Introduction
One of the most important historical occurrences in the world is the Berlin crisis. The Berlin airlift which was as a result of Berlin blockade is considered a very serious event in diplomatic relations of the superpowers in history. The Soviet Union had decided to put a blockade on Berlin and this lasted from June 8th to 12th 1949. This was followed by intervention by the US, France and the United Kingdom. The US was very active in this crisis and greatly assisted the Western Berlin to go over the blockade staged by the Soviet Union. The Berliners were forced to tolerate a lot of adversity and suffering of the United States military that supplied them with everything they needed. The USs hoped that the Germans would re-unite but as a non-communist nation. Since the Soviet Union was dominant in Eastern Berlin, The Us was forced to take such a strong stance and assistance. Since the US was against communism, it had to make sure that it prevent that ideology from being spread all over the world by all and any means available and possible.
Historiography
Understanding the event of the cold war has been very tricky, with different people having their own perceptions and suppositions of what was taking place or the causes of conflicts. Essentially there are about four schools that have tried to offer explanations of the occurrences or attempted to interpret them. This paper however focuses on three main schools which include orthodox interpretation, revisionism explanation and the post-revisionism interpretation.
At the end of the Second World War, Germany which had been accused of provoking the wars was defeated. It was then divided into four sections that were to be controlled by the United States, the UK, France and the Soviet Union. The capital city of the country, Berlin was divided into western and eastern Berlin. The Soviet Union occupied the eastern side while the western was in command of the US allies. The west was to be accessed by road, canals, air corridors and railways. Though this was expected top last for a short time and then peace to return to the area. However the intentions of the Soviet Union were very different from what peace would mean to the region and to the world. Germany was to be reunited when the tension of the war was over and under allied corporation (US Air Force Museum 21).
Orthodox interpretation
Disregarding this, the Soviet Union decided to undertake some initiatives to make sure that the communist Germans were dominant in the area and Berlin in particular which the union maintained that was a critical part of their region. Their overall intention was to re-unite those Germans who were pro-communist, an objective that soon placed it at odds with its opponents from the west.
The reason why the orthodox interpretation of the conflict was founded is that the Soviet Union was to be blamed for the conflict. Orthodox school purports that the post second world war was described by cold war and event like Berlin blockade and airlift due to the Stalin’s dedication to territorial expansion communism as it was evident in his violation of Yalta and Potsdam conferences and imposing the Soviet unions authority on the unwilling nations from Eastern Europe. According to orthodox interpretation, the Soviet Unions Ideologies were not for peace but for violence since the resulted in escalation and aggravation of the cold war. Accordingly, William in the Tragedy of Americans Diplomacy, puts up arguments that the cold war conflicts and Berlin airlift was inevitable consequence of the development contradictory US and Soviet Union’s economic interests (Feltus 5).
Emanation of the Berlin blockade was not only a factor of Soviet Union’s imperialism but also the paranoid profile Stalin was claimed to hold. This stringent devotion to the communist doctrine and asserted mental problems Stalin presented made the union imperialistic and unsteady. Orthodox perceptions regard the US as innocent in the conflict and simplify got involved because it was acting on humanitarian grounds following invitation of the harassed nations (Bastian 3).
Revisionism Interpretation
This interpretation came along to dispute some long held assumption by the orthodox theory and only the US’s foreign policies during the cold war period. Led by William Appleman, this theory of interpretation became a classic or a factor of disloyalty. His arguments were that the America were not actually innocent or close to it as far as the conflict of Berlin and other events during cold war were concerned.He states that the Americans were also on the verge to expand their empire as much as the rest of the nations did though they continuously denied this fact (Feltus 5).
The claims made by William were so provocative that he started facing threats since some staunch supporters of America thought of him as being disloyal and even accused his of getting into some kind of treasonous actions. However much US found support that it was being just in its dealings, the theory presented by William soon found enough support and was soon a historical on its own termed the revisionism interpretation. It sought to explain the US foreign relations and the nature of the conflict.
The US was a capitalist economy that is why it was in opposition with communist. Just like Soviet Union, the US was also imperialist. With this reasons, it was very active in instigating and helping to escalate the Berlin airlift incidence. Capitalism had to be expanded.The US was seen to be more dedicated to offering solutions by its allies. However revisionists argue that what the US was doing was actually provoking the conflict since it was very obvious that it held very different views to those of the Soviet Union. In its quest, the US was very aggressive and imperialism could not be hidden or held back since the Truman administration was an expansive one. Therefore having retaliated by military force, the US is equally to blame in the conflict. Basically, its evident that historian do not agree on who is to blame or who should take responsibility as having instigated the war and aggravated the situation(Harrisville 4).
Revisionists’ interpretation saw this perception reach its peak when the US was involved in the Vietnam War. The Americans were seen as comparable to the Russians. Historians usually try to study and analyze whether the conflict could have been avoided or was it really inevitable. However revisionists maintain that the then two superstars are morally comparable (Bastian 3).
The Post-Revisionist interpretation
This is considered the most rational theory to explain why the conflict was provoked and aggravated to extreme reaction by military. The post – revisionism harmonizes the idea of both orthodox and revisionism to bring a balanced rationale of accountability (Bastian 3). As orthodox believes that Leninist philosophy and sinister intensions of the totalitarian community and paranoid Stalin resulted in conflict; revisionists argue that the American run very bad international policies that gave the Russians no real option. Russians had to acquiesce to what American proposed or they could face their wrath (supremacy and aggression). The post-revisionist takes these two ideologies combined and take United States and the Soviet Union as being causes of conflict. This ideology is supported by the evidences provide from the first two. It maintains that the two superpowers by then held very deep seated critical discrepancies like economic ideologies, attitude and objectives (Harrisville 5).
Post – revisionist assessment relied on the mutual misperception and reaction by the US and Soviet Union. From the realistic ideology of the global relationships, Post-revisionists have come to accept the US policy in Europe.However it’s important to realize that the Communist activities were not the main cause of the problems in Western Europe but rather the troublesome consequences of the war on the political, economic and social organization of the Europeans. The US and Russia misunderstood each other and took unsuitable self-protective actions against what they perceived as a threat (Wolk 5).
Conclusion
The three schools of thought believe that Berlin airlift was a very undesirable conflict that should never have been allowed to take place as it revealed that though the Second World War had come to an end, there was possibility that another war could erupt. The originators should therefore take the guilt. The only difference was that on settling on the true cause of the war.
Works Cited
Bastian, Peter. Origin of the Cold War. Historiography. 2001. Web.
Feltus, P. Berlin Airlift. US Centennial of Flight Commission. 2005. Web.
Harrisville, David. Berlin Airlift. 2004. Web.
US Air Force Museum. Berlin Airlift – US Air Force Museum Cold War History Gallery. 2001. Web.
Wolk, Herman., Revisionism and the Cold War. 2003. Web.