Professional Documents
Culture Documents
4) Expansionist Tendencies
[Events of the Outbreak of the Cold War]
: Events are manifestations of the conflict between the superpowers that compounds the
friction in deteriorating the bilateral relationship
- Their occurrences encouraged the discord already present due to the factors to ferment
into open conflict with the opposing state
- These actions must be in relation to the way it impacts superpower perspectives of each
other and how it promoted counter-responses that escalated to the Cold War
: List of Events
1) Post-War Settlement Disagreements
- Yalta Conference
- Potsdam Conference
- They pertain to schools of thoughts, and are always used in comparison to each other in
supporting a conclusion
- When written, it must always contain all four schools of thought in the argument
: List of Historiography Approach
1) Traditionalist (USSR to be blamed)
2) Revisionist (USA to be blamed)
3) Post-Revisionist (None to be blamed)
- Mutual Misunderstandings
- Action-Reaction Cycle
4) Post-Cold War Debate (Ideological Differences)
- Political Differences
- Economic Differences
Origins of the Cold War: Causes of the Outbreak of the Cold War [Factors]
[Ideological Differences]
: The fundamental ideologies of both superpowers in the period 1945-1949 had set them at
odds against each other as they were conflicting in nature
- Ideologies have an impact on the goals and policies of the superpowers
- It influences the actions taken by each superpower to realize their vision for their state
- Hence, contradictory ideologies would lead to clashing policies, that sets the conflict
between the two states
: Ideological differences would impact the outbreak of the Cold War in two ways:
- Firstly, it caused USA and USSR to compete for political and economic supremacy, that
led to the creation of an atmosphere of hostility
- Secondly, it made USA and USSR to perceive each others actions as undermining to
their policies, leading to an action-reaction cycle
[Ideological DIfferences - Political Differences]
Political
Ideology
USA
(Democracy)
USSR
(Communism)
Determination
Inclined to self-determination;
pushes for free elections by a
general electorate to decide on
their government and identity
Party System
Economic
Ideology
Wealth
Distribution
USA
(Capitalism)
Capitalistic distribution of wealth;
individuals able to grow wealthy
through promotions, work
specialization, investments and
heading businesses
USSR
(Socialism)
Socialistic distribution of wealth;
individuals receiving equal pay for
any form of jobs or positions, and
businesses solely controlled by
the state
Command economy; market is
determined solely by the
government and trade is restricted
mainly within the state or friendly
countries to reduce influence by
other currencies
[Mutual Misunderstandings]
: Mutual misunderstandings pertain to misinterpretations of each superpowers goals and
actions, that led to the antagonization of either party
- It aggravated tensions between USA and USSR, triggering conflicting movements
- The opinions of these Soviets were adhered to by Brezhnev who was more willing to work
with them and follow their directions
- As the old guards emphasized on stability and consensus, there was no dynamism and a
clampdown on radical change in the system
- Soviet economic failures meant that radical changes was needed such as greater
decentralization in the agricultural sector to improve productivity
- It has been proven so, with private plots having only 4% of the Soviet arable lands, but
contributing to 25% of total crop output
- However, Soviet mentalities tending towards socialism and centralized rule had reacted
against agricultural decentralization, forcing back the reform
- Additionally, opposition advocating for strict central planning had halted industrial reforms
to incite better productivity from managers by granting them wages on profitability basis
- These kickbacks by the political system made the entire economy sluggish, for there was
an aversion to necessarily, radically altering the system by the old guards
[Stability of Brezhnevs Regime]
: Stability refers to the period of consistency; similar to stagnation but instead having slow
growth and prosperity rather than a decline
- The entrenchment of systems made for a smooth transfer of power and adherence to the
central government
- This had allowed improvements in certain aspects of the USSR through being able to
enforce economic focus and stable societal order
: Economic Stability - Technological Advancements
- Argument: Stability characterized Brezhnevs regime for his policies brought about
technological progress
- The entire time, the USSR was still focused on the Cold War competition against the USA
- They were able to attain certain successes in this aspect for their defense industries were
able to outmatch that of the US
- Brezhnev had allocated more funds to the defense sector, building it up to around 2040% of the countrys GNP
- The continuous allocation of funding to defense and stockpile of ICBM made the USSR
the largest standing army and attain nuclear parity with the US
- Further advancements were made where the USSR where they had successes in space
with the 1970 soft landing and return of a robot craft, and 1970 launching of the first selfpropelled vehicle to ride the lunar surface
- As a result of Brezhnevs ability to divert the funding, he created technological successes
for the USSR by improving the developments of certain industries
: Social Stability
- Argument: Stability characterized Brezhnevs regime because his policies prevented the
disruption of social order in the Soviet Republics
- During Brezhnevs rule, there were rising unrests within the Soviet Union itself
- Nationalism and fundamentalism became a key factor in the social order, with
