Cold War Discussion: Six Facts Essay

1. The continuously developing conflict between the USSR and the USA became one of the most important aspects of the 20th century. The origins of this opposition could be traced back to the end of WWII when two allied states agreed to divide their spheres of influence and reorganize the world order in a specific way (Brower & Sanders, 2014). However, everyone understood that the given pattern was not able to satisfy all parties to the agreement. Their growing power and appetite resulted in the appearance of numerous claims to each other (Brower & Sanders, 2014). For this reason, their competing accusations were just a war of words introduced to conceal growing ambitions and the desire to enlarge the sphere of influence. Nevertheless, ‘isms’ that could be applied are fascism, imperialism, capitalism, liberalism, socialism which means that the causes of the Cold War could be related to these.
2. The fact is that the end of WWII meant a radical reconsideration of global relations and shifts of priorities in international relations. During the years of war, allies were united by the necessity to fight against Germany; however, radical differences in mentalities and perspectives on the further development of the world remained (Hong, 2017). Soon after the war, both USSR and the USA transformed into powerful superstates that had their spheres of interests all over the world. Moreover, they adhered to opposite ideologies that cultivated aggravation between countries and resulted in the emergence of numerous conflicts. In such a way, the desire to dominate, increasing power, and ideological differences became the central reasons.
3. One of the central reasons for placing ballistic missiles by the USSR at Cuba was the deployment of similar missiles by the USA in Italy and Turkey. These objects obviously threatened the security of the Soviet Union. Additionally, regarding the basic terms of the Cold War arms race, the power balance had to be observed. For this reason, the USSR used Cuba as the strategic location to place its nuclear weapon and create a particular threat to the security of the USA. At the same time, it was a potent political tool to exercise pressure on opponents by demonstrating power and readiness to preserve the USSRs positions and defend the country.
4. All these phenomena meant that the world was divided between two camps that adhered to different ideologies. The Soviet Union and Eastern Europe were considered socialist states and allies in the struggle against the Western Camp (Park, 2013). At the same time, the USA created its own coalition and initiated the arms race aiming at expelling the USSR and holding the dominant position in the global policy. The U.S. policy was called ‘containment’ which meant that the country proclaimed its central role in struggling against the Soviet Union and the further spread of its influence (Brower & Sanders, 2014). Moreover, the principle of domino was also peculiar to that period of time as one action triggered another and resulted in an appropriate response.
5. One of the central reasons for America’s inability to accept the Bolshevik Revolution is its anti-capitalist ideology. The government of the USA and company owners was concerned about communism in their state. They considered their labor unions a potential threat to capitalism. For this reason, the state was not able to accept the ideas of the Revolution in Russia as it undermined the basics of Western society.
6. Martin Luther King took many ideas and inspiration from Mahatma Gandhi in his struggle against discrimination and segregation. Following these ideas, he gave rise to numerous non-violent campaigns which became part of the U.S. social life of the second half of the 20th century. His ideas altered peoples mentalities and cultures by demonstrating the new way to interact within society and to struggle for their rights. Later, numerous activists followed this approach.

References

Brower, D., & Sanders, T. (2014). The world in the twentieth century: From empires to nations (7th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.

Park, J. (2013). Forward to the future? The democratic peace after the Cold War. Conflict Management and Peace Science, 30(2), 178-194. Web.

Hong, S. (2017). Propaganda leaflets and Cold War frames during the Korean War. Media, War & Conflict. Web.