DOCSLIB.ORG

Topic 5: the Cold War Title and Author of Packet: Glasnost and Perestroika – Robert Service

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Topic 5: the Cold War Title and Author of Packet: Glasnost and Perestroika – Robert Service Topic 5: The Cold War Title and Author of Packet: Glasnost and Perestroika – Robert Service Major Theme: Origins of the Cold War Ideological Differences Mutual Suspicion and Fear From Wartime Allies to Post-War Enemies Historiography Major Theme: Nature of the Cold War Ideological Opposition Superpowers and Spheres of Influence Alliances and Diplomacy in the Cold War Historiography Major Theme: Development and Impact of the Cold War Global Spread of the Cold War from its European Origins Cold War Policies of Containment, Brinkmanship, Peaceful Coexistence, Détente Role of the United Nations and the Non-Aligned Movement Role and Significance of Leaders Arms Race, Proliferation and Limitation Social, Cultural, and Economic Impact Historiography Major Theme: End of the Cold War Break-Up of Soviet Union: Internal Problems and External • Glasnost = ‘openness’, ‘a voicing’, ‘a making public’ – does not mean freedom of Pressures information • Most comm. Officials wanted only minimal reforms and were horrified at the thought of changing their methods of rule; Gorbachev turned for help to the intelligentsia • Gorbachev focused on political and ideological measures; he believed that substantial progress on the economic front would be impeded until he had reformed politics and ideology • Gorbachev described the USSR’s condition as ‘socialism in the process of self- development’ AKA socialism hadn’t yet been built in the USSR • Gorbachev called for the correction of history in textbooks • Khrushchev’s reforms had been too timid to be effective • Gorbachev instituted election rather than appointment of party committee secretaries; the holding of multi-candidate elections to the Soviets; the assignation of nonparty members to high public office • Gorbachev aimed at political as well as industrial democratization • The reintroduction of a mixed economy was projected, but there would still be a predominance of state ownership and regulation in the economy • Comm. Intellectuals were attracted to the Gen. Sec., comm. Party functionaries were not • Gorbachev didn’t really clarify the details of strategy, tactics, and policies; he had set out a stall of general objectives • Gorbachev’s comprehension of economic principles was rudimentary in the extreme • New incumbents of office made little effort to alter local practices • Gorbachev called for a strict functional separation between the party and the soviets. The party was being dropped as the vanguard of perestroika. Instead Gorbachev wished to rule through a congress of people’s deputies elected by the people. The USSR remained a one-party state, but the party as such had abruptly lost much of its power • As the hidden dimensions of the USSR’s domestic problems became apparent to Gorbachev, so did his need for a drastic reduction in military expenditure. The Cold War was gradually being ended. He said that global peace transcended support for class struggle Breakdown of Soviet Control Over Central and Eastern Europe • Gorbachev didn’t take cognizance of the role of the USSR as an imperial power both within its own boundaries and across Eastern Europe • Gorbachev asserted that the USSR’s foreign policy throughout the world should be based on ‘common human values’, which clashed with Leninist tradition. He had misconceived his idol • The degree of autonomy demanded by Lithuania and Estonia rose • The USSR contained many inter-ethnic rivalries which did not predominantly involve Russians • In all three Baltic Soviet republics, ‘interfronts’ were being formed that consisted mainly of Russian inhabitants who felt menaced by the local nationalisms and who were committed to the maintenance of the USSR • Gorbachev continued to uphold his promise to not interfere in the affairs of Warsaw Pact states • The common feeling of Soviet political leaders was that the USSR’s affairs should have priority of attention. Gorbachev’s working assumption was that the comm. Leaderships of each country in the region had to find their own most suitable mode of political and economic transformation • In April 1988 the USSR announced its intention to make a complete withdrawal from Afghanistan Historiography • “It would not be enough to merely replace Brezhnev’s personnel with younger, more energetic officials. The attitudes and practices of the Communist Party of the USSR needed changing.” • Gorbachev was freeing the debate in the USSR o an extent that no Soviet leader had attempted, not even Khrushchev and Lenin • “Gorbachev felt that until there was comprehension of the past, little could be done by him in the present” • Gorbachev’s argument was that the country was in a ‘pre-crisis’ condition, and that over-centralized methods of planning and management had to be abandoned • Gorbachev still aimed to preserve the USSR and the one party state. He failed to understand that his actions were strengthening the very phenomena that he was trying to eliminate. Glasnost and perestroika were undermining the political and economic foundations of soviet order .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Indochina, the Vietnam War, and the Mayaguez Incident
