|
Soviet insecurity following a period of turmoil
and torture [1] combined
with aggressive US rhetoric and military actions functioned to
produce the origins of the Cold War. Analyzing events before World
War two and peace attempts during the war indicates that the United
States acted as an imperial bully in trying to protect its security
interests, plunging both countries into a period lacking communication,
negotiation and understanding. [2]
Before world war two, Europe was devastated by
the first great war. Understanding the developments during
the Russian Revolution and at the Paris Peace Conference in 1919
[3] provides insight into how the major powers of
the world would interact in the future and more interestingly,
how the United States viewed its role in creating peace in the
world. [4]
During the war Americans intervened in the Russian
civil war to aid the non communist side. Their efforts to influence
Soviet domestic politics resulted in an "enduring anger among
many Russians
some justification for the communists' use
of the world 'imperialists' to describe them" (Levering 6).
This anger lasted into the cold war and laid the groundwork for
Soviet perception of American actions.
Like most of the victorious countries following
the first world war, Wilson very much wanted a say in the peace
process. He went to the Paris Peace conference with many goals
and ideas about how Europe should be reconstructed. Wilson focused
on what became known as his fourteen points including, self determination
for nations, freedom for all people and establishing a league
of nations to solve global problems. More
than anything, Wilson wanted "America
to have a prominent place at the peace table in order to help
make the world better"(Levering 4). Wilson and Americans
saw this as an honorable goal and something that would make the
world safer for democracy. More than anything America's approach
to the Paris Peace Conference demonstrated its willingness to
embark on an ideological crusade in Europe to ensure its security
interests. Wilson wanted to make the world safe on America's terms
even if his definition of freedom and its pursuit differed from
Eastern Europe's in fundamental ways. Therefore Wilson's call
for sovereign nations and freedom-in the American sense-in Europe
simply revealed to the world America's readiness to impose its
values and beliefs on other countries.
[5] During the cold war the Soviet Union feared the
dogma of United States foreign policy that continued to follow
the spirit of Wilson at the Paris Peace conference.
[6]
Nearing the end of the second world war, the allied
powers began to grow curious about what political and economic
structures the new world would adopt. With Germany out of the
picture, new emerging powers in the East and the great involvement
of the United States in another European war, questions about
how world politics should operate began to emerge. The major allied
powers met in Yalta in February of 1945 to discuss the post war
world. One of the major issues talked about was the future of
Poland which was currently being run by a Soviet led communist
government. The United States wished for the Soviet Union to reinstate
the original democratic government that was now in exile in London.
After negotiation a compromise was reached, Stalin would be allowed
to keep the Soviet government in Poland but must agree to free
elections. Americans did not approve of this compromise, seeing
it as Roosevelt weakly acquiescing to Soviet demands to continue
the unfair and undemocratic actions of a puppet government. The
Soviet Union saw the Poland issue as a Soviet concern because
of the devastation it had endured during the wars. Poland was
used twice as a gateway to the Soviet Union. When a compromise
was finally reached, "Stalin agreed to allow free elections
and a democratic reorganization of the pro-Soviet Lublin government
- a formulation representing the maximum price Stalin was willing
to pay for his preserving 'comity' with his Western allies"
(Levering 98). To the Americans this attitude represented an overwhelming
sense that Soviets were being uncooperative in establishing peace
and needed to be dealt with firmly. In reality, the Soviets were
acting to protect their frequently violated security by creating
a buffer of friendly as well as strong governments on its western
border, particularly in Poland. Americans also saw their inflexibility
as a sign that the Soviets were trying to put in place puppet
governments around the world to spread the influence of communism.
