1. The end of WW2 and the beginning of the Cold War, 1945-9

Contents

1. Economic and political structures of the post-war world
2. Cold War and peripheral tensions in a bipolar world
3. Historiographical debates about the origins of the Cold war

Key issues

Assess the role played by the USSR in the origins of the Cold War.
Blame for the origins of the Cold War lies mainly with the USA. How far do you agree?
The pursuit of national self-interest by both the USA and the USSR was a key cause of the Cold War. How far do you agree?
The Cold War was inevitable, due to the ideological opposition of the USA and the USSR. How far do you agree?

Key terms

Yalta & Potsdam
Marshall Plan
Truman Doctrine
Containment

Discussion points

Bretton Woods Conference (1944)
Iron Curtain Speech (1946)
UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948)

The aftermath of World War II marked a turning point in global history, as nations faced unprecedented devastation and a pressing need for reconstruction. This period saw the emergence of two dominant superpowers, the United States and the Soviet Union, whose ideological differences—capitalism versus communism—quickly escalated into a global rivalry known as the Cold War.

The Cold War was characterised by ideological and political conflicts, proxy wars, and strategic competition between the two blocs, yet it avoided direct military confrontation. It unfolded against the backdrop of efforts to rebuild shattered economies and establish new institutions to secure lasting peace. Initiatives such as the United Nations, the Marshall Plan, and Bretton Woods Agreements reflected attempts to shape a new world order, while tensions over the division of Europe and the containment of Soviet influence revealed deep fractures in international relations.

This chapter examines how the aftermath of World War II shaped the Cold War, focusing on key economic, political, and ideological developments. It also explores the early crises that solidified the divide between the United States and the Soviet Union and introduces historiographical debates about responsibility for the conflict.

#1. Economic and political structures of the post-war world

#A. Unprecedented devastation and loss

The Second World War caused significant human casualties, with millions of civilians killed due to advanced weaponry, strategic bombings, and deliberate targeting. Cities were reduced to rubble, and infrastructure, agricultural land, and industrial capacities were severely damaged, leaving economies in ruins.

The liberation of concentration camps further revealed the horrors of genocide, shocking the global conscience with the extermination of millions of Jews. Survivors faced long-lasting psychological trauma. In response, the international community established new legal principles, such as the concepts of crimes against humanity and genocide, which were developed through the Nuremberg and Tokyo trials. These trials laid the foundation for justice and collective security in the new world order.

#B. Rebuilding the economy and protecting people

#a) Restarting production

Restarting production after the war presented a significant challenge, but nations demonstrated a strong determination to recover. In France, the General Commissioner for Planning was established in 1946, led by Jean Monnet. The French government prioritised investment in key sectors such as energy, transportation, and construction, overseeing reconstruction efforts. This included the nationalisation of major companies in 1945, showcasing a state-led approach to economic recovery.

#b) The welfare state

The welfare state concept aimed to protect citizens from life's uncertainties and asserted the state's responsibility to meet the population's essential needs.

The origins of this idea can be traced back to late 19th-century Germany and Scandinavia in the 1930s. It was later theorised by William Beveridge in his influential 1942 report. Practical implementations followed shortly after, with France establishing Social Security in 1945, Sweden introducing “people's retirement” in 1946, and Britain launching the National Health Service through the 1948 NHS Act. These measures underscored a commitment to social protection.

#c) The Marshall Plan

The Marshall Plan, initiated by the United States in 1947, provided billions of dollars for the reconstruction of European countries. The Organisation for European Economic Co-operation (OEEC), an early precursor to the European Union, was established by the accepting nations. Although the offer was extended to all countries, communist nations like the Soviet Union rejected it. Notably, Yugoslavia's leader Tito accepted the aid, highlighting his independence from Moscow. The Marshall Plan demonstrated the economic power of the American capitalist model and aimed to curb the spread of communism by alleviating poverty, as suggested by George Kennan in 1946.