demonstrations in the Baltic States and uprisings in the Muslim republics occurring
against the USSR
- However, Brezhnev was able to retain the state control over the countrys media and
security, was able to clamp down on the dissidents by portraying them as belonging to
privileged, ungrateful factions
- This had criminalized the activities of the revolters, turning local opinion agains them
- By removing their ability to gain support from the masses, these nationalists were largely
left powerless and unable to create significant disturbances
- This is seen in that no single state was able to breakaway during Brezhnevs time in office
- Hence, Brezhnev was able to create a stable social order by limiting the unrest and ability
of the uprisings from significantly destabilizing the state to force concessions
: Political Stability
- Argument: Stability characterized Brezhnevs regime because his policies created
subordinate loyalty, preventing political upheaval
- Khrushchev was ousted from power after the Cuban Missile Crisis by drawing the ire of
multiple party members and loss his support base as a result of failure in policy making
- To counter this, Brezhnev had set up the Nomenklatura system to be loyal to him
- He filled up key positions in the state with people drawn from a list of reliable Party
personnel, thus allowing him to have full control over state mechanisms
- Additionally, he created a system of privileges to party members such as access to
special shops and luxury goods such as healthcare
- This created a promise of power and political influence in the CPSU, that encouraged
individuals to remain in the good books of Brezhnev to gain these benefits
- Hence, Brezhnev had secured the support of party members, such that he was able to
remain in power the entire time, making for a stable rule
[Instability of Brezhnev Regime]
: Instability refers to the large, open unrest against the Soviet power, that was able to
garner significant attention and necessitated a full-scale response by the CPSU
- This centered around large movements that defied the Communist regime
- It had affected the social order of the state by having the state go on a campaign of
persecution and suppression that left the entire population uneasy
: Political Instability
- Argument: Instability had characterized Brezhnevs regime, for his policies failed to curb
political uprisings against the USSR
- As a result of the Stalinist and Khrushchev rule, coupled with the de-Sterilization
campaign, there were greater questioning and doubt against Soviet rule
- The speaking out against Communist rule had resulted in heightening unrest against the
central government, to establish the interests of autonomy in the satellite states
- Resistance had grown to such a point that Eastern European countries had attempted to
break away in the form of the Prague Spring of 1968
- Warsaw Pact members were called upon to contribute troops to militarily extinguish the
uprising
- By such measures, it had created social friction in the USSRs sphere of influence
against the Moscow government as they were seen to be extremely harsh
- Further actions by the USSR cemented this hostility by enforcing stricter police
measures, reintroducing capital punishment and toughening the legal code
- More political activists and writers were arrested during Brezhnevs regime
- These acts of state intervention in civilian life had imbalanced the social order in Eastern
Europe, and led to continued revolts against the USSR, for the Prague Spring had led to
the outbreaks of dissent in the Soviet Republics
- However, the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan was entirely different from their pursuits in
Africa, for it posed an economic rather than simply ideological threat to the US
- By aiming to conquer Afghanistan, it could allow the Soviet Union to use it as a staging
ground to take over Middle Eastern oil fields that supplied the US and its economy
- Hence, this act of Soviet aggression had placed US economic and strategic interests in
jeopardy, one which they were not willing to let pass
- Ideological interests were placed aside for the period of Detente based on mutual
understanding, however the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan was a clear detriment to
American strategic interests in the region
- As such, this act had shattered the non-intervention policy of both superpowers
: Retaliatory Actions
- Argument: Detente could have ended the Cold War but the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan
shattered the possibility, because the US took retaliatory actions towards the USSR
which reignited the Cold War tensions
- The improvement of relations during Detente had reduced the need for confrontation
between the two superpowers due to better mutual understandings then
- Cold War competition was greatly tamed with signed trade agreements that was
beneficial on both sides; with the USSR having its much-needed imports on advanced
technology and wheat due to its starved agricultural sector and the US from information
on atomic energy
- This form of mutual exchanges had allowed the USSR to be able to secure its domestic
economy, that was suffering badly from the lack of food due to failed agricultural policies
- However, as a result of the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, the US took to place an
embargo on foodstuff exported to the Soviet Union
- The embargo was highly detrimental to the USSR for it deprived them of the necessary
imports, and it was seen as a means to starve out the entire population
- It thus necessitated the need for the USSR to turn towards equally aggressive measures
to recover the essential imports by forcing the US into a concessionary state