    Defining a War: Indochina, the Vietnam War, and the Mayaguez Incident Lieutenant Colonel Michael Hunter Marine Corps History, Volume 6, Number 2, Winter 2020, pp. 72-90 (Article) Published by Marine Corps University Press For additional information about this article https://muse.jhu.edu/article/796393/summary [ Access provided at 30 Sep 2021 11:21 GMT with no institutional affiliation ] This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Defining a War: INDOCHINA, THE VIETNAM WAR, AND THE MAYAGUEZ INCIDENT by Lieutenant Colonel Michael Hunter, USA Abstract: Only two weeks after the fall of Saigon in May 1975, Khmer Rouge forces seized the American mer- chant ship SS Mayaguez (1944) off the Cambodian coast, setting up a Marine rescue and recovery battle on the island of Koh Tang. This battle on 12–15 May 1975 was the final U.S. military episode amid the wider Second Indochina War. The term Vietnam War has impeded a proper understanding of the wider war in the American consciousness, leading many to disassociate the Mayaguez incident from the Vietnam War, though they belong within the same historical frame. This article seeks to provide a heretofore unseen historical argument con- necting the Mayaguez incident to the wider war and to demonstrate that Mayaguez and Koh Tang veterans are Vietnam veterans, relying on primary sources from the Ford administration, the papers of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Fund, and interviews with veterans. Keywords: Vietnam, Cambodia, veterans, memory, Mayaguez, the Wall, Vietnam Veterans Memorial Fund, Koh Tang, Koh Tang Mayaguez Veterans Organization, Gerald R.
    [Show full text]
  • The Space Race
    The Space Race Aims: To arrange the key events of the “Space Race” in chronological order. To decide which country won the Space Race. Space – the Final Frontier “Space” is everything Atmosphere that exists outside of our planet’s atmosphere. The atmosphere is the layer of Earth gas which surrounds our planet. Without it, none of us would be able to breathe! Space The sun is a star which is orbited (circled) by a system of planets. Earth is the third planet from the sun. There are nine planets in our solar system. How many of the other eight can you name? Neptune Saturn Mars Venus SUN Pluto Uranus Jupiter EARTH Mercury What has this got to do with the COLD WAR? Another element of the Cold War was the race to control the final frontier – outer space! Why do you think this would be so important? The Space Race was considered important because it showed the world which country had the best science, technology, and economic system. It would prove which country was the greatest of the superpowers, the USSR or the USA, and which political system was the best – communism or capitalism. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xvaEvCNZymo The Space Race – key events Discuss the following slides in your groups. For each slide, try to agree on: • which of the three options is correct • whether this was an achievement of the Soviet Union (USSR) or the Americans (USA). When did humans first send a satellite into orbit around the Earth? 1940s, 1950s or 1960s? Sputnik 1 was launched in October 1957.
    [Show full text]
  • CIA Files Relating to Heinz Felfe, SS Officer and KGB Spy
    CIA Files Relating to Heinz Felfe, SS officer and KGB Spy Norman J. W. Goda Ohio University Heinz Felfe was an officer in Hitler’s SS who after World War II became a KGB penetration agent, infiltrating West German intelligence for an entire decade. He was arrested by the West German authorities in 1961 and tried in 1963 whereupon the broad outlines of his case became public knowledge. Years after his 1969 release to East Germany (in exchange for three West German spies) Felfe also wrote memoirs and in the 1980s, CIA officers involved with the case granted interviews to author Mary Ellen Reese.1 In accordance with the Nazi War Crimes Disclosure Act the CIA has released significant formerly classified material on Felfe, including a massive “Name File” consisting of 1,900 pages; a CIA Damage Assessment of the Felfe case completed in 1963; and a 1969 study of Felfe as an example of a successful KGB penetration agent.2 These files represent the first release of official documents concerning the Felfe case, forty-five years after his arrest. The materials are of great historical significance and add detail to the Felfe case in the following ways: • They show in more detail than ever before how Soviet and Western intelligence alike used former Nazi SS officers during the Cold War years. 1 Heinz Felfe, Im Dienst des Gegners: 10 Jahre Moskaus Mann im BND (Hamburg: Rasch & Röhring, 1986); Mary Ellen Reese, General Reinhard Gehlen: The CIA Connection (Fairfax, VA: George Mason University Press, 1990), pp. 143-71. 2 Name File Felfe, Heinz, 4 vols., National Archives and Records Administration [NARA], Record Group [RG] 263 (Records of the Central Intelligence Agency), CIA Name Files, Second Release, Boxes 22-23; “Felfe, Heinz: Damage Assessment, NARA, RG 263, CIA Subject Files, Second Release, Box 1; “KGB Exploitation of Heinz Felfe: Successful KGB Penetration of a Western Intelligence Service,” March 1969, NARA, RG 263, CIA Subject Files, Second Release, Box 1.