#C. Fresh economic order: establishing global financial governance

#a) Institutions of global economic governance

Belief in the importance of international law led to the establishment of institutions aimed at promoting global economic governance. The Great Depression of the 1930s had shown how economic instability could threaten peace and foster the rise of totalitarian regimes. In response, the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) was created in 1947 to promote free trade and prosperity. This marked a step towards ensuring collective security through economic stability.

#b) The Bretton Woods Agreements (1944)

The Bretton Woods Conference of 1944, attended by 44 countries, set the stage for a new international monetary system. Although the Soviet Union participated in the conference, it later withdrew from the resulting institutions.

The agreements established the US dollar, tied to gold, as the dominant global currency, embedding the capitalist model into the international economy. Two major institutions were created: the International Monetary Fund (IMF), tasked with guaranteeing monetary stability, and the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (now the World Bank).

#c) The "Thirty Glorious Years"

The post-war period, often referred to as the “Thirty Glorious Years,” saw sustained economic growth, particularly in capitalist countries, with annual growth rates ranging from 5% to 9%. This period of reconstruction and economic revival benefited both capitalist and communist states, which focused heavily on mass production, particularly in sectors such as construction and armaments.

#D. A new world seeking a new political balance

#a) Emergence of new states

The revival of states that had been annexed by Axis powers during World War II created a need for a fresh political balance in the post-war era. Many of these states were reorganised under the influence of the Allied powers, with significant geopolitical changes occurring in regions such as Japan, Korea, Eastern Europe, and the People's Republic of China. This restructuring was not merely administrative but represented the emerging spheres of influence of the superpowers.

For example, Korea was divided into North and South at the 38th parallel. The northern region fell under Soviet influence, establishing a communist regime, while the southern part aligned with the United States and adopted a capitalist framework. Similarly, Germany was initially divided into four occupation zones controlled by the United States, the United Kingdom, the Soviet Union, and France. Over time, the Western zones merged into a single entity, known as “Bizonia,” which, after the Berlin blockade, became the Federal Republic of Germany, contrasting with the Soviet-controlled German Democratic Republic in the east.

The influence of superpowers was evident not only in territorial divisions but also in the establishment of new regimes. For instance, Stalin found it natural to extend Soviet-style governance into Eastern Europe, characterising this era as a “new type of war.” This period marked the foundation of a bipolar world order, with the United States and the Soviet Union asserting their dominance through the restructuring of former Axis territories.

#b) Independence movements in the colonies

The weakening of European states after World War II created a fertile ground for independence movements to emerge across their colonies. In several cases, these demands were met with violent resistance from colonial powers. For example, in 1945, the regions of Sétif, Guelma, and Kherrata in Algeria witnessed uprisings demanding independence. These demonstrations were harshly suppressed by the French army, resulting in significant casualties and deepening the divide between the Algerians and their colonial rulers.

In the same year, Ho Chi Minh declared Vietnam's independence in Indochina, initiating a struggle against French colonial rule. This conflict escalated into the First Indochina War in 1946 and eventually led to the broader Vietnam War, which saw direct involvement by the United States in subsequent decades.

While some colonies experienced violent paths to independence, others achieved liberation through peaceful means. A notable example is India, which gained independence from the British Empire in 1947. This was accomplished largely through non-violent resistance, inspired by leaders like Mahatma Gandhi, whose methods of civil disobedience played a crucial role in ending colonial rule.

#c) The UN: a new peace organisation

The idea of creating a new international organisation to maintain peace and security emerged during early meetings between Franklin D. Roosevelt and Winston Churchill at the beginning of World War II. These discussions laid the groundwork for what would become the United Nations. The organisation was formally established in 1945 at a conference in San Francisco, with the aim of preventing future global conflicts and promoting international cooperation.

The decision-making process within the United Nations was designed to balance efficiency with representation. The General Assembly was empowered to make decisions without requiring unanimous agreement, allowing actions to proceed even in the face of minority dissent. Decisions could be made with a simple majority, ensuring that the organisation could function without being paralysed by disagreement.