Though Americans saw these fears as legitimate at the onset of
the cold war, several conditions made Soviet ideas of imperialism
impossible. In light of "Russian history, the huge war debts,
and the country's perceived vulnerabilities, as well as the mentality
of Stalin and his subordinates, concerns about security were especially
pronounced in the Soviet Union" (Levering 88). In the wake
of the conclusion of what the Soviets hoped to be one final devastation
of their people and country, the Soviets only had self protection
on their minds. At Yalta, "security concerns remained paramount
in Soviet leaders' thinking about the postwar world" because
they had suffered so much (Levering 88). Americans had the luxury
at Yalta of ignoring the realistic perceived threats of the Soviet
Union for idealistic goals following WW2 because the US military
was stronger than ever, it's economy was booming and the proximity
of aggressors was greatly lessened for the Americans.
The Soviet Union's lack of desire for imperialism
is further demonstrated by the agreements reached at Yalta. The
Soviet Union signed a Declaration of a Liberated Europe, agreed
to sign a friendly agreement with the non communist leader of
China and promised the Western powers that it would declare war
on Japan following the end of the current war. All of these actions
prove that although battered from the war, the Soviet Union was
willing to make more sacrifices for its Allies in the spirit of
cooperation. Additionally, the Soviet Union established that it
was not motivated by the ideology of communism in its actions
when it signed a friendly agreement with the non communist side
of the Chinese civil war.
Going into the meeting at Yalta, President Roosevelt
wanted "to strengthen Allied Cooperation and fashion a communiqué
that would convince the American people and Congress that the
Big Three were working together effectively in waging the war
and planning the postwar world" (Levering 26). The Soviets
had similar aspirations, Stalin said himself "'there is no
doubt
that without Great Britain, The USA, and the U.S.S.R
creating joint military force capable of preventing aggression,
it would be impossible to secure peace in the future'" (Levering
95). These sentiments of both world leaders reflect the desire
for cooperation in a post war world. The Soviet Union's insecurity
was intensified by Western words and documents like the Declaration
of a Liberated Europe and fight for Poland to be democratic resulting
in the destruction of the pre-cold war mentality of cooperation.
The major powers met in Potsdam in July of 1945
and the meeting illustrated the improbability of close cooperation
between the Soviet Union and the United States. The new president
was Harry Truman who didn't share all of Roosevelt's concern about
establishing an alliance with the Soviets. The American public
had also become more skeptical of Soviet motivations. They held
the same sentiments the "news media conveyed
that the
U.S.S.R. was not cooperating in establishing a just peace"
(Levering 36). The media capitalized on the issues that divided
the powers, notably the issue surrounding Soviet influence in
Iran. The Soviet Union refused to leave Iran after the war ended
and Americans saw that as empire building. A subsequent shift
in American policy took place and was noted by the Soviets in
a telegram written by Foreign Minister Vyacheslav Molotov where
he reported that "the foreign policy of the United States
is not determined at present by the circles in the Democratic
party that (as was the case during Roosevelt's lifetime) strive
to strengthen the cooperation of the three great powers"
(Levering 161). The Soviets were correct in noticing the change
in which they were dealt with because "new issues, notably
Russian pressure on Iran, tipped the balance in US policy in the
winter of 1945-46 from grudging accommodation to open confrontation"
(levering 35). At the same time that Americans were feeling the
Soviets were uncooperative, the Soviets felt the United States
was not seeking cooperation. Americans had the luxury afforded
by distance and economic stability during this time period to
value accommodation over the real security issues the Soviet Union
was forced to acknowledge. American foreign policy was too heavy
handed and ignored Soviet instability in many instances. For example,
the Soviet Union didn't have the choice of whether or not to give
in to US demands regarding Iran. After the hardships they endured
during the world wars the Soviet Union had to be attentive to
its weaknesses and "Soviet policy-planners viewed this neighboring
country as a potential launching pad for attack against the USSR"
(Levering 118). The American government and media often ignored
the reality of situations facing the Soviet Union and were attempting
to discredit the honest Soviet efforts to cooperate, as evidenced
by the Yalta agreements, in order to further its imperialist goal
of shaping the world in its image. Unlike in the United States,
"Soviet policy options
were always constrained by the
weight of history, by lack of resources, and by the nature of
the Stalinist system" (Levering 149).