    [Show full text]
  • The Cold War and East-Central Europe, 1945–1989
    FORUM The Cold War and East-Central Europe, 1945–1989 ✣ Commentaries by Michael Kraus, Anna M. Cienciala, Margaret K. Gnoinska, Douglas Selvage, Molly Pucci, Erik Kulavig, Constantine Pleshakov, and A. Ross Johnson Reply by Mark Kramer and V´ıt Smetana Mark Kramer and V´ıt Smetana, eds. Imposing, Maintaining, and Tearing Open the Iron Curtain: The Cold War and East-Central Europe, 1945–1989. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books, 2014. 563 pp. $133.00 hardcover, $54.99 softcover, $54.99 e-book. EDITOR’S NOTE: In late 2013 the publisher Lexington Books, a division of Rowman & Littlefield, put out the book Imposing, Maintaining, and Tearing Open the Iron Curtain: The Cold War and East-Central Europe, 1945–1989, edited by Mark Kramer and V´ıt Smetana. The book consists of twenty-four essays by leading scholars who survey the Cold War in East-Central Europe from beginning to end. East-Central Europe was where the Cold War began in the mid-1940s, and it was also where the Cold War ended in 1989–1990. Hence, even though research on the Cold War and its effects in other parts of the world—East Asia, South Asia, Latin America, Africa—has been extremely interesting and valuable, a better understanding of events in Europe is essential to understand why the Cold War began, why it lasted so long, and how it came to an end. A good deal of high-quality scholarship on the Cold War in East-Central Europe has existed for many years, and the literature on this topic has bur- geoned in the post-Cold War period.
    [Show full text]
  • COLD WAR, DETENTE & Post- Cold War Scenario
    Lecture #01 Political Science COLD WAR, DETENTE & Post- Cold War Scenario For B. A.(Hons.) & M.A. Patliputra University, Patna E-content / Notes by Prof. (Dr.) S. P. Shahi Professor of Political Science & Principal A. N. College, Patna - 800013 Patliputra University, Patna, Bihar E-mail: [email protected] 1 Outline of Lecture Cold War: An Introduction Meaning of Cold War Causes of Cold War DETENTE End of Cold War International Scenario after Cold War Conclusion Cold War: An Introduction After the Second World War, the USA and USSR became two Super Powers. One nation tried to reduce the power of other. Indirectly the competition between the super powers led to the Cold War. It is a type of diplomatic war or ideological war. The Cold War was a period of geopolitical tension or conflict between two superpowers i.e., the United States of America and USSR, after World War-II. 2 The period is generally considered to span the Truman Doctrine (1947) to the dissolution of the Soviet Union (1991), but the first phase of the Cold War began immediately after the end of the Second World War in 1945. The conflict was based around the ideological and geopolitical struggle for global influence by the two powers. United States of America was a representative of Capitalistic ideology and Soviet Union was a representative of Socialist ideology. The United States created the NATO military alliance in 1949 in apprehension of a Soviet attack and termed their global policy against Soviet influence containment. The Soviet Union formed the Warsaw Pact in 1955 in response to NATO.
    [Show full text]
  • The Marshall Plan and the Beginnings of Comecon
    THE MARSHALL PLAN AND THE BEGINNINGS OF COMECON Cristian BENȚE Abstract: The integration of the Eastern-European states into the Soviet Union’s sphere of influence at the end of the Second World War represented a complex process that aimed all the vital sectors in those states. In a relatively short period of time, the political, economic, social and cultural life of the Eastern-European states was radically transformed, according to the models imposed by Moscow. The Soviet Union imposed its control over Eastern Europe because it had strategic, political, military and economic interests in this region. The states in this region became, after the Soviet Union broke relations with its former Western allies, the main suppliers of resources for the recovery of the soviet economy. The soviet control over the Eastern-European economies took many forms: from the brutal transfer of raw materials, finite products and technology during the first years after the war, to more subtle methods, as the establishment of “mixed enterprises”, the initialization of bilateral agreements and finally by establishing the COMECON. The establishment of the COMECON in January 1949 was one of the measures taken by Moscow in order to counteract the effects of the Marshall Plan and to consolidate the Soviet influence in the satellite-states from Eastern Europe. This measure was preceded by other actions meant to strengthen Moscow’s political, economic and ideological control over these states. Keywords: Marshall Plan, COMECON, Cold War economic integration, Iron Curtain The launch of the Marshall Plan in the summer of 1947 and its rejection by the Soviet Union represents a turning point in the evolution of the Cold War.