- Hence, US retaliatory actions was a trigger for Soviet hostility as it was perceived as an
aggressive measure to wither the USSR, disregarding previous agreements and hence
shattered the possibility of Detente normalizing relations permanently
[Soviet Actions Ending Detente]
: Soviet Aggressive Foreign Policies
- Argument: Detente could have ended the Cold War but Brezhnevs misadventures in
foreign policy shattered the possibility, because it undermined the agreements made
between the superpowers
- Detente was able to provide military relief for both sides, where tensions were running
high and the economy being wrecked by the continued manufacturing of nuclear arms
- By being able to agree on the need to reduce the arms race, the signing of arms control
negotiations such as the NNPT in 1968 and SALT I in 1970 had benefitted both sides
- This was due to being able to cut down on the constant drain on positioning missiles
against one another, hence neutralizing strategic threats during Detente and downplaying
the necessity of continuing the arms race
- However, despite such agreements, the USSR continued in its politico-military aims of
forcefully spreading its influence during the Cold War
- The deployment of SS-20s in Eastern Europe in 1977 was a sign of this commitment, that
threatened the Western European states to increase Soviet bargaining power that
provoked the US to similarly deploy its Pershing missiles against the USSR
- These actions carried out by the USSR convinced the USA of its fickle foreign policies
and the need to be constantly aware of such offensive measures
- In defense of their interests, the US had to break from the USSR for continuing Detente
would be to the detriment of US domestically and the Cold War
- Hence, Soviet failures in foreign policies and its dabbling in nuclear deployment had
destroyed the agreements made between the superpowers, making it void and unable to
provide a basis for better relations
- Hence, Carters policies invoked greater hostility from the USSR as it openly threatened
their domestic state, which violated the non-intervention clause in the Joint Declaration
on Principles concerning internal affairs
- As such, this act of aggression and subterfuge placed an immense strain on the
continuation of good relations between superpowers as Carters policies had formed a
bargaining chip on USSRs interests
- The inability to supply even the most basic substance to the population immediately
showed the failings of the Soviet government to its local population, making the
government highly disliked to a point where multiple uprisings occurred against it
- Multitudes of local uprisings such as the Georgian protest in 1989 and Baltic Crisis in
1990 had severely destabilized the state
- Thus, Reagans economic policies were a significant factor in instigating the locals to rise
up against the USSR and demand for independence, thus shaking up the government
and causing it to lose control over its territory to secession, causing the collapse of USSR
- He had drawn greater focus towards the ideological flaws of the Soviet Union and in
doing so, demonized the morality of the system and condemned it
- This act of discrediting the Soviet system brought greater scrutiny on Communism
especially within the regime itself, so as to make individuals lose faith in Moscow
- The ideological offensive raised doubts on Communism within Eastern Europe, making it
highly unpopular and unfavored by the population
- It was so deeply ingrained to a point that Communism collapsed in Eastern Europe within
a single year, that marked the disgruntled view of the local population
- Hence, his offensive had entirely delegitimatized the Soviet government and initiated its
collapse with it losing its authority entirely over the whole of its original sphere of
influence, making it disliked and redundant by the populace
- However, both of these policies had brought about greater unrest in the Soviet Union, for
it had inadvertently turned the population against the CPSU
- By allowing individuals to delve deeper into their ethnic roots and the failings of the
Communist government, it destroyed the credibility of the government as people began to
see it in a negative, failed light, that contributed to nationalist uprisings
- Perestroika had given them greater reason to seek breakaway as the policies failed to
raise their standards of living, when local Communists had sabotaged the process by
burying foodstuff and denying it to the local population
- Faced with heightened nationalists sentiments and worsening economic prospects in the
USSR, both policies had incited uprisings to occur within the USSR that brought about
the collapse of the government by preventing them having authority over the locals
: Political Stagnation
- Argument: Gorbachevs policy of Glasnost was crucial in causing the collapse of the
Soviet Union, as it had undermined the legitimacy of the Communist government
- In seeking to reject the Stalinist dictatorial legacy over the Soviet Union, Gorbachev had
turned towards democratizing the system slightly so as to introduce pluralism
- This was so as to strengthen the view of the government in the eyes of the local populace
as elected by their say through elections and multi-party representation
- Glasnost advocated openness and free speech even in the Soviet government system,
that led to Gorbachev holding open elections for the Soviet Congress in 1989
- This was to allow more parties into the government so as to appease the population
facing economic deprivation with political freedom, giving them a semblance of hope
- However, by allowing multiple parties into the government, it had distorted the nature of
the Soviet Union as it invited contradictions and opponents to Communism
- As there were multiple opposing views, the central government was unable to operate
