History essay plans - n/a PDF

Preview

Summary

n/a...

Description

June 2013

The primary aim of containment was to protect democracy

Other factors

Furthermore

‘The policy of containment was pursued by the USA with the sole purpose of protecting democracy.’ Assess the validly of this view with reference to the years 1945 to 1949 • From 1945 the Soviet Union had been developing the creation of

Communist regimes in Eastern Europe. The USA saw Communism as a form of political dictatorship which threatened democratic freedom. Containment was a way of ensuring that the spread of Communism was controlled • Germany was seen by the USA as the focal point confrontation between itself and the Soviet Union. The USSR’s actions in Germany for between 1945 and 1949 may be explored in order to establish a link between the introduction of containment and the preservation of democracy within and beyond Germany. References may be made to reparations, the promotion of pro-Communist political groups in Germany and the Berlin Blockade. The latter confirms the relevancy of containment as a strategy to defend democracy • The expansion of Communism beyond Europe is seen through the conflict in Korea. Students may suggest that the primary reason for US intervention in Korea between 1950 and 1953 was to protect democracy from what was becoming the fulfilment of Marxist ideology towards the globalisation of Communism. • Containment was founded on an economic strategy, the Marshall Plan. The USA wanted to establish itself as an unassailable global economic power. It was this so called economic imperialism that suggested that the primary aim behind containment was to create US global economic power through the preservation of pro-American democracies • Containment may be viewed in the context of the USA’s nuclear monopoly up to 1949. As such containment may be seen as the means through which the USA could apply this strategic power. By appearing to protect democracy through containment, the USA could use nuclear diplomacy to ensure the USSR remained a second rate superpower • Truman wanted influence in Western Europe. Europe was the springboard for US global power. Not only did the USA wish to be a global power in economic terms but also in strategic terms. • Examine the view that a power vacuum existed from 1945. Had the USA not intervened through containment there may well have followed a period of gross instability. In this sense containment went beyond protecting democracy as a strategy to enhance US power. It was primarily an essential component of effective post-war recovery. Failure to develop such a strategy may have led to long-term conflict and political and economic instability which would have impacted on millions of Europeans • The influence of European states is significant. Britain was determined to ensure the USA became part of its security strategy in the face of Soviet expansionism. To this extent students may suggest that containment did have elements of protecting democracy in it but also it was driven by pressure from relatively vulnerable European states

June 2013

‘The soviet Union’s policies toward the USA were aimed at relaxing the tensions between them.’ Assess the validly of this view with reference to the years 1956 to 1991

The Soviet Union sought to relax international tension in the years 1956 to 1991

• Khrushchev’s attempts to develop peaceful co-existence as the basis for international relations from 1956 • The Soviet Union had a much more positive approach towards détente than did the USA. The Soviets were keen to preserve détente as the basis of international relations and willingly participated in the SALT talks • The Cold War came to an end due to the cooperation of Gorbachev. He was pivotal in its conclusion and he made the ultimate contribution towards the relaxation of tension. • Peaceful co-existence was a strategy designed to strengthen the Soviet Union’s position both globally and in terms of its control of Eastern Europe. It was not a means to relieve international tension • Détente was not about the relaxation of tension for the Soviet Union. Primarily it was a means of establishing Soviet parity as a superpower and that implied the Soviet Union could then develop its global power with less US interference. This may be apparent in Angola. Soviet expansionism into Third World states could only intensify tension rather than minimise it • Cooperation by Gorbachev was an attempt to rescue the Soviet Union’s power base, particularly in Eastern Europe. Reagan’s militarism left Gorbachev with few alternatives in terms of international relations, particularly in the context of the Soviet Union’s weakened strategic and economic condition. • Explore the view that the Cuban Missile crisis, although a source of great international tension, was a Soviet strategy to heighten the nuclear issue and move towards some strategy for nuclear arms controls and therefore international peace • That Soviet cooperation in international relations was more apparent than real throughout the period. It was consistently driven by the motive of reinforcing the Soviets’ position rather than by a genuine desire to defuse international tension.