The Security Council was structured to reflect the geopolitical realities of the post-war world. It consisted of elected members and five permanent members who were given special powers to ensure their active participation in maintaining global peace. The permanent members: the United States, the United Kingdom, the Soviet Union (now Russia), China, and France, were granted veto power. This allowed any of these nations to block resolutions if they deemed it necessary, cementing their influential role in the organisation's operations. This structure ensured the involvement of the major powers while attempting to address the complexities of global governance in a divided world.

#d) The UDHR in the context of Cold War

The UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), adopted in 1948, was a response to the atrocities of World War II, aiming to prevent future violations of human dignity. Emerging from the moral reckoning of the war and the creation of the United Nations, it established universal principles of equality, freedom, and protection from discrimination, reflecting the global commitment to justice and peace.

During the Cold War, the UDHR became a battleground for ideological competition. The West emphasised civil and political rights, criticising the Soviet Union's lack of freedoms, while the East focused on socio-economic rights, like access to education and healthcare, to validate their system. This dual legacy made the UDHR both a product of post-war reconstruction and a tool in the ideological struggle, cementing its role in shaping global norms and diplomacy.

#2. Cold War and peripheral tensions in a bipolar world

#A. Origins of the Cold War

#a) Progressive deterioration of the Grand Alliance

The Grand Alliance, which united the United States, the Soviet Union, and Britain against the Axis powers during World War II, began to deteriorate as the war neared its conclusion. The Nazi-Soviet Pact, which had initially allied Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union, ended on June 22, 1941, when Germany launched a surprise invasion of the USSR. In response, the Soviet Union joined the Allied powers, forming a coalition against the Axis. However, this alliance was based on shared necessity rather than genuine trust.

Despite their collaboration, deep-seated suspicion persisted between the allies. Wartime conferences such as those held at Tehran (1943), Yalta (February 1945), and Potsdam (July 1945) revealed significant disagreements about the post-war order. While Franklin D. Roosevelt sought to maintain cooperation, his efforts were undermined by conflicting priorities and ideologies. Tensions were exacerbated by leadership changes during this period. FDR's death in April 1945 brought Harry Truman to power in the United States, and his openly anti-communist stance contrasted with Roosevelt's more conciliatory approach. In Britain, Winston Churchill was replaced by Clement Attlee during the Potsdam Conference, further altering the dynamics of the alliance.

One of the most contentious issues was the future of Poland, with disagreements over its borders and political alignment creating significant friction. Additionally, during the Potsdam Conference, Truman revealed the existence of the atomic bomb, signalling American military superiority. Although Stalin was already aware of the weapon through Soviet intelligence, this disclosure marked a turning point in relations, highlighting the widening gulf between the United States and the Soviet Union. These events collectively signalled the progressive breakdown of the Grand Alliance and set the stage for the Cold War.

#b) Opposition of superpowers

The question of Japan's capitulation during the final stages of World War II highlighted the growing opposition between the United States and the Soviet Union. Both superpowers recognised that the outcome of the war in Asia would significantly impact their respective spheres of influence in the post-war world.

The United States formulated its strategy with the belief that Soviet assistance in the Pacific theatre should be avoided to limit the USSR’s expansionist ambitions. Aware of the potential for the Soviet Union to assert influence over territories in Asia, the US decided against involving Soviet forces in the final stages of the conflict. Additionally, American leaders sought to bring the war to a swift conclusion, partly to prevent the USSR from having time to claim a role in Japan’s surrender.

To achieve a rapid end to the war without deploying ground troops, the United States opted to use nuclear weapons. The atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August 1945 served this purpose, forcing Japan to surrender unconditionally and showcasing the destructive power of the US arsenal. This decision not only secured Japan’s defeat but also sent a clear message to the Soviet Union about American military dominance, further deepening the divide between the two superpowers and setting the stage for the Cold War.

