importance and consequences of the cold war
Download
Skip this Video
Download Presentation
Importance and Consequences of the Cold War

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 96

Importance and Consequences of the Cold War - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 172 Views
  • Uploaded on

Importance and Consequences of the Cold War. Wars: 1945-1990: 150 conflicts, 23 million dead Superpower wars: Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan Proxy Wars / Civil Wars: Angola, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Somalia, Cambodia, Guatemala, Mozambique, Ethiopia Risk of nuclear war

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Importance and Consequences of the Cold War' - zafirah


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
importance and consequences of the cold war
Importance and Consequences of the Cold War
  • Wars: 1945-1990: 150 conflicts, 23 million dead
  • Superpower wars:
    • Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan
  • Proxy Wars / Civil Wars:
    • Angola, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Somalia, Cambodia, Guatemala, Mozambique, Ethiopia
  • Risk of nuclear war
    • Cuban Missile Crisis, 1962
    • Yom Kippur War 1973 (Egypt & Syria vs. Israel)
    • Reagan & “Second” Cold War, 1980s
on the brink
On the brink
  • US Deputy Under-Secretary of Defense, 1981: “The United States could recover from an all-out nuclear war with the Soviet Union in just two to four years... If there are enough shovels to go around, everybody’s going to make it. Dig a hole in the ground, cover with a couple of doors, and then cover the doors with three feet of dirt. It’s the dirt that does it.”
    • T. K. Jones
importance and consequences of the cold war3
Importance and Consequences of the Cold War
  • Risk of nuclear war
    • US war plans, 1982 committed US to fighting and winning a nuclear war lasting up to six months: “A war in which the U.S. could prevail and force the Soviet Union to seek earliest termination of hostilities on terms favorable to the United States.”
slide4
How did humanity bring itself to the brink of self-inflicted catastrophe?
  • How has disaster been avoided - what explains the peaceful end of the Cold War?
the cold war key early events
The Cold WarKey Early Events

US dropping of atomic bombs, 1945 (?)

US Marshall Plan

Soviet occupations in Eastern Europe - Poland / Czech coup 1948

the cold war key early events7
The Cold WarKey Early Events

US dropping of atomic bombs, 1945 (?)

US Marshall Plan

Soviet occupations in Eastern Europe

Truman & “Containment” policy (1947)

the cold war key early events9
The Cold WarKey Early Events

US dropping of atomic bombs, 1945 (?)

US Marshall Plan

Soviet occupations in Eastern Europe

Truman & “Containment” policy (1947)

Czech coup 1948

Berlin Blockade, 1948-9

the cold war key early events11
The Cold WarKey Early Events

US dropping of atomic bombs, 1945 (?)

US Marshall Plan

Soviet occupations in Eastern Europe

Berlin Blockade, 1948-9

1st Soviet Atomic bomb test, 1949

NSC-68, 1950

the cold war key early events14
The Cold WarKey Early Events

US dropping of atomic bombs, 1945 (?)

US Marshall Plan

Soviet occupations in Eastern Europe - Poland / Czech coup 1948

Berlin Blockade, 1948-9

1st Soviet Atomic bomb test, 1949

NSC-68, 1950

Korean War, 1950

US develops Hydrogen bomb 1952, Soviets 1953

slide16
Nuclear Fireball Size

Outer Red line = Tsar Bomba test, 1961: 50 MT 4.6 km

the cold war key early events22
The Cold WarKey Early Events

US dropping of atomic bombs, 1945 (?)

US Marshall Plan

Soviet occupations in Eastern Europe - Poland / Czech coup 1948

Berlin Blockade, 1948-9

Korean War, 1950

NSC-68

US develops Hydrogen bomb 1952, Soviets 1953

Soviets Build Berlin Wall, 1961

cold war cuban missile crisis 1962
Cold WarCuban Missile Crisis, 1962
  • Consider: What does the Cuban missile crisis demonstrate:
    • Nuclear deterrence works (implication: go nuclear for own security)