    [Show full text]
  • Beyond Mortar and Bricks !E Symbolic Function of the Berlin Wall
    THE JOURNAL OF UNDERGRADUATE RESEARCH University of Kansas | Summer 2008 Beyond Mortar and Bricks !e Symbolic Function of the Berlin Wall Fig. 1. Fig. 2. Standing Berlin Wall 1 Fall of the Berlin Wall 2 !roughout history, civilizations Berlin Wall, followed by a discussion of have built walls to create boundaries the audience reactions and symbolism and to protect against attackers. How- of the wall. !en, evidence will dem- ever, the unique purpose of the Berlin onstrate that, while the Berlin Wall was Wall — to prevent the German citi- symbolic of oppression as it stood, its zens from traveling freely within their destruction also served as a visual ar- own country — sets the wall apart gument. In conclusion, this article will from other similar structures. Clearly, compare the Berlin Wall and a pres- the Berlin Wall was never simply an ent-day wall — the Israeli West-Bank object or mere piece of history, but barrier — in order to exemplify how rather functioned as a symbol of op- the analysis of the Berlin Wall provides pression. !is essay proves this asser- important insight into the function, tion by o$ering a brief history of the nature, and symbolism of walls. ANNE KRETSINGER is a 2008 graduate from Communication Studies Department at the University of Kansas. 15 Fig. 3. !e Construction of the Berlin Wall 7 THE HISTORY OF THE BERLIN barricaded or bricked up so as not to WALL serve for escape purposes.”9 Clearly, To begin, one must consider the the presence of the Berlin wall altered history behind the Berlin Wall.
    [Show full text]
  • Cold War Triumphalism and the Reagan Factor
    Cold War Triumphalism and the Reagan Factor Onur İŞÇİ* Abstract Key Words Three decades after Gorbachev’s 1986 Cold War Triumphalism, Reagan Victory Glasnost campaign, the sudden death of School, US-Soviet Confrontation, Demise of the the Soviet Union still continues to keep USSR, Mikhail Gorbachev. diplomatic historians busy with its momentous implications. The mutually excluding political realms of the Cold War forged a conservative In 1986 the Union of Soviet Socialist American historical discourse, which perceived the Soviet Union as an evil empire. Existing Republics finally became the toast of biases against Moscow continued after the American diplomats, who believed Soviet collapse and were conjured up in a new that global harmony was a step closer. scholarly genre that might properly be termed as After four decades of superpower “the Reagan Victory School”. The adherents of conflict, the new Russia was seen as a this school suggest that President Reagan’s resolve and unsophisticated yet faithfully pragmatic long lost friend that reemerged from its foreign policy designs – the Strategic Defense ashes, promising to adopt democracy Initiative (SDI) in particular – became the and a liberal market economy. Mikhail major factor behind the Soviet Union’s demise Gorbachev’s Glasnost and Perestroika and America’s “triumph” after the Cold War. signaled the end of a modern period Looking at several influential monographs on the subject, this paper seeks to demonstrate the in history that had been economically well nuanced yet often mono-causal notions and politically exhausting for virtually vocalized by American scholars of Cold War the whole world. Faced with a serious triumphalism.