Other factors

Furthermore

June 2013

To what extent was the USA’s response to international aggression based solely on protecting its own national interests in the years 1991 to 2004?

The US response was focused upon protecting US national interests

• The Cold War had come to an end by 1991 and the USA needed to preserve its position as a global superpower. This was essential to guaranteeing US national interests were secure. This approach had always been present in US foreign policy and international relations thinking throughout the Cold War and it remained an imperative for US policy after 1991 • The USA frequently acted outside the auspices of the United Nations. This is apparent in its intervention in Iraq in 2003. The US was not firmly committed to cooperating with the United Nations because it needed to act independently in order to ensure its own interests were secured. The intervention in Iraq was very much a response to international aggression • A similar reasoning may be applied to the USA’s decision to intervene directly in Afghanistan. As in Iraq, the USA used its political alliance with Britain to further promote its own campaign against international terrorism • The US response to Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait in 1990 also illustrates a determination to act solely in US interests. The US needed to protect its Middle East ally, Israel. It also needed stability in the Middle East because of that region’s importance in economic and strategic terms. The USA’s economy was the priority rather than removing a dictatorial regime in Iraq in the interests of the Iraqi people. • The USA did cooperate with the United Nations in 1990 by participating in the economic sanctions strategy developed by the UN to put pressure on Iraq to withdraw from Kuwait • The USA’s willingness to allow the regime of Saddam Hussein to continue after Iraq had been defeated in the Gulf War suggests that the USA was prepared to limit its direct intervention in the Middle East. There is no indication of any protracted US presence but rather a willingness to enable the sovereign state of Iraq to return to whatever system or regime it wanted • The US response to the Gulf War was presented by Bush as part of a ‘new world order’. This does not suggest a US plan to manipulate events solely in terms of US interests. • Explore the emergence of international terrorism and its direct impact of US policy making, particularly in terms of 9/11 • Consider the commitment to democracy in both Iraq and Afghanistan and the huge costs to the USA in terms of economic and human resources. This may imply a more altruistic level of thinking that explains the US response.

Other factors

Furthermore

June 2012

‘In the years 1955 to 1962, Khrushchev was genuinely committed to peaceful co-existence.’ Assess the validly of this view

The primary motive underlying peaceful coexistence was to limit the further development of the Cold War and even scale down the conflict through a commitment to international tolerance Other factors

• the Austrian State Treaty, 1955, was a clear indicator of the Soviet Union’s willingness to embark on wider co-operation • The Soviet Union needed to develop its own economy. This was being damaged by the ever rising financial cost of the Cold War. Khrushchev was a pragmatist and he was willing to make genuine efforts to de-intensify the Cold War because this would have a direct benefit to the USSR • The Geneva Summit, 1955 also reinforces the validity of the view.

Furthermore

• The USSR was lagging behind in the nuclear arms race. The USA was a stronger Cold War power and peaceful co-existence was a Soviet strategy to redress the power imbalance in what the Soviets saw as a lasting ideological struggle that they had to win • The strategy was designed to reinforce the Soviet Union’s position as the leader of global communism. This became particularly significant with the ever increasing rise of competition from China • The strategy was designed to enable the USSR to consolidate its position in Eastern Europe in the face of increasing opposition to Soviet domination and Soviet models of communism, e.g. Hungary, 1956. • Consider the problems over Germany and Berlin and the events leading to the construction of the Berlin Wall in August 1961. These may suggest that Khrushchev’s commitment to peaceful co-existence was a rather cynical and clumsy attempt at political distraction, and one that failed • Consider the pre-Cuban missile crisis events, particularly the efforts of the Soviet Union to cultivate Cuba as an ally and thereby inflame the USA. This is hardly an element of peaceful co-existence • The treatment meted out to Soviet satellite states is also significant in measuring Khrushchev’s intentions through peaceful co-existence, particularly the Soviet response to the Hungarian uprising. The USA could hardly have been unaware of this and these events confirmed its Cold War position.