#c) Incompatibility of ideologies and systems

The incompatibility of political, economic, and social systems between the United States and the Soviet Union lay at the heart of their rivalry and was a key driver of the Cold War. Politically, the United States operated as a representative democracy characterised by free elections and the presence of multiple political parties, which allowed for open debate and competition. In stark contrast, the Soviet Union was a totalitarian state governed by a single-party system. Elections, where they existed, were tightly controlled, and political opposition was systematically suppressed. This fundamental difference created an ideological chasm, with one system prioritising individual choice and diversity of opinion while the other prioritised state control and uniformity.

In terms of individual rights, the United States championed freedoms such as speech, press, and religion, all of which were seen as cornerstones of a liberal democratic society. The Soviet Union, however, imposed strict controls on media and heavily censored opinions critical of the government. Religious practices were actively discouraged, as they were viewed as incompatible with Marxist ideology, further highlighting the repressive nature of the Soviet regime compared to the freedoms upheld in the United States.

Economically, the two superpowers were equally divergent. The United States advocated for a capitalist system based on free trade, private ownership, and the pursuit of profit, which aligned with its broader commitment to individual liberty. The Soviet Union, by contrast, embraced a centralised economic model, where private property was abolished, and the means of production were collectivised under state control. This system was designed to eliminate class distinctions but often resulted in inefficiencies and shortages.

These profound differences in political ideology, individual freedoms, and economic systems meant that the United States and the Soviet Union represented two diametrically opposed world views. Their inability to reconcile these differences made meaningful communication and collaboration extremely difficult, further entrenching the divide that defined the Cold War era.

#B. Early crises of the Cold War

#a) Strategies and doctrines

The early stages of the Cold War saw the development of key strategies and doctrines by both the United States and the Soviet Union, which shaped the ideological and geopolitical rivalry between the two superpowers.

In February 1946, George Kennan, an American diplomat stationed in Moscow, sent the Long Telegram to the US State Department. In this critical document, Kennan described the dangers of Soviet expansionism and advocated for a policy of containment to prevent the spread of communism. His analysis introduced the concepts of containment and the “Domino Theory,” which posited that the fall of one country to communism could trigger a chain reaction, endangering neighbouring nations.

In March 1946, Winston Churchill delivered his famous speech in Fulton, Missouri, where he introduced the metaphor of the "Iron Curtain." This term vividly illustrated the division of Europe into two spheres: the democratic and capitalist West, and the communist-controlled East under Soviet influence. Churchill’s speech highlighted the emerging divide and called for Western unity to counterbalance Soviet power.

In March 1947, the United States formalised its approach with the announcement of the Truman Doctrine. This policy framed communism as a global threat and positioned the United States as the leader of a defensive effort to contain it. President Truman explicitly identified communism as an “evil” that needed to be countered and contained wherever it appeared, marking the beginning of the US strategy of active intervention in global affairs to curb Soviet influence.

In response, the Soviet Union criticised the Truman Doctrine as a form of American imperialism. They articulated their own vision through the Zhdanov Doctrine, named after Andrei Zhdanov, a key Soviet political figure. The Zhdanov Doctrine framed the world as being divided into two camps: the imperialist and capitalist camp led by the United States, and the anti-imperialist and socialist camp led by the Soviet Union. This doctrine solidified the Soviet commitment to supporting a global communist revolution and reinforced the ideological divide that defined the Cold War.

Together, these strategies and doctrines institutionalised the ideological battle between capitalism and communism, setting the stage for decades of geopolitical conflict.

#b) Antagonistic economic blocs and military organisations

The Cold War saw the creation of rival economic and military blocs, reflecting the ideological and strategic divide between the United States and the Soviet Union. Both superpowers developed institutions to consolidate their influence, support allies, and counteract their opponent.