OR

    • Unacceptable risk of nuclear war (implication: disarmament)
cuban missile crisis 1962 overview
Cuban Missile Crisis, 1962Overview
  • October 12, 1962
    • Kennedy shown U-2 photos of Soviet missiles in Cuba
  • October 22, 1962
    • Kennedy speaks to the nation
cuban missile crisis overview
Cuban Missile CrisisOverview
  • October 12, 1962
    • Kennedy shown U-2 photos of Soviet missiles in Cuba
  • October 22, 1962
    • Kennedy speaks to the nation, announces blockade
  • October 28, 1962
    • Khrushchev announces missiles will be removed
  • Kennedy believed chance of nuclear war between 1 in 3 and even, McNamara 50-50
cuban missile crisis lessons
Cuban Missile CrisisLessons
  • Conventional Lesson: Nuclear superiority and compellence prevailed (realism)
    • Soviets “blinked”
    • Implications:
      • Nuclear Superiority matters
      • Nuclear Arms Race
cuban missile crisis lessons30
Cuban Missile CrisisLessons
  • Conventional Lesson:
    • Nuclear superiority and compellence prevailed (realism)
  • New Lessons:
    • Risk of nuclear war was higher than realized
      • Misperceptions: N readiness & local launch authority in Cuba
      • Bureaucracy: Accidents / Loss of Control
    • Compromise / cooperation / reassurance helped resolve crisis, rather than compellence (liberalism) – US missiles in Turkey
    • US nuclear superiority didn’t matter
    • Conclusions:
      • Minimum or “existential” deterrence worked, only a few N needed for mutual deterrence, arms race unnecessary
      • nuclear weapons also cause of crisis in first place: made each side more insecure & raised risks
      • If too terrible to use even one, why have them? Paradox of deterrence
      • So, are they worth the risk?
cuban missile crisis aftermath consequences
Cuban Missile Crisis: Aftermath & Consequences
  • Soviet N superiority
  • Crisis Management: “Hot-Line”
  • Era of “Détente” & Arms Control:
    • Limited Test Ban Treaty (1963)
    • Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (1968)
    • SALT Treaties (1970s) / BTWC (1975)
final exam
Final Exam
  • Thursday December 10, 12:00
  • Wesbrook Building100
reagan the second cold war
Reagan & the “Second” Cold War
  • US President Reagan:
    • 1981 calls USSR “evil empire” and announces plans to “leave Marxism-Leninism on the ash-heap of history”
    • 1983 “Star Wars” speech: SDI
    • 1984 (sound check for radio address): “My fellow Americans. I’m pleased to tell you today that I’ve signed legislation that will outlaw Russia forever. We begin bombing in five minutes.”
end of the cold war
End of the Cold War
  • Learning objectives:
    • How did it end without major conflict?
    • What lessons do we draw from this major change in the international system?
    • Was it due to US military spending ‘bleeding the Soviets dry”?
    • At stake: implications for policy if above is correct
end of the cold war explanations
End of the Cold WarExplanations
  • System Level:
    • Balance of Power (Realist): Imperial Over-Stretch
    • Problems: What does this leave unexplained?
      • 1) Why was it the USSR and not US that became overextended?
      • 2) No great power war to change system = anomaly for balance of power theory
      • “There is nothing in the character or tradition of the Russian state to suggest it could ever accept imperial decline gracefully. None of the over-extended empires… ever retreated to their own ethnic base until they had been defeated in a Great Power war….” Paul Kennedy, 1987
      • Timing: why 1989?
did peace through strength work
Did “Peace Through Strength” Work?
    • Reagan’s “Peace Through Strength” (Realist): Spend Soviets into the ground with SDI and massive military budget
  • Problems:
    • Reagan’s policy change: agreed to arms control agreements
    • Made it almost impossible for Soviet reformers, legitimized hard-liners: Arbatov
      • End of Cold War came about despite US policies
      • cf. Iranian reformers & W. Bush’s “axis of evil”
    • Soviet reasons for policy changes:
      • Dobrynin: “It was not the strain of matching Reagan’s “huge arms build-up that led to the collapse of the Soviet Empire. … The troubles in our economy were the result of our own internal contradictions.” (Marxist/Critical)
end of the cold war explanations41
End of the Cold WarExplanations

Domestic Level:

