory of the 1955 Geneva summit-the frst (and last) pants were hopeful that a four-power meeting meeting of the heads of state from the United would provide an opportunity to gradually reduce States, the Soviet Union, Britain, and France dur‐ East-West tensions. ing the Cold War. Their edited compilation, Cold Ernest May provides a short but detailed War Respite: The Geneva Summit of 1955, is com‐ background chapter on the early Cold War-prior prised of thirteen well-documented essays that ex‐ to the summit.
    [Show full text]
  • Bailout Reform Talks to Be Cont Greek-American Recruit from Texas
    S O C V st ΓΡΑΦΕΙ ΤΗΝ ΙΣΤΟΡΙΑ W ΤΟΥ ΕΛΛΗΝΙΣΜΟΥ E 101 ΑΠΟ ΤΟ 1915 The National Herald anniversa ry N www.thenationalherald.com A wEEkly GrEEk-AmEriCAN PuBliCATiON 1915-2016 VOL. 20, ISSUE 1002 December 24-30 , 2016 c v $1.50 Bailout Greek-American Recruit from Texas Became ISIS Prince Reform John Georgelas, now known as Yahya Abu Talks to Hassan, converted to Islam in college TNH Staff pushed for a Caliphate, a Mus - lim state, and the death of non- Be Cont On Dec. 8, 2015, a voice was believers – which would include heard on Al Bayan radio – the his own parents and even Mus - voice of the Islamic State – one lims he feels do not embrace the Tsipras’ Turnabout unknown outside the violent most radical tenets the group world of jihad, but not to a fam - holds dear. Causes Delays ily in Plano, TX. After getting his family out into Next Year It was that of an Islamic of Syria in 2013, Georgelas – scholar known as Yahya, so for - whose garb and beard and eyes midable in his knowledge of the locked on his new life make him TNH Staff Koran and Arabic and religion resemble not an American but that even hardened devotees of a passionate follower of Islam – ATHENS – Prime Minister ISIS bowed to him and showed he was free, as Wood wrote, to Alexis Tsipras' handout to pen - respect. “pursue his dreams unencum - sioners has delayed third bailout But it was also that of a once- bered by a wife and children.
    [Show full text]
  • NATO Summit Guide Warsaw, 8-9 July 2016
    NATO Summit Guide Warsaw, 8-9 July 2016 An essential Alliance in a more dangerous world The Warsaw Summit comes at a defining moment for the security of the North Atlantic Alliance. In recent years, the world has become more volatile and dangerous with Russia’s illegal annexation of Crimea and destabilisation of eastern Ukraine, as well as its military build-up from the Barents Sea to the Baltic, and from the Black Sea to the eastern Mediterranean; turmoil across the Middle East and North Africa, fuelling the biggest migrant and refugee crisis in Europe since World War Two; brutal attacks by ISIL and other terrorist groups, as well as cyber attacks, nuclear proliferation and ballistic missile threats. NATO is adapting to this changed security environment. It also remains committed to fulfilling its three core tasks: collective defence, crisis management and cooperative security. And, in the Polish capital, the Alliance will make important decisions to boost security in and around Europe, based on two key pillars: protecting its citizens through modern deterrence and defence, and projecting stability beyond its borders. NATO member states form a unique community of values, committed to the principles of democracy, individual liberty and the rule of law. In today’s dangerous world, transatlantic cooperation is needed more than ever. NATO embodies that cooperation, bringing to bear the strength and unity of North America and Europe. This Summit is the first to be hosted in Poland and the first to be chaired by NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg, who took up his post in October 2014.
    [Show full text]
  • Konrad Adenauer and the Cuban Missile Crisis: West German Documents
    SECTION 5: Non-Communist Europe and Israel Konrad Adenauer and the Cuban Missile Crisis: West German Documents access agency, the exchange of mutual non-aggression declara- d. Note: Much like the other NATO allies of the United tions and the establishment of FRG-GDR technical commissions. States, West Germany was not involved in either the ori- Somehow the proposals leaked to the German press, leading gins or the resolution of the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis.1 Secretary of State Dean Rusk to protest the serious breach of confi- EBut, of course, nowhere in Europe was the immediate impact of dence. Hurt by the accusation, Adenauer withdrew his longstand- Khrushchev’s nuclear missile gamble felt more acutely than in ing confidante and ambassador to Washington, Wilhelm Grewe. Berlin. Ever since the Soviet premier’s November 1958 ultima- Relations went from cool to icy when the chancellor publicly dis- tum, designed to dislodge Western allied forces from the western tanced himself from Washington’s negotiation package at a press sectors of the former German Reich’s capital, Berlin had been the conference in May. By time the missile crisis erupted in October, focus of heightened East-West tensions. Following the building Adenauer’s trust in the United States had been severely shaken.4 of the Berlin Wall in August 1961 and the October stand-off The missile crisis spurred a momentary warming in the between Soviet and American tanks at the Checkpoint Charlie uneasy Adenauer-Kennedy relationship. Unlike other European crossing, a deceptive lull had settled over the city.2 allies, Adenauer backed Kennedy’s staunch attitude during the cri- Yet the Berlin question (centering around Western rights sis wholeheartedly, a fact that did not go unnoticed in Washington.
    [Show full text]
  • Thirteen Days Is the Story of Mankind's Closest Brush with Nuclear Armageddon
    Helpful Background: Thirteen Days is the story of mankind's closest brush with nuclear Armageddon. Many events are portrayed exactly as they occurred. The movie captures the tension that the crisis provoked and provides an example of how foreign policy was made in the last half of the 20th century. Supplemented with the information provided in this Learning Guide, the film shows how wise leadership during the crisis saved the world from nuclear war, while mistakes and errors in judgment led to the crisis. The film is an excellent platform for debates about the Cuban Missile Crisis, nuclear weapons policy during the Cold War, and current foreign policy issues. With the corrections outlined in this Learning Guide, the movie can serve as a motivator and supplement for a unit on the Cold War. WERE WE REALLY THAT CLOSE TO NUCLEAR WAR? Yes. We were very, very, close. As terrified as the world was in October 1962, not even the policy-makers had realized how close to disaster the situation really was. Kennedy thought that the likelihood of nuclear war was 1 in 3, but the administration did not know many things. For example, it believed that the missiles were not operational and that only 2-3,000 Soviet personnel were in place. Accordingly, the air strike was planned for the 30th, before any nuclear warheads could be installed. In 1991-92, Soviet officials revealed that 42 [missiles] had been in place and fully operational. These could obliterate US cities up to the Canadian border. These sites were guarded by 40,000 Soviet combat troops.
    [Show full text]