Economically, the Western bloc introduced the Marshall Plan in 1947, an American initiative to provide financial aid for the reconstruction of European countries devastated by World War II. The funds were distributed through the Organisation for European Economic Cooperation (OEEC), which coordinated reconstruction efforts. While the Marshall Plan was crucial for economic recovery and stability in Western Europe, it also allowed the United States to establish economic and political dominance in the region. The Soviet Union rejected the Marshall Plan, labelling it as an imperialist effort to expand American influence. Yugoslavia, under the leadership of Tito, was the only communist country to accept aid from the Marshall Plan. While the Soviet Union and its Eastern European allies rejected the plan as a tool of American imperialism, Tito sought to use the financial assistance to rebuild Yugoslavia’s economy and assert its independence from Moscow. Tito’s decision highlighted his growing rift with Stalin, as he refused to adhere to Soviet directives. This acceptance of Western aid underscored Yugoslavia's unique position during the Cold War, balancing between the two superpowers and pursuing a more autonomous path within the communist bloc.

In response, the Soviet Union created Comecon in 1949 to foster economic integration within the Eastern bloc. Comecon facilitated industrialisation, encouraged the export of raw materials to the Soviet Union, and ensured that member states acted as priority markets for Soviet goods. This arrangement, however, resulted in significant economic dependency on the Soviet Union for both trade and industrial support.

Militarily, the Western bloc established the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) in 1949, with its operational framework completed in 1950. NATO was a collective defence alliance aimed at protecting its members from external aggression, particularly from the Soviet Union. Its creation formalised the military cooperation of the United States and its European allies, strengthening the Western bloc's security.

In 1955, the Soviet Union countered by forming the Warsaw Pact, a military alliance that united the Soviet Union and its Eastern European satellite states. The Warsaw Pact was designed to counterbalance NATO and secure Soviet dominance over the military forces of its allies. It reinforced the Eastern bloc's collective defence strategy and ensured cohesion within the Soviet sphere of influence.

These economic and military blocs symbolised the deepening divide of the Cold War. Both the Western and Eastern blocs sought to expand their influence and secure their interests, resulting in a world characterised by sharp ideological and geopolitical competition.

#c) Prague Coup

The Prague Coup of February 1948 was a critical moment in the consolidation of Soviet control over Eastern Europe. Following World War II, the Soviet Union exerted significant influence in the region, supporting the gradual rise of communist leaders. These leaders came to power through a combination of elections and coercion, with some being democratically elected while others were imposed by force.

In Czechoslovakia, elections in February 1948 saw communists making significant gains, which increased their hold on the government. This success, however, triggered a political crisis. Non-communist ministers, frustrated with the growing influence of the communists and their disregard for democratic norms, resigned en masse in an effort to provoke new elections. Instead, this move backfired. President Edvard Beneš, under intense pressure from the communists and their Soviet backers, eventually resigned as well. This cleared the way for the complete transfer of power to the Stalinist faction in the country.

The communists employed “salami tactics” to achieve this outcome, a strategy of dividing and systematically eliminating opposition groups one by one, until no resistance remained. This method allowed them to consolidate power gradually while avoiding direct confrontation with stronger opposition forces. The Prague Coup was an example of Soviet dominance in Eastern Europe and underscored the authoritarian nature of communist rule in the region. It also heightened Western fears of Soviet expansion, further deepening the divide between East and West during the early Cold War.

#d) Berlin Blockade

The Berlin Blockade of 1948-1949 was a defining episode in the early Cold War, illustrating the ideological and geopolitical struggle between the superpowers. Berlin, located deep within Soviet-controlled East Germany, became a symbolic focal point of the conflict. The city was divided into four sectors, with the United States, France, and Britain controlling West Berlin and the Soviet Union overseeing East Berlin. This division made West Berlin an isolated enclave surrounded by Soviet territory.

In June 1948, Soviet leader Joseph Stalin escalated tensions by closing the borders of East Germany, effectively isolating West Berlin. All road, railway, and waterway access to the city was cut off, making it impossible to resupply the Western sectors by land. The blockade aimed to pressure the Allies into relinquishing their hold on West Berlin and accepting Soviet dominance in the region.

Faced with the blockade, American officials considered forcibly entering East Germany to reopen supply routes, but this would have risked direct war with the Soviet Union. Instead, the Western Allies opted for a massive airlift, flying in essential supplies such as food and fuel to sustain the population of West Berlin. This operation, known as the Berlin Airlift, involved thousands of flights and became a remarkable logistical success.