  • Soviet Union
    • Economic decay
    • Dissent and challenges to ideological legitimacy
  • Eastern Europe
    • Civil Society: “People Power” mobilizing dissident groups (“bottom-up” explanations)
      • Berlin Wall
      • Lech Walesa & Solidarity, Poland
      • Vaclav Havel & Civic Forum, Czechoslovakia
end of the cold war explanations43
End of the Cold WarExplanations
  • Domestic Level: Soviet / European domestic factors
    • “People Power”: Civil Society in Eastern Europe, mobilizing dissident groups
  • Puzzle: Why weren’t these efforts crushed with force?
end of the cold war explanations45
End of the Cold WarExplanations
  • Individual level: Gorbachev
    • Domestic Reform: “Glasnost” & “Perestroika”
    • Foreign policy
      • Strategy:
        • “Common security”
        • “Reasonable Sufficiency”
        • “Sinatra doctrine”
gorbachev initiatives
Gorbachev Initiatives
  • Foreign policy
    • 1987: INF Agreement / Test Ban Moratorium
    • Unilateral reduction of 500,000 troops
    • Announce withdrawal from Afghanistan Feb. ‘88, complete by Jan. ‘89
    • May ‘89 Sino-Soviet summit
    • 1990-91 Gulf War: UN Security Council authorization
    • May ‘91 established relations with Israel
    • May ‘91 Cubans out of Angola
gorbachev effects
Gorbachev effects
  • Europe
    • June ‘89 elections in Poland (1990 Walesa President)
    • Feb. ‘89 independent parties in Hungary; May ‘89 border barricades w/Austria removed; EGermans flee to WGer via Hungary Sept. ‘89; elections Mar/Apr. ‘90
    • Oct. 6 ‘89 Gorbachev visits East Germany: “Policies which affect the GDR are decided not in Moscow but in Berlin.”
    • Nov. 9, ‘89 Berlin Wall falls
    • Gorbachev accepts principle of reunification Jan. ‘90; elections Mar. ‘90; Oct. 3, ‘90 German unification; Warsaw Pact dead by Mar. ‘91
    • Havel elected President of Czechoslovakia Dec. ‘89
    • Communist leader Ceausescu overthrown by force in Romania, Dec. ‘89; elections May ‘90 won by Illiescu’s National Salvation Front
  • Internal Soviet empire
    • 1989-91 fifteen Soviet republics declare sovereignty, then independence
    • June ‘91 Yeltsin elected President of Russia
    • Aug. ‘91 attempted coup; Dec. ‘91 Gorbachev resigns (Nobel Peace Prize 1990)
lessons implications of the end of the cold war
Lessons & Implications of the End of the Cold War:
  • Can major economic reform (towards capitalism) take place without accompanying political reform towards greater democracy?
    • China
  • Civil Society & People Power: Global spread of democratic ideas
    • 1989-90 EEurope / Soviet Union
lessons implications of the end of the cold war51
Lessons & Implications of the End of the Cold War:
  • Civil Society & People Power
    • 1989-90 EEurope / Soviet Union
    • October Revolution Serbia 2000
    • Orange Revolution Ukraine (Dec 2004)

But

lessons implications of the end of the cold war52
Lessons & Implications of the End of the Cold War:
  • Civil Society & People Power
    • 1989-90 EEurope / Soviet Union
    • October Revolution Serbia 2000
    • Orange Revolution Ukraine (Dec 2004)

But

      • “Saffron Revolution” Burma 2007
      • Iran election protests 2009
    • Global spread of democratic ideas
      • Transnational activist networks & technology
lessons implicatoins of the end of the cold war
Lessons & Implicatoins of the End of the Cold War:
  • 3) Who won and why?
    • US won / USSR lost
      • Due to aggressive US policy of militarized containment (realism)
      • Is this right in this case? Even if so, will it work to apply in other contexts?
lessons implicatoins of the end of the cold war57
Lessons & Implicatoins of the End of the Cold War:
  • 3) Who won and why?
    • US won / USSR lost
      • Due to aggressive US policy of militarized containment (realism) OR
      • Despite this strategy which prolonged the cold war and at unnecessary cost
        • Ideas & individual leadership (liberalism)
        • Internal contradictions (critical theory)
    • Inevitable superiority of capitalism & democracy (liberalism)?
      • “End of History” - Fukuyama
lessons of the cold war
Lessons of the Cold War

The Sources of Soviet Conduct, 1947, Foreign Affairs

“X” (George Kennan)

“…it is clear that the main element of any US policy toward the USSR must be that of a long-term, patient but firm and vigilant containment of Russian expansive tendencies. It is important…that such a policy has nothing to do with outward histrionics: with threats or blustering or superfluous gestures of outward “toughness.”

the sources of soviet conduct 1947 x george kennan
The Sources of Soviet Conduct, 1947“X” (George Kennan)

“…If anything were ever to disrupt the unity and efficacy of the [Communist] Party as a political instrument, Soviet Russia might be changed overnight from one of the strongest to one of the weakest and most pitiable of national societies… Soviet power…bears within it the seeds of its own decay, and the sprouting of these seeds is well advanced.