properly due to impeding disunity; that which the local population was highly reliant on
- By destabilizing the centralized government system through political pluralism,
Gorbachev had essentially brought inertia to a governmental level, slowing down its
policy-making and speed in tackling local problems such as food shortages
- This had broken the locals view of the Communist government, losing their credibility
domestically, that saw individuals turning towards other governmental system such as the
Russian Republic under Yeltsin rather than the CPSU under Gorbachev
- Hence, Glasnost heralded the collapse of the Soviet Union as the local population turned
disgruntled towards it as it lost legitimacy, giving rise to opposing, secessionist states
: Economic Strain
- Argument: Gorbachevs policy of Perestroika was crucial in causing the collapse of the
Soviet Union, as it pushed the economy past its tipping point
- The economy has been the constant corpse shackled to the Soviet Union, as its failings
had incapacitated its operation as a state, leading to inability to compete against the
United States, and led to civil unrest
- Hence, Gorbachevs Perestroika was meant to revitalize the economy by restructuring it
in a way that it can bring about greater productivity in the long run
- He initiated reforms such as removing the central role of Gosplan and allowing managers
to set wages and prices for workers
- These were meant to improve working condition and encourage better work and
management of the economy at a micro level
- However, it had backfired in managers allocating disproportionate wages in order to gain
the favor of the workers, that overpaid them to an extent inflation became rampant
- By 1991 the crisis as a result of such practices had erupted to 250% inflation that made
the entire economy untenable and unsustainable
- Hence, his policies had failed to rejuvenate the economy of the Soviet Union, but instead
prompted its imminent collapse by overspending and having wrong allocation of
resources
- Thus, Perestroika initiated the collapse of the Soviet Union by dooming its economy to a
breaking point, that convinced Soviet Republics to reject any last-minute proposal of
greater autonomy as remaining in an economic union will still result in them facing dismal
food shortages and low standards of living
- Thus, his policies delegitimized the local Communist regime, such that within a year, all
the Communist states in Eastern Europe had fallen, that heralded the internal collapse of
the Communist Soviet Union
[Internal Factors]
: Internal factors relates to events occurring within the USSR that involved multiple
stakeholders, regarding the Soviet Republics and non-CPSU politicians, that rocked the
central Communist regime
: Nationalist Uprisings in Soviet Republics
- Argument: The USSR was destroyed by a series of nationalist revolts in the Soviet
Republics as it led to the destabilization of the Soviet regime
- Nationalist revolts in the Soviet Republics had occurred largely due to failing living
conditions for the locals
- Facing 250% inflation and a government inept to cope with the problem, multiple
nationalists protested and demanded for secession to form their own state
- This was to be able to better manage their own ethnic interests, such as the Baltic states
carrying out a series of non-violent revolts and declaration of independence so as to
defend against the influx of Russian immigrants
- However, this act had forced the USSR to counter by sending in military vehicles to
Lithuania and placing an economic blockade on the Republic
- Such acts of resistance towards the Soviet regime had prevented the governance of
these states by the central government, that wrecked relations between the locals and the
CPSU, and destabilized the regime with constant confrontation
- Hence, as such destabilization gave rise to continued unrest, it had removed the authority
of the government, thus destroying the USSR as a valid state government
: Conservative Coup
- Argument: The USSR was destroyed by a series of conservative coups, as it had
shattered the image of the Soviet regime
- Gorbachevs policies were becoming viewed as increasingly radical and unacceptable to
the hardliner Communists in the CPSU, who wanted a return to centralized government
- His actions such as discarding Article 6 of the constitution, removing the right of the
CPSU to be the domineering party in the state, frustrated the Communists as it meant a
break from the central idea of the Soviet Union being a Communist movement
- This had prompted the conservative factions in the CPSU to stage a coup against
Gorbachev to force him and the country to accede to their demands of de-radicalization
- However, despite the failure of the coup, it was significant as it portrayed Gorbachev as
isolated from the rest of his party, and weak in the face of opposition
- It had discredited his personal image and that of the CPSU severely due to the extent of
disunity in the party such that internal revolts would occur
- Hence, the conservative coups were significant in displaying the internal weakness of the
central government, killing the reputation of the CPSU that forced Gorbachev to step
down and the CPSU dissolved not long after
- Thus, it left the Communist state without a Communist government, that heralded the end
of Soviet rule over the entire territory as it invalidated the need for a Soviet regime, as all
Soviet republics declared independence within 5 months
- Hence, the backfiring of Gorbachevs policies led to the ascension of political challengers
that were able to pursue their economic interests that aligned with the removal of the
USSR as a political entity, that saw it being removed entirely upon the formation of the
CIS