The Soviet Union, in turn, contemplated shooting down the incoming planes but refrained from doing so to avoid triggering open conflict. After nearly a year of intense standoff and rising tensions, Stalin lifted the blockade in May 1949 without securing any concessions. The Berlin Blockade highlighted the deep divisions between East and West and marked one of the first major confrontations of the Cold War, further solidifying the split between the two blocs.

#e) Korean War

The Korean War (1950–1953) was a significant conflict that marked the first major military confrontation of the Cold War, exemplifying the growing tensions between the United States and the Soviet Union. After Japan's defeat in World War II, Korea, which had been under Japanese occupation, was divided along the 38th parallel. The northern half came under Soviet influence and established a communist government, while the southern half aligned with the United States and adopted a capitalist and democratic framework.

The conflict began in June 1950 when North Korea, supported by the Soviet Union and later China, launched an invasion of South Korea, aiming to unify the peninsula under communist rule. In response, US President Harry Truman leveraged the absence of the Soviet Union from the United Nations Security Council to pass a resolution authorising international intervention. A coalition of UN forces, composed of troops from multiple nations but predominantly American (88%), successfully pushed back the North Korean forces.

The UN forces advanced beyond the 38th parallel and approached the Chinese border. General Douglas MacArthur, commanding the UN forces, advocated for further military action into China. However, this provoked a massive Chinese intervention. Approximately 1.7 million Chinese "volunteers" entered the conflict, compelling the UN forces to retreat southward. This intervention was seen as a major victory for Mao Zedong, solidifying China’s position as a key player in Cold War geopolitics.

The conflict eventually stabilised near the original 38th parallel, essentially restoring the pre-war boundary between North and South Korea. Despite ongoing hostilities, the war officially ended in 1953 with the signing of an armistice under the leadership of US President Dwight D. Eisenhower. However, no formal peace treaty was ever signed, leaving the Korean Peninsula technically still at war. The Korean War entrenched the division of Korea and underscored the global stakes of the Cold War, with both sides determined to prevent the spread of their rival’s ideology.

#B. New tensions in the Middle East

#a) End of mandatory powers' occupation

The end of the mandate system in the Middle East marked a significant turning point in the region’s political landscape and became a focal point for Cold War rivalries. The Middle East’s vast oil reserves played a major role in these tensions, as they were a critical resource that attracted the attention and strategic interests of global powers. Control over oil-rich territories was seen as essential for economic and military advantage, further intensifying international competition in the region.

The mandate system had been established by the League of Nations after World War I to administer former German and Ottoman territories. These mandates were continued under the United Nations after World War II. In the Middle East, territories such as Syria, Lebanon, Palestine, and Transjordan were assigned to France and Britain for administration. The mandate powers were tasked with preparing these regions for independence, but the process often involved conflicts and delays, reflecting the complex geopolitics of the region.

The transition to independence was overseen by the United Nations for states classified as "Class A mandates," which were deemed to be closest to achieving self-governance. As these territories gained independence, they emerged into a Cold War context that forced them to navigate the pressures of aligning with either the Western or Soviet bloc. For instance, Syria, upon gaining independence, aligned itself with the Soviet Union, strengthening its ties with the Eastern bloc. Conversely, Turkey, which neighboured Syria, joined NATO in 1952, firmly positioning itself within the Western alliance.

These developments, combined with existing regional rivalries, intensified tensions in the Middle East. The struggle for influence in this strategically vital region became a key arena for superpower competition, with both the United States and the Soviet Union vying to establish dominance through alliances and support for local regimes. This period laid the groundwork for the complex and often volatile political dynamics that continue to shape the Middle East.

#b) The Iranian-Soviet Crisis

The Iranian-Soviet Crisis, which unfolded in the aftermath of World War II, was an early test of Cold War tensions in the Middle East. After the war, Soviet troops occupied northern Iran but refused to withdraw despite prior agreements and diplomatic negotiations. Joseph Stalin’s objective was to establish pro-Soviet states in the region and gain access to Iran's valuable oil resources by supporting local separatist movements, such as those in Azerbaijan and Kurdistan.