[7]
In analyzing World War two diplomacy at Yalta
and Potsdam, the motivations of the two super powers and their
contributions to the conflict become apparent. Both countries
attempted to establish post war communication but efforts were
made null by American forcefulness that accompanied Truman and
the Potsdam meetings and growing Russian insecurity after the
war. [8]
After World War two the sense of insecurity on
the Soviet side was insurmountable and for several reasons. First,
they viewed the US's interference in the Russian Revolution as
evidence that the United States had the propensity to intervene
again. Second, their country had suffered
major damages during the war because of lack of a western boarder.
Third, their lack of a western boarder also revealed weaknesses
in their military. Finally, the United States had also proven
its willingness to use the atomic bomb. To day this countries
still fear the United States nuclear arsenal because of American's
previous acceptance of causing devastation on such a level. These
reasons all emboldened the United States and gave them little
to worry about in terms of losing their influence.
It is easy to pass off the origin of the cold
war as a misunderstanding or miscommunication between two superpowers
however that is very unlikely. The Soviet Union and the United
States had clear pictures of what the other wanted as each country's
case was made in public addresses that were easily and readily
accessible in an ever increasingly globalized world. In creating
a peace Americans made clear their aspirations that "the
peace should be based on such Wilsonian principles as national
self-determination, religions and other personal freedoms protected
by law, growing freedom of international trade and investment,
and increasingly effective international institutions" (Levering
14). In efforts to create this world characterized by democratic
principles they would need the support and cooperation of the
other super power, the Soviet Union which could not make concessions
to such principles without sacrificing its security whether on
its western boarder or in countries that formerly threatened its
security. World war two had a different effect on the Soviet Union
than it did on the US, it "exposed critical strategic vulnerabilities:
easily penetrable borders,
lack of ready access to key seaways, and absence of a strategic
air force and an oceangoing navy" (Levering 88). These insecurities
led the Soviet Union to do everything it could to secure its borders
and prevent aggressors from entering the country again. American
policy changed as its attempts to establish a world order that
mirrored western democracy intensified. The Soviet Union's actions
can not be attributed to imperialism, "its overriding goal
was remarkably consistent throughout World War II and the Cold
War: security through aggrandizement and consolidation of the
Soviet sphere" (Levering 147).
[9]
|
1.
Write self contained papers - if a reader didn't know the question,
would they be a bit lost opening this way? It feels like you
jumped into the middle of the paper. Find a way to orient the
readers into the paper.
2. The opening is too assumptive.
The implicit audience should always be a well educated person.
Don't make the reader work too hard to understand what the paper
is talking about and where it is going.
3. Better way to introduce this? Be clear that the reader understands
where we are coming from, be clear with transitions.
4. This idea about world war
one is difficult to understand because it is not introduced
very clearly. Work on clearer transitions to guide the reader
along.
5. Insert commas into long series
of sentences to indicate the rhythm of sentences to the readers.
A lot of students undercomma and sentences seem to run on and
on. Read paper out loud to edit out awkward phrasing such as
here. You don't want to confuse the reader with bad comma usage,
so paying attention to grammar can increase clarity.
6. Consider organization - could these points (and others) be
presented more clearly. (i.e. American view, Russian view, then
compare and contrast through events)
7. Think critically about each
and every quote. Part of this quote, "the weight of history"
seems like it deserves further analysis because the United States
was also shaped by its history
8. Further analysis on this
point needed. Consider further questions, did Truman have other
options? Could he have acted differently? Peel back the layers
of your arguments, dig in and analyze what happened. Don't just
accept everything as fact, look at the reasons behind Truman's
actions. Take advantage of opportunities to be analytical.
9. Overall, this paper could
be much more focused and the argument could be built better
by reorganizing and finding more evidence for your point. Always
consider the reader in argumentative essays. What point are
you trying to prove to your audience? The thesis should be the
purpose of the essay and the audience should be who you are
communicating it to. Further editing can also improve the clarity
of this paper. Lack of clarity due to editing mistakes harms
efforts to communicate the point you are trying to make, no
matter what the content is. Editing is not as important as content,
but can harm a paper.
|