An Unnatural Alliance That Was Bound to Fall Apart After the Defeat of the Common Enemy. to What Extent Does This Statement Explain the Origin of the Cold War

In: Historical Events

Submitted By alizeebarth
Words 1809
Pages 8
During the Second World War, the USSR and the USA, the two great nations in the 1940s united each other to defeat their common enemy, Nazi Germany. Their alliance was however ‘unnatural’ as both countries had conflicting ideologies, capitalism vs. communism and both wanted to spread their power and control in the world. Their incompatible ideologies from the start together with their troubled relationship since 1918 when the west intervened on the Russian civil war on behalf of the White Army, created an uneasy alliance in 1941 that that was most certainly ‘bound to fall apart’ when the common enemy was defeated in 1945. In order to come to a conclusion on the extent to which “An unnatural alliance that was bound to fall apart after the defeat of the common enemy” explains the origin of the cold war the essay will be divided into four parts: the opposed ideologies, events from 1919 to 1945, the Yalta and Potsdam conferences, and events subsequent to the conferences until 1949.

The Bolsheviks seized power in 1917 leading to the establishment of the world’s first socialist state whose guiding ideas were those of communism. For the leaders of the western countries these ideas threatened the very basis of their societies, economically and politically, as they followed an ideology of Capitalism. For the USSR, capitalism which revolves around private enterprise was seen as creating divisions between rich and poor and thus the communists believed that all goods should be taken over by the government and distributed to individuals accordingly. (Phillips P4-5). Furthermore, a communist state was a one-party state, with the Communist Party representing the people whereas the West embraced liberal democracies where each person has the freedom to vote, the freedom of speech and freedom of the press. (Rogers, p1). The USA’s and USSR’s later alliance can without doubt be said…...

Similar Documents

"The Long March Was a Retreat That Changed the Destiny of China" to What Extent Do You Agree with This Statement?

...“The Long March was a retreat that changed the destiny of China” To what extent do you agree with this statement? The Long March was an epic journey across China conducted by the Red army in 1934. After the breakdown of the first United Front, Chiang Kai Shek launched an offensive which forced a retreat from Mao and the Red army. This retreat is believed to have lasted for over a year and covered 6000 miles. By the end of the march, of the 80000 marchers who embarked on the journey, only 6000 made it to Yenan. It was a march rich with heroism and hardship. However to call the Long March a retreat that changed the destiny of china is controversial. The term 'destiny' can be interpreted in two different ways. It can be the outcome of the Long March influencing the civil war by 1949 or the world's perspective of China. According to many historians, such as Richard Cavendish, the Long March was a victorious march for Mao and the CCP. It made the survival of the imperiled CCP possible, gave Mao a secure grasp on its leadership and ultimately led to the creation of the People's Republic of China. “As a bulwark of Chinese pride and patriotism, skillfully exploited as such by Mao and his circle”. It is also sometimes believed that the Long March was a seeding machine, one that spread the Marxist ideology and manipulated the opinions of China and Mao across the globe. Before the epic journey began, the CCP was in a quagmire and the Nationalists seemed on the point of......

Words: 1146 - Pages: 5

To What Extent Was the Nuclear Arms Race a Stabilising Factor in the Cold War Between 1949 and 1963? (June 2011)

...To what extent was the nuclear arms race a stabilising factor in the Cold War between 1949 and 1963? (June 2011) The view that the nuclear arms race was a stabilising factor in the Cold War between 1949 and 1963 is a view that should be viewed as correct as the stabilising factors outweigh the de-stabilising factors because a nuclear weapon was never used aggressively. It allowed the Cold War to be just that, a Cold War, and not one of direct aggression between the USSR and the United States. Despite this, the anxiety of both nations increased drastically and there were also de-stabilising factors such as the pressure of domestic politics and the fear of each other from both nation’s publics. Also, the ‘hot wars’ in Korea and Vietnam show that indirect aggression remained. Moreover, Mutually Assured Destruction, or MAD, shows how the nuclear arms race was much more a stabilising factor than a de-stabilising one. There were many de-stabilising factors that occurred due to the nuclear arms race. The secrecy of the two countries was a major issue as it led to constant beliefs that one was in front of the other. An example of this is the ‘missile gap’ of 1957 that led to many Americans believing they were behind Russia in the arms race and therefore pressurised the increased development of nuclear missiles therefore costing the U.S a lot of money. This also shows de-stabilisation as it meant that the missile stockpiles continued to unnecessarily increase therefore......