June 2012 Changing attitudes in the United States

Other factors

Furthermore

To what extent was the collapse of detente by 1980 due to changing attitudes in the United States’ • There was a rise in the number and influence of neo-conservatives in the USA administration. Increasingly the view was being expressed that détente was helping the USSR more than it was helping the USA. These neo-conservatives came to have an increasing influence over Carter. Hard line and influential views were expressed particularly by Zbigniew Brzezinski • Détente was seen by the USA as a means of developing an adapted version of containment. Its aim was to establish a form of ‘behaviour management’ over the USSR by creating a level of dependency. It became increasingly clear to many that this management strategy was not working • By the late 1970s opposition to SALT II was increasing. More and more US Senators were doubtful about a US commitment to SALT II. There was a belief that détente was acting contrary to US interests particularly in terms of nuclear capability • The Carter Doctrine was a clear indication that US commitment to détente had ended by 1980. • Détente stalled throughout the post SALT I period. Despite a series of summits neither side was able to make significant and speedy moves towards SALT II • The Soviet Union was seen to be supporting international revolutionary socialist movements. This seemed particularly provocative to the USA in areas such as Angola and Ethiopia. The Soviets sought to legitimise these interventions in the context of détente, despite US opposition • The ultimate intervention came in 1979 with the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. This act of apparent Soviet aggression stimulated a US response. US interests in the Middle East and the security and stability of that region as one of the world’s largest oil suppliers, and therefore one that profoundly impacted on US and other global economies, was now presented as vulnerable to Soviet expansionism. . • Suggest that President Carter failed to accurately analyse Soviet actions and that he acted irresponsibly and in haste • Suggest that ending détente was part of a US strategy to bring European détente to an end in order to re-establish a stronger US influence in Europe and the ‘traditional’ power the USA had held over Europe.

June 2012

The USA’s determination to protect Western Europe did serve to prolong the Cold War rather than shorten its duration

Other factors

Furthermore

‘The Cold War lasted for so long because of the United States’ fears for Western European security’. Assess the validly of this view with reference to the years 1945 to 1991 • Western Europe was the focal point of the US policy of containment. This had been a major factor in the development of the Cold War. This policy was further developed through the Marshall Aid programme. From the very end of the Second World War, Western Europe, particularly Germany, became a source of Cold War confrontation • 1949 NATO was formed. This was promoted by the USA and that state became a primary defender of Western Europe. NATO formed part of that defence system, but so did the guarantee of US nuclear capability against the Soviet Union • Confrontation over Berlin was a constant theme. This developed in 1948–9 and during the period 1958–61. President Kennedy made a seminal speech in 1963 committing the USA to Berlin’s defence • The Berlin Wall had a significant impact on US-Soviet Cold War relations. It became a symbol of the Cold War and Berlin became a symbol of defiance against the spread of Communism • Western Europe became the location for missile deployment during the 1980s. The USA placed Cruise missiles in Europe and Britain formed a deep relationship with President Reagan, which further linked Western Europe to Cold War confrontation. •Western Europe became the focal point of the development of détente. Willy Brandt was the prime mover in this process through his policy of Ostpolitik. This may be viewed as a significant impulse in the development of global détente that emerged. This is a clear link between Western Europe and the attempts to establish a new more cooperative relationship between the superpowers, which could have lead to bringing the Cold War to an end much earlier. •Berlin became the focal point of the end of the Cold War. As the Wall came down in November 1989 the first most significant step towards a final end of the Cold War was taken •Western Europe consolidated its own defence and economic security. This could be explored through the Maastricht Treaty, 1991 • Ideological divisions acted as a lasting and long-term division and this was the result of both the USA and the USSR • Both sides participated in a lasting nuclear arms race, even during détente. • Consider the view that while Eastern Europe remained part of the Soviet satellite system, Western Europe would always be vulnerable to the further expansion of Communism. This made Western Europe a key factor in the continuance of the Cold War •There were opportunities to reduce the tension further. One particularly significant one was détente. Students may consider the collapse of détente and the degree of responsibility taken by the USA • Containment was not merely a Western European strategy. It was a