    [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 Development of the Cold War, 1953-1962
    THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE COLD WAR, 1953-1962 Chairman So – did Khrushchev make the Cold War better, or worse? Russian historian Of course he made things better. It was a political earthquake in the Soviet Union in 1956 when he declared Stalin is being a tyrant, and going to de- Stalinise Russia. E.European historian Pfaff! ‘De-Stalinsation’ was just window-dressing. Khrushchev TALKED de- Stalinisation, but tell me ONE example of where he did it. There was no curbing of the KGB, no granting of human rights. Control was actually tightened in Poland and Czechoslovakia! Hungary was worse – when Nagy [actors’ note: pronounced Noj ] tried to reinstate the Catholic religion, introduce democracy, allow freedom of speech – wham …Khrushchev sent in the Red Army! Do not they say 30,000 Hungarians were killed? Russian historian 30,000 is a HUGE overestimate. Nowadays, we think perhaps 4,000 at most, with only 300 executed. E.European historian … 4,000 is still a HUGE number … Russian historian Maybe, but most of Khrushchev’s so-called ‘tyranny’ in Hungary was American propaganda. The TRUTH is VERY different. Khrushchev invented the idea of ‘peaceful co- existence’ – he said: ‘There are only two ways - either peaceful co-existence or the most destructive war in history’ He was right!!! Do you realise how close US came to using nuclear weapons in Korea in 1953? Khrushchev’s ‘Peaceful co-existence’ idea , pulled the world back from the brink.of a nuclear catastophe Khrushchev saved world – it is as simple as that. American historian I’ve heard as much of this as I can stomach! What Khrushchev meant by ‘peaceful co-existence’ was ‘unhindered competition’ – he wanted to be free to build his armies, buy allies with economic aid – while the US sat back and let him! So he talked ‘peaceful co-existence’, but in practice he was hellish aggressive.
    [Show full text]
  • An Historical Ethnography of Rural Life in Communist Albania
    Accepted Manuscript (AM) of King, R. and Vullnetari, J. (2016) From shortage economy to second economy: An historical ethnography of rural life in communist Albania. Journal of Rural Studies 44: 198–207 [DOI: 10.1016/j.jrurstud.2016.02.010][accepted January 2016; published online 24 February 2016]. From Shortage Economy to Second Economy: An Historical Ethnography of Rural Life in Communist Albania Abstract Few accounts exist of the nature of everyday rural life in communist societies, such as those which existed in Eastern Europe between the end of World War Two and circa 1990. In this paper we use oral-history testimonies from older people to reconstruct an ‘historical ethnography’ of rural life in Albania, the most isolated and repressive of the East European socialist regimes. We build our analysis around the dialectical relationship between the ‘shortage economy’, which was all-pervasive and derived from the Albanian regime’s Stalinist policy of prioritising mining and heavy industry over consumer goods and agriculture, and the ‘second economy’ which developed as a bottom-up strategy to overcome some of the imbalances and blockages in the official or ‘first’ economy. Fieldwork was carried out in clusters of villages and settlements corresponding to cooperatives and a state farm in four locations in different parts of Albania. Within the symbiotic or ‘lubricating’ relationship between the shortage economy and the second economy, we examine the ‘institutionalised hierarchy of access’ that gave some people and groups privileged access to scarce goods, whilst others remained in a marginalised and partially excluded state. Keywords: Albania; communist era; shortage economy; second economy; everyday rural life; oral history [The Version of Record of this manuscript has been published and is available in Journal of Rural Studies; 24 February 2016; DOI: 10.1016/j.jrurstud.2016.02.010].
    [Show full text]
  • The Evolving Interpretations of the Origins of the Cold War
    Háskóli Íslands Hugvísindasvið Rússneska The Evolving Interpretations of the Origins of the Cold War Have Historians Reached a Consensus on the Origins of the Cold War? Ritgerð til B.A. prófs Saga Helgason Morris Kt.: 011097-3329 Leiðbeinandi: Jón Ólafsson 1 Abstract The Cold War and its origins have been a constant source of debate among historians and quite rightly so. With no access to Soviet archives until 1991 and the outcome of the hostilities unknown, historians were left to draw their own conclusions from official documents and published propaganda. Hence, as with any historical event, interpretations have changed over time. In this paper, I set out to explore whether assessments have shifted to a degree whereby historians today have come together in their understanding of the origins of the Cold War. In order to answer this question, an investigation is required to explore how and why these historical perspectives have changed. First, the two traditional viewpoints of the Cold War are discussed, namely the orthodox and revisionist interpretations. The orthodox view places responsibility on the USSR for the development of the Cold War whereas the revisionist view argues that the hostilities developed as a result of reacting to one another’s actions. Subsequently, the viewpoints of a selected group of post-Cold War historians are explored. Gaddis argues that hostilities between the United States and Soviet Union had their roots in the nations’ different perceptions of security. Zubok and Pleshakov maintain that Stalin’s character and diplomatic actions were of particular importance in the onset of the Cold War.
    [Show full text]