Words: 936 - Pages: 4

Three Paradigms of Cold War

...            BERNATH LECTURE The New International History of the Cold War: Three (Possible) Paradigms* The Cold War is not what it once was. Not only has the conflict itself been written about in the past tense for more than a decade, but historians’ certainties about the character of the conflict have also begun to blur. The concerns brought on by trends of the past decade – such trifles as globalization, weapons proliferation, and ethnic warfare – have made even old strategy buffs question the degree to which the Cold War ought to be put at the center of the history of the late twentieth century. In this article I will try to show how some people within our field are attempting to meet such queries by reconceptualizing the Cold War as part of contemporary international history. My emphasis will be on issues connecting the Cold War – defined as a political conflict between two power blocs – and some areas of investigation that in my opinion hold much promise for reformulating our views of that conflict, blithely summed up as ideology, technology, and the Third World. I have called this lecture “Three (Possible) Paradigms” not just to avoid making too presumptuous an impression on the audience but also to indicate that my use of the term “paradigm” is slightly different from the one most people have taken over from Thomas Kuhn’s work on scientific revolutions. In the history of science, a paradigm has come to mean a comprehensive explanation, a kind of scientific......

Words: 8015 - Pages: 33

Cold War Breakdown in Alliances

...To what extent were rival ideologies responsible for the breakdown of the relationship between the two superpowers between 1945 and 1949? It was the Truman Doctrine and the Marshall Plan that really split Europe and made the concept of an Iron Curtain permanent during 1947/8. It was the final breakdown of the Allied cooperation over Germany that led to tensions and permanent divisions in the centre of Europe in 1948/9 as witnessed by the Berlin blockade and Allied airlift.  It was the explosion of the Soviet atom bomb and American membership of NATO that created a bi-polar nuclear world during and after 1949. rival ideologies Under President Woodrow Wilson the US had committed itself to liberal internationalism, which promoted democracy and the free enterprise system, while the communist emphasis was upon a world wide class revolution to bring about the socialist future. These conflicting views were less important in the 1920s and 1930s because the Soviet Union was a weak military power and the main threat seemed to come from the right wing ideology of Fascism. However the defeat of these powers by 1945 reopened the ideological sense of difference between the Americans and Russians. hard line anti-Russian views became more influential in Washington by 1945 and George Kennan’s famous “Long Telegram” in 1946 also reinforced the idea that the communists were ideologically hostile to US interests and needed to be contained. ......

Words: 1959 - Pages: 8

Cold War

...How far do you agree that the origins of the Cold War in 1945-6 owed much to ideological differences and little to personalities and conflicting national interests? There is a significant and complex argument into which aspects were the most important in the origins and sowing the seeds that led to the Cold War in the years 1945 and 1946. It is widely perceived that the variances in philosophy was the focal reason, because America and the Soviet Union had virtually polar opposite understandings on how their country should be run and consequently capitalist and communist countries could not co-exist lacking any strain. Nonetheless, it is similarly claimed that the traits of the leaders of the three countries are a substantial influence to the Cold war conflict; Roosevelt and Truman of the United States, Stalin of the USSR and Churchill of the United Kingdom. This is because the attitudes of the three regularly clashed. It is furthermore disputed that national interests of the separate nations throughout and post-World War II formed strains among the countries of the USA and the USSR, since they both saw the others objectives as a danger to their individual national security. To assist the Cold War from occurring, it is said Winston Churchill is the crucial individual due to his ideological differences with Stalin. Churchill’s 1946 ‘Iron Curtain’ speech certainly caused tension: it unveiled to the world Stalin’s increasing “Soviet sphere” and “increasing measure of......