June 2011 It was the result of the United States’ role

Other factors

Furthermore

long-term global strategy. To what extent was the United States responsible for the collapse of the Grand Alliance at the end of the Second World War? • The USA was convinced that the primary aim of the Soviet Union was to spread communist ideology into Europe at a time when Europe was at its most vulnerable. Truman was easily convinced of this view • There were some significant influences on the USA’s leadership which further served to demonise the Soviet Union. The Kennan Long Telegram was a significant influence as was Churchill’s Iron Curtain speech • Candidates may argue that the USA always intended to protect and expand its economic interests and influence in Europe. Any expansion of communist influence and control would fundamentally undermine this and thereby threaten US vital interests. • Stalin was committed to establishing Communist regimes in Eastern European states in order to establish a buffer zone to guarantee Soviet security from attack. This was inconsistent with his agreement to accept the declaration on Liberated Europe which had been finalised at Yalta • The Soviet strategy towards Germany was based on ensuring there would be no economic recovery there. There was also the idea that the whole of Germany should only be united if it was in the form of a communist state. Problems rapidly emerged as the Soviet Union implemented this policy. The USA saw it as yet further evidence of Soviet ideological and strategic expansionism • The Soviets blockaded Berlin in 1948. This was a final attempt to consolidate Soviet dominance in eastern Germany and it completed the USA’s certainty that containment was a valid and necessary step. • There was no clear and firm joint agreement on the future of Germany at the Potsdam Conference. This left a continuing uncertainty and enabled both sides to develop their own policies and priorities towards Germany. It was likely that these would go in different and conflicting directions • The introduction of containment was the most significant factor in the collapse of the Grand Alliance. This ensured that there would be no route to enable the protagonists to re-establish constructive relations. Some may suggest that it was a deliberate US strategy designed to ensure the USA had a role in Europe and it was part of the USA’s determination to develop a global presence in the post-war world • The USA’s nuclear monopoly led to it adopting a provocative and seemingly aggressive stance towards the USSR. Nuclear diplomacy could not be the foundation of effective and lasting two power cooperation.

June 2011 The end of the Cold War enabled the UN to function as an effective peacekeeping organisation

Other factors

Furthermore

‘The United Nations was an affective international peacekeeping organisation in the years 1991 to 2004.’ Assess the validly of this view • The Cold War had undermined the UN’s effectiveness because it was founded on the principle of collective security and international cooperation while the Cold War was based on confrontation • Some statistical detail would develop the view that the UN took part in more interventions once the Cold War had ended than it did during the Cold War. Also the number of vetoes applied in the Security Council reduced significantly • Candidates may examine specific interventions and assess their outcomes as examples of successful peacekeeping actions.

• The nature of the challenges facing the UN in the post-Cold War era were significantly different from those it faced during the Cold War, e.g. the rise of international terrorism, the emergence of new states • The USA still wished to retain its status as an international superpower. It was not willing to enter into a new era of international cooperation even of its primary Cold War protagonist had disappeared. The USA was determined to intervene outside and beyond UN involvement. The UN could not be allowed to emerge as a powerful alternative to US international power • The lack of international support continued. Also there were examples of international agencies overriding the role of the UN, e.g. in Yugoslavia. • Consider that the role of the UN was compromised in the post-Cold War era. It assumed a more pronounced role as an enforcer than merely a peacekeeper. This may be evidenced through the 1991 Gulf War • Consider examples of UN failures, e.g. Somalia and Rwanda • 9/11 acted as a turning point in the effectiveness of the UN.

Ju...