… To avoid destruction, the US need only measure up to its own best traditions and prove itself worthy of preservation as a great nation”

lessons of the cold war60
Lessons of the Cold War:
  • Why was the Cold War not “hot”? Did nuclear weapons “keep the peace”?
    • If so, would suggest the advantages of nuclear proliferation (implication: obtain WMD).
    • If not, their risks might outweigh their advantages (non-proliferation).
  • Implications: Do nuclear weapons & other WMD provide security?
    • Do they prevent (nuclear/conventional) war?
    • Will they be used? Why or why not? Why haven’t WMD been used more often?
    • Are they counterproductive for state security in an era of terrorism?
    • Is the use / possession of nuclear weapons morally acceptable?
a nuclear revolution
A Nuclear Revolution?

“We knew the world would not be the same…

...I am become death, the destroyer of worlds”

Robert Oppenheimer

has there been a nuclear wmd revolution
Has there been a nuclear (WMD) revolution?
  • "The unleashed power of the atom has changed everything save our modes of thinking, and thus we drift toward unparalleled catastrophe.”
          • Albert Einstein, 1946
  • Was he right?
  • Or has humanity adapted and learned?
the power of nuclear weapons
The Power of Nuclear Weapons
  • Hiroshima = 15-20 kilotons (atomic bomb)
  • Today’s nuclear weapons:
    • 1 Ohio (“Trident” ) Submarine:
      • 24 Trident missiles: 8475 kilotons (8 megatons) each
    • Each sub = 6,080 Hiroshima bombs
    • US has 14 Trident subs
one megaton nuclear explosion

One-megaton nuclear explosion

Source: Mansbach, Global Puzzle, 2nd edition, p. 377

weapons of mass destruction wmd
Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD)
  • Nuclear / Radiological
  • Chemical Weapons (CW)
  • Biological Weapons (BW)
use of wmd
Use of WMD
  • Nuclear Weapons
    • Hiroshima & Nagasaki, 1945
  • Chemical Weapons
    • WWI / Italy in Ethiopia 1937 / Iraq vs. Iran/Kurds 1980s
    • Terrorist attempts
      • Japan 1995 (Sarin)
  • Biological Weapons
    • Japan in Manchuria, 1930s
    • Terrorist attempts
      • US anthrax 2001
puzzles why wmd restraint
Puzzles: Why WMD Restraint?
  • Why haven’t nuclear, chemical and biological weapons been used more frequently?
explaining the non use of wmd
Explaining the Non-Use of WMD
  • Realism:
    • Deterrence: Fear of Retaliation
    • Interests (utility): Only useless weapons restrained / technical obstacles
    • Cicero: `inter arma silent leges'
explaining the non use of wmd76
Explaining the Non-Use of WMD
  • Realism: Problems:
    • Why no WMD use when WMD state in war vs. non-WMD state?
      • Why no US nuclear use in Korea, Vietnam, Gulf War, Iraq when faced no nuclear retaliation? UK Falklands / USSR Afghanistan. No mutual deterrence, but still no use.
      • Why no CW use by US in Vietnam? By USSR in Afghanistan?
    • Questionable Utility/technical limitations
      • Best for BW
      • False for CW/N
        • E.g, WWI used massively / modern CW
        • US assessment of CW utility vs. Japan 1945
explaining wmd restraint
Explaining WMD Restraint
  • Neo-liberalism (rationalism): Cooperation & Compliance with treaties.
    • Self-interest and Reciprocity
  • Treaty Verification and Compliance (to overcome cheating):
    • Geneva Protocol 1925 / Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC 1997)
    • Biological & Toxins Weapons Convention (BTWC 1975)
explaining wmd restraint79
Explaining WMD Restraint
  • Realism: Deterrence (fear of retaliation)
    • Problem: Many cases of non-use with no fear of retaliation
  • Neo-liberalism (rationalism): Treaties
    • Verification and Compliance
    • CWC, BTWC, NPT
    • Problems:
      • Cheating (realism)
        • USSR and BTWC
        • Iraq, Iran, North Korea and NPT
      • Non-parties - Pakistan, India, Israel, NKorea withdrew 2003
      • BUT even non-parties and cheaters on possession have mostly not used their WMD
    • There is no international treaty prohibiting the use of nuclear weapons: Nuclear Weapons Convention & “Global Zero”?
explaining wmd restraint80
Explaining WMD Restraint
  • Constructivism: Power of Moral Norms and Identity
    • Personal belief
      • “I / we just don’t do that kind of thing…”
    • International / domestic costs of breaking taboos
      • Reputation (social power, not material)
moral norm vs cw
Moral Norm vs. CW
  • WWII
    • US President Roosevelt: “I have been loath to believe that any nation could be willing to loose upon mankind such terrible and inhumane weapons. . . I state categorically that we shall under no circumstances resort to the [first] use of such weapons...”
    • British Major-General Henderson: ‘such a deplorable departure from our principles and traditions would make us wonder if it mattered which side won.’
moral norm vs nuclear weapons
Moral Norm vs. Nuclear Weapons
  • Korea:
      • General Ridgway: N as “the ultimate in immorality”
      • Truman: “I could not bring myself to order the slaughter of 25 million”
  • Vietnam - Sec. of State Rusk: “We never seriously considered using nuclear weapons”
  • Iraq, 1991 - Colin Powell: “Let’s not even think about nukes. You know we’re not going to let that genie loose.”
explaining wmd restraint83
Explaining WMD Restraint
  • (Liberal) Constructivism: Power of Moral Norms and Identity
  • Problems:
    • While states and decision-makers are socialized by norms or abide by them for their own interests, (suicidal) terrorists not constrained by norms.
implications of wmd
Implications of WMD
  • So where to from here? Should / can the proliferation of nuclear weapons be stopped? If so, how? What are the implications for dealing with terrorism?
  • Realism: Spread of nuclear weapons is
    • Inevitable
the davy crockett
The Davy Crockett
  • smallest nuclear device ever deployed
  • 76 lbs.
  • 1.25 to 2.5 mile range
  • variable yield (10 to 20 tons TNT)
  • deployed 1961-71
implications of wmd87
Implications of WMD
  • Realism - Spread of WMD is
    • Inevitable
    • Desirable (Mearsheimer): Cold War -> India & Pakistan
  • Con:
    • Not inevitable
      • Only 9 nuclear states (due to treaty verification / power of nuclear taboo)
      • Many states reversed nuclear arsenals and programs
        • Ukraine, Kazakhstan, Belarus, South Africa / Brazil, Argentina, Taiwan, etc.
    • Not desirable: Risks
        • Assumes rationality
        • Risk of accidental nuclear war / loss of control (Bureaucracies / Organizational Theory / Misperceptions)
          • Human or technical error -> accidental / unauthorized detonation
dangers of nuclear proliferation
Dangers of Nuclear Proliferation