Words: 1953 - Pages: 8

Art of War

...The Art of War, by Sun Tzu 1 The Art of War, by Sun Tzu The Project Gutenberg eBook, The Art of War, by Sun Tzu This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org Title: The Art of War Author: Sun Tzu Translator: Lionel Giles Release Date: May 1994 [eBook 132] [Most recently updated December 28, 2005] Language: English Character set encoding: ISO-646-US (US-ASCII) ***START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE ART OF WAR *** Note: Please see Project Gutenberg's eBook 17405 for a version of this eBook without the Giles commentary (that is, with only the Sun Tzu text). SUN TZU ON THE ART OF WAR The Art of War, by Sun Tzu THE OLDEST MILITARY TREATISE IN THE WORLD Translated from the Chinese with Introduction and Critical Notes BY LIONEL GILES, M.A. Assistant in the Department of Oriental Printed Books and MSS. in the British Museum First Published in 1910 To my brother Captain Valentine Giles, R.G. in the hope that a work 2400 years old may yet contain lessons worth consideration by the soldier of today this translation is affectionately dedicated. Preface to the Project Gutenburg Etext When Lionel Giles began his translation of Sun Tzu's ART OF WAR, the work was virtually unknown in Europe. Its introduction to Europe began in 1782 when a French Jesuit Father living in China,......

Words: 58846 - Pages: 236

Origins of the Cold War

...Origins of the Cold War Author(s): Arthur Schlesinger Jr. Source: Foreign Affairs, Vol. 46, No. 1 (Oct., 1967), pp. 22-52 Published by: Council on Foreign Relations Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20039280 . Accessed: 21/08/2013 03:57 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp . JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org. . Council on Foreign Relations is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Foreign Affairs. http://www.jstor.org This content downloaded from 27.254.22.254 on Wed, 21 Aug 2013 03:57:18 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions THE RUSSIAN REVOLUTION?FIFTY YEARS AFTER ORIGINS OF THE COLD WAR By Arthur THE Cold War Schlesinger, Jr. in its original form was a presumably mortal antagonism, arising in the wake of the Second World War, between two rigidly hostile blocs, one led by the Soviet the other by the United States. For nearly two somber Union, and dangerous decades this antagonism the fears of dominated itmay even, on occasion, have come close to blowing up mankind; the planet. In......

Words: 14176 - Pages: 57

To What Extent Was the Arms Race a Stabilising Factor in the Cold War Between 1949-1963?

...the period of 1949 to 1963, the Arms race was a period were there which saw two superpowers the USA and the USSR increasing their nuclear technology developments. The arms race ultimately prevented tensions from escalating into an actual fully fledged war. On the other hand there were de-stabilising factors that put both countries on the brink of nuclear warfare and the world at risk of annihilation, such as the pressure of domestic politics, hot wars in Korea and Vietnam, and the Cuban missile crisis. Regardless of these factors the war remained a Cold war. This is because the arms race created the most important stabilising factor which was mutually assured destruction. Both superpowers realised the devastating capability of Nuclear weapons and as a result they did not use Nuclear weapons. Therefore the arms race (and fear of the consequences of an arms race) outweighed the other de-stabilising factors to a large extent from 1949 to 1963. An important reason why the arms race was a stabilising factor in the Cold war is because it led to Mutually Assured Destruction. This is based on the idea that the existence of massive nuclear arsenals prevented the conflict between the Soviet Union and the United States from devolving into outright war between the superpowers. The arms race helped to keep the war cold because both Kennedy and Khrushchev's administrations knew that due to the massive nuclear stockpiles on each side, outright war between the two sides would result in both...

Words: 1214 - Pages: 5

‘a Cold War Between East and West Was Inevitable After 1945.’ Do You Agree?

...‘A cold war between East and West was inevitable after 1945.’ Do you agree? Up until May 7th 1945 Germany had been Europe’s main defence against Russian hegemony. Once the Allied defeat of Nazi Germany was complete, this defence no longer existed and the USSR held onto the territorial gains it had made during its monumental war effort. Germany’s fate had not yet been decided but in the meantime it had been divided into four areas by the former Allies. The tension between the remaining post war Superpowers, the United States and The Soviet Union were ever increasing. Britain became economically and militarily dependant on the US as its empire floundered. British rhetoric and ‘scaremongering was born of Britain’s desire to keep America involved in Europe.’ Stalin began to consolidate the Soviet area and the anti-Western language of the Soviet regime became just as scathing as Churchill’s. The ‘Iron Curtain’ was now in place and America, Britain and Russia were coming to realise that their respective ideologies were for the most part irreconcilable. Although it is often said that nothing is inevitable, there are times when the consequences of decisions and policies gather momentum and become an unstoppable force. By considering their differences and how the individual iron willed leaders involved expressed their intentions and shaped their stances against each other it will become apparent that the consequences and the forces that the East and the West put in motion made the......

