MORE COLD W AR 50 Rather, the System Evolved As a Result Preservation of Good Relations with the of Unilateral Actions Taken by Each of the Soviet Union
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
FEATURE 3 AIO R E Are we facing a new Cold War? The blusterings and sabre rattlings of the Reagan Administration COLD together with its sinister activities in the Central America would indicate that we are already in one. But what about the WAR Russians? Do they also have their nuclear hawkes and their worst-case theorists? The balance of the world’s forces has substantially altered since the ig50s. The People’s election of Ronald Reagan that the West will let them have the marked the culmination of a concerted world without a fight."1 Nitze and his Republic of China, a wild campaign by those on the extreme Right colleagues believe that mos_t of the card in the world power of American politics to refreeze their world's ailments are attributable to the game, is now a major nation's relations with its principal Soviet Union: "For example, it appears adversary, the Soviet Union, and to probable that the Red Brigades in Italy, nuclear power. The non- return the world to the Cold War the assault on the Mosque in Mecca, and aligned movement has atmosphere of the nineteen forties, fifties the seizure of the American hostages in developed and expanded and sixties. And despite the monumental Iran were supported and perhaps changes which have taken place irf the instigated by agents of the Soviet bloc."2 its influence and the anti world since the Cold War was at its The fact that there is no hard evidence for war movement seems to height, the campaign has met with such allegations is irrelevant,3 for the spectacular, if temporary, success — at a hawks base their case largely on recent be riding the crest of a governmental level at least. examples of Soviet military involvement popular wave of concern. What factors have brought about this in Angola, Ethiopia and Afghanistan. But the existence of an decisive shift in political thinking in And it is this concept of a ruthless and America, a development which has relentless communist expansionism increasing number of undoubtedly propelled the world closer which has, they claim, forced the United volatile smaller states towards the nuclear precipice? What is States, to adopt a tough, uncompromis possessing nuclear the Russian attitude to the new political ing and interventionist stance of its own. climate? and more fundamentally, what To give these men their due, one must capacity means that the is the nature of the so-called "New Cold certainly agree that the Soviet Union has Cold War of the 1980s War" and how does it relate to the been responsible for many dangerous could be more unstable original Cold War and to the period and provocative actions. But the Soviet known as detente? All these questions Union has always acted in this fashion, and menacing than the require answers if we are to devise a and a brief glance through the pages of sterile power plays of the rational and realistic response to a American history will show that the 1950’s. In this article a phenomenon which now directly United States has behaved no differently jeopardises our future security. ’ (in fact its behaviour has been controversial argument is In the view of America's hard-liners considerably worse).4 Rather than being put forward that the (the so-called "hawks"), there is nothing a decisive factor in reinvigorating the policies of both the particularly new about the New Cold Cold War, Russian actions have merely War. They see it as simply a return to the served as a pretext to justify a shift in tJ.S.S.R. and the U.S.A. is sensible policies which a well-meaning American foreign policy whose roots lie determined by self-interest but naive America chose to abandon elsewhere. It must be remembered that as interpreted by their after ignominious defeat in the Viet Nam the invasion of Afghanistan took place War. The Soviet Union, they argue, fully two and a half years after American social and military elites. "duped" America into believing that co hawks began calling for a tougher, more operation was possible, while relentlessly militant stand against the Soviet Union. pursuing its plans for world domination. If anything, the Russian decision to re Paul Nitze, co-founder of the hawkish establish control in that country by Committee on the Present Danger, and military means was encouraged by what currently a senior Reagan foreign policy was undoubtedly perceived as a KEN adviser and arms control negotiator, dangerous and provocative change in expressed this myopic world view in American foreign policy. It is no Foreign Affairs journal: 'The Kremlin coincidence that the invasion took place leaders do not want war; they want the ENDERBY world. They believe it unlikely, however, 48 A utum n 1983 just two weeks after the NATO decision upon whom one chooses to believe), and to deploy Pershing and Cruise missiles in smaller nations must take shelter beneath IQ Western Europe. These missiles will, for Mounted Pershing 1 missile In West the ideological and military umbrella of ” ™ the first time, give NATO the option of G erm any the one superpower, for fear of being initiating a devastating nuclear strike engulfed by the immutably aggressive against military targets in the Soviet Has this lesson simply been lost on the designs of the other. So the argument Union, a development which will, hawks? In many cases the answer is goes. ironically, in the event of a crisis, give the probably yes; however, men such as Paul Russians a strong motivation to destroy Nitze have been close to the seat of power these missiles before they can be used. for a long time (Nitze himself was a senior The Russians tried very hard to forestall foreign policy adviser to President l n order to meet the seriousness of the deployment of these weapons, offering to Truman, and chaired the committee threat as it is presented to the public, each freeze production of their own SS20s which produced NSC-68, the blueprint superpower has deployed a gruesome which were then only very few in number, for the Cold War), and for all we might array of sophisticated weaponry, and but no American response was dislike them and disagree with them, we stands poised to rain unparalleled forthcoming. must give them credit for intelligence and destruction on its adversary at what is The point which needs to be made is cunning. These men are acutely aware literally a moment's notice. An arms race that the New Cold War has done nothing that the Cold War serves as a vital of-this magnitude is unavoidable given to curb the Russians — they are still in instrument in the exercise of American the nature of the Cold War, and the great ■ | Afghanistan and Ethiopia (and Eastern power. And, as we shall see, the roots of tragedy is that this arms race will Europe) and look like remaining there the New Cold War lie primarily outside undoubtedly destroy us unless the Cold for some time to come. Indeed, there was the orbit of the superpower military War can be rapidly and permanently never any possibility the United States confrontation. terminated. Again, most of the hawks are could do anything to change Soviet well aware of this, as evidenced, by their policy by adopting a confrontationist admission of the ultimate need for stance. The overriding lesson of the 1950s nuclear disarmament. The Reagan is that posturing and proselytising are NI N evertheless, that confrontation is still administration has proposed a Soviet- entirely lost on the adversary during a the basis of the Cold War world order, American arms reduction of one-third of climate of tension and conflict. In fact, and it has become so widely accepted that existing strategic nuclear stockpiles. But ironically, Soviet adventurism was at its it is now believed by most people to be because it publicly argues that the Soviets peak during the period of maximum both permanent and inevitable. The can never be trusted to keep their word, American diplomatic and military division of the world into two armed the administration has a very convenient coercion (1947-1953). The times when camps is nowhere more evident than in excuse for giving disarmament Soviet co-operation has been most Germany, particularly since the erection negotiations only perfunctory attention. forthcoming have been during partial of the Berlin Wall in 1961. According to The problem is that the short term thaws in the Cold War. The Partial Test the unending stream of propaganda benefits derived from prolonging the Ban Treaty and a whole series of similar emanating from both camps, the world is Cold War are perceived as being more undergoing an ideological struggle agreements were signed in the 12 months important than the long term advantages following the Cuban Missile Crisis of between the forces of good and the forces ot superpower co-operation. And so 1962, before Kennedy and Khrushchev of evil (of course which superpower leaders cling to an antiquated and were both removed from office. represents which forces depends entirely dangerous world order which at least Similarly, SALT emerged during the promises certainty, if not security. early days of detente, a period when the Soviets dramatically increased the quota of Jews permitted to leave the country. Now, with the refreezing of the Cold War, the number leaving has been reduced to a trickle.5 A ustralian Left Review 83 49 MORE MORE COLD W ARThis certainty derives from the Brezhnev's Russia is represented by In America's case, the Cold War has confrontation itself and the "black and power, privilege, and a holiday house on been absolutely essential for the pursuit white" propaganda it generates.