The United States, viewing the Soviet presence in Iran as a challenge to its interests and a violation of international agreements, threatened to intervene. Faced with this pressure, the Soviet Union eventually withdrew its forces in 1946, marking a significant diplomatic victory for the US. This crisis demonstrated the application of Cold War bi-polar logic in the Middle East, where regional conflicts became arenas for superpower rivalry, with each bloc vying for influence and dominance.

#c) First Arab-Israeli War

The First Arab-Israeli War, also known as the 1948 Arab-Israeli War, was a direct consequence of the end of the British mandate over Palestine and the creation of the State of Israel. Palestine had been under British administration since the end of World War I, but by the late 1940s, Britain was preparing to withdraw from the region, unable to manage escalating tensions between Jewish and Arab communities.

In 1948, the State of Israel was officially declared, immediately triggering tensions with neighbouring Arab states, which opposed its establishment. The surrounding Arab nations, including Egypt, Jordan, Syria, and Iraq, rejected the United Nations’ partition plan and sought to prevent the creation of a Jewish state. In the ensuing conflict, Israel received significant support from the United States and other Western nations, both politically and materially, enabling it to defend its sovereignty and expand its territory.

The war not only shaped the geopolitics of the Middle East but also deepened animosities between Arab states and Israel, laying the foundation for decades of conflict in the region.

#3. Historiographical debates about the origins of the Cold war

#A. The orthodox or traditional perspective

The orthodox interpretation, formulated by figures such as George F. Kennan in his "Long Telegram" (1946) and the "Sources of Soviet Conduct" (1947), holds that the Soviet Union bears primary responsibility for the Cold War. Historians like William H. McNeill and Herbert Feis argue that the roots of Soviet hostility lie in Marxist-Leninist ideology, which promoted global revolution, and the Soviet regime’s need to maintain internal control through external conflict. The USSR's foreign policy is seen as fundamentally expansionist, with Stalin leveraging communist movements, the Red Army, and coercive tactics to extend Soviet influence in Eastern and Southeastern Europe, Germany, and beyond.

During World War II, the United States and Britain misjudged Stalin's intentions, granting concessions for Soviet security that enabled the USSR to dominate Eastern Europe. These included recognising the Polish Provisional Government, accepting new Polish borders, and tolerating the sovietisation of countries like Romania and Bulgaria. While US leaders initially sought cooperation with the USSR,evident in proposals like the inclusion of Eastern Europe in the Marshall Plan, the Soviet refusal to engage in joint initiatives made the division of Europe inevitable.

As the USSR intensified its control over Eastern Europe through actions like the Prague Coup (1948) and the Berlin Blockade (1948–49), the United States shifted towards a policy of containment, marked by economic aid (Marshall Plan), military alliances (NATO in 1949), and rearming West Germany. The Korean War (1950–1953) reinforced the need for American-led alliances. While Soviet expansion was eventually curtailed, the orthodox view suggests that Moscow’s desire to spread communism remained a persistent threat throughout the Cold War.

#B. The revisionsit interpretation

The revisionist school of thought challenges the traditionalist view, arguing that the United States, not the Soviet Union, bears significant responsibility for the Cold War. Revisionists reject the traditionalist analysis as Western-biased and rooted in a misunderstanding of Soviet intentions and capabilities. They contend that the Soviet Union, devastated by World War II, focused on economic recovery and security rather than global revolution. The USSR’s actions in Eastern Europe were defensive, aimed at preventing future threats from German soil and ensuring friendly governments in neighbouring states, rather than inherently expansionist.

Key figures in the revisionist camp include William Appleman Williams, Gabriel Kolko, and Gar Alperowitz, who emphasised American economic motives. According to revisionists, the United States pursued an aggressive "open door" policy to secure global markets and investment opportunities, driven by the needs of its liberal capitalist economy. This policy aimed to eliminate barriers like tariffs and imperial preferences, forcing countries, including the Soviet Union and Great Britain, to open their economies to American competition.