Organizational Theory (Domestic level, bureaucracy) & Individual level

  • Pro-proliferation argument assumes rationality
  • Risk of accidental nuclear war / loss of control
    • Human or technical error
      • Accidental detonation
      • False alerts
dangers of nuclear proliferation91
Dangers of Nuclear Proliferation

Organizational Theory (Domestic level, bureaucracy) & individual level

  • Proliferation as stability argument assumes rationality
  • Risk of accidental nuclear war
    • Human or technical error -
      • accidental detonation
      • false alerts
    • Loss of control: Command and control
    • Smuggling, theft, loss of materials or weapons -> use by terrorists
      • 1500 incidents 1993-2008, 30% occurred 1993-95
significant cases of nuclear smuggling 1992 95
Significant cases of nuclear smuggling 1992-95
  • 1992: 1.5 kg of highly enriched (90%) uranium stolen in Podolsk, Russia
  • July 1993: 1.8 kg of enriched (36%) uranium stolen from naval base in Andreeva Guba, Russia
  • November 1993: 4.5 kg of enriched (20%) uranium from naval base in Severomorsk, Russia
  • May 1994: 6.15 g of highly purified (99.75%) plutonium discovered by German police in garage of a businessman in Tengen, Germany
  • June 1994: 800 mg of highly enriched (87.7%) uranium powder bought by undercover agents in Landshut, Germany
  • August 1994: 363 g of weapons-grade plutonium and 200 g of lithium seized in suitcase in Munich airport
  • December 1994: 2.72 kg of highly enriched (87.7%) uranium discovered in back seat of a car in Prague, Czech Republic
  • June 1995: 2 kg enriched (2-4%) uranium to be bought in sting operation in Moscow; shootout prevents seizure or arrests
  • November 1995: Chechen rebels place small amount of Cesium-137 in Ismailovsky Park, Moscow

Source: Frontline, Loose Nukes

implications of wmd94
Implications of WMD
  • Can or should proliferation of WMD be stopped?
    • Realism: Proliferation of N inevitable / desirable
    • Critics: Not inevitable / Risks of proliferation
      • Human / Technical Error
      • Loss of Control
      • Smuggling / Terrorism

Implications and Prescriptions of dangers of proliferation

    • Cooperative Threat Reduction Programs / G-8 Global Partnership Against the Spread of WMD
      • $20 billion over 10 years to secure Russian nuclear materials (Canada pledged $650 million)
ad