The revisionists argue that American policies, such as the Marshall Plan and the Truman Doctrine, were designed to create an informal American empire, extending political and economic influence even into Eastern Europe. US actions, including the abrupt cessation of Lend-Lease aid, the termination of reparations from the US occupation zone in Germany, and the exploitation of its atomic monopoly, were seen as deliberate efforts to pressure the Soviet Union and limit its recovery.

The Soviet response, according to revisionists, was defensive and aimed at securing its sphere of influence in the face of American encroachment. While the USSR resisted US demands, the United States settled for dividing Europe into two blocs, creating a myth of Soviet global expansion to justify its policies. The formation of NATO, the implementation of the Truman Doctrine, and US actions during the Korean War further widened the gulf between East and West. Revisionists argue that the Soviet Union, despite its resistance, continued to hope for a rapprochement with the West, highlighting the complex interplay of American aggression and Soviet defensiveness in shaping the Cold War.

#C. Post-revisionist views

The post-revisionist interpretations moves beyond the polarised views of the traditionalist and revisionist schools, which place blame primarily on the Soviet Union or the United States, respectively. Instead, post-revisionists argue that the Cold War was a product of complex and multifaceted factors that cannot be reduced to one-sided narratives. They critique the traditionalist approach for ignoring the Soviet Union’s legitimate security concerns and the revisionist perspective for overlooking Soviet actions that provoked American responses. Both sides, post-revisionists suggest, misunderstood and mishandled each other’s intentions, which were complicated by their lack of prior experience in diplomacy before 1941.

John Lewis Gaddis is a central figure in post-revisionist scholarship. He highlights how containment emerged as a pragmatic response to the consequences of the wartime alliance between the United States and the Soviet Union. While necessary to defeat Germany and Japan, this alliance empowered a totalitarian state that posed a long-term challenge to Western interests. Gaddis argues that the United States adopted containment to prevent the USSR from reshaping the post-war international order in ways that would threaten key political and economic centres such as Western Europe and Japan. Similarly, the Soviet Union sought to establish a secure sphere of influence, driven by fears of future invasions and the need to maintain control over its borders.

Roosevelt’s efforts to balance wartime cooperation with the Soviets and post-war ideals, such as those in the Atlantic Charter, often fell short. His reliance on goodwill and the integration of the USSR into a cooperative post-war world proved unrealistic. Stalin’s actions, including his moves in Eastern Europe and demands over Turkey, reflected deep-seated mistrust and expansionist tendencies, further exacerbating tensions. Post-revisionists suggest that the Cold War was not entirely inevitable but was shaped by poor handling of the relationship on both sides, where mutual suspicion and misreading of signals played a significant role.

Fred Halliday offers a broader theoretical framework, identifying several perspectives that contribute to understanding the Cold War. These include the Soviet threat theory, which focuses on Soviet expansionism, and the US imperialism theory, which attributes the conflict to capitalist desires for markets and influence. Other approaches include superpower collusion theory, which views the Cold War as mutual domination by the USA and USSR; arms race theory, emphasising the destabilising effects of nuclear weapons; and North-South conflict theory, which frames global tensions as struggles between rich and poor nations. Additional interpretations include West-West rivalry theory, intra-state theory linking foreign policy to domestic politics, and class conflict theory, which sees the Cold War as an extension of global capitalism versus communism.

In conclusion, post-revisionists see the Cold War as the result of a combination of ideological, structural, and security-related factors. They argue that neither the United States nor the Soviet Union can bear sole responsibility, as both superpowers contributed to the escalating tensions through their policies and responses. The opening of Soviet archives has enriched the debate, with some historians suggesting that Stalin’s worldview and policies made the conflict nearly inevitable. However, post-revisionists avoid assigning singular blame, instead emphasising the interplay of global and domestic factors in shaping the Cold War’s trajectory.