Words: 2384 - Pages: 10

To What Extent Was the Alliance System to Blame for the Outbreak of War in 1914?

...To what extent was the alliance system to blame for the outbreak of war in 1914? The alliance system is an important factor in the outbreak of war in 1914, however it is only one of the causes of the First Word War and many other factors led to the war. These included militarism and nationalism. However the assassination of the Archduke Franz Ferdinand was the most immediate cause. The alliance system in Europe linked countries together in larger groups. Germany’s alliance with Austria- Hungary was responsible for turning the war into a global crisis instead of a local one. Germany pledged to support Austria unconditionally in Austria’s punishment to Serbia for the Assassination of Franz Ferdinand. Russia sent out a partial mobilization when they heard their ally ( Serbia ) was under threat. This triggered responsive mobilizations against Russia from Austria and Germany. France’s alliance with Russia was then brought into the war. Germanys war plan “The Schlieffen plan” was constructed around the idea that a war with France would mean a war with Russia and vice versa. However Britain debated about entering the war when its ally ( France ) was threatened. They finally decided to join in when Belgian were violated by Germany. Imperialism can also be seen as a cause for the first world war. One example of this would be the Second Moroccan Crisis of 1911. France had sent in troops to Morocco in order to help the Sultans government, however, Germany saw this as...

Words: 934 - Pages: 4

To What Extent Does the Impact of the First World War Explain the Outbreak of Two Revolutions in Russia in 1917?

...To what extent does the impact of the First World War explain the outbreak of two revolutions in Russia in 1917? To an extent, the First World War contributed greatly in the outcome of two revolutions in Russia. This is a result of the war worsening already evident issues in Russia such social, economic and political factors as well as losing support from the peasants and army. It can also be argued that revolution was inevitable as social, economic and political factors throughout the years were bound to end in revolution; the war was just the tipping point. Nonetheless, all these factors link back to a single factor: The weakness of the government. If the government had been stronger, the peasants wouldn’t need to, or be able to, revolt. Primarily, the First World War was arguably a large factor in the outbreak of two revolutions as it lost large amounts of support from Russian civilians. It made already crucial factors worse as the Russian peasants and working class which made up 80% of the population worked longer and harder and yet struggled to find food due to transport being taken over by the military and little food entered the cities, as well as high inflation on food available. This led to large amounts of hostility towards the Russian government and losing large amounts of support. Nonetheless, it can be argued that Russia had experienced many failures before, such as the 1914 Russo-Japanese war; therefore, bad leadership or war failure was not significant......

Words: 956 - Pages: 4

To What Extent Was the Civil War a War over Slavery

...“To what extent was the Civil War a war over slavery?”    In this enlightened age, there are few I believe, but what will acknowledge, that slavery  as an institution, is a moral and political evil in any Country.  Robert E. Lee      620 thousand of ​ soldiers lost their lives,​  war cost 5 billion dollars, large  destructions, especially in the South. 4 million freed slaves by Thirteenth Amendment to  the United States Constitution. Brother shot to brother.  Slavery in America has its origins from the beginning of United States existence.  In nineteenth century U.S could be called as an young country with wide, noble ideas of  independence, equality and economic development; with their own basic law, the first  constitution in the World. Regarding to mentioned words; why was it possible to  America to start Civil War?  The case of America was multi­dimensional. United States Constitution did not explain  laws and behaviour towards black­skinned slaves clearly. The South States of America  were place where slavery flourished. Hosts of latifundiums needed ''hands to work'' –  slaves were the cheapest solution because hosts after buying a slave with reasonabe  price had to care only of the fact that their slave is still alive; they provided slaves with  hunger food rations and water – it was a cheap labour which made large land holdings  profitable. In general opinion this unhumanitarian situation was the reason of Civil War.  But...  Was it that clear?......

Words: 1544 - Pages: 7

Origins of the Cold War

...that the origins of the Cold War in 1945 and 1946 owed much to the ideological differences and little to personalities and conflicting national interests? The origins of the Cold War cannot be denied as being most obviously and most forefront due to the great ideological differences between the USSR’s communism and the USA’s capitalism, such as their complete opposing beliefs over nationalisation and system of government. However National interests, such as the fight over Poland and leaders personalities, such as Truman’s lack of experience in foreign policy cannot be overlooked as important reasons for growing hostilities between superpowers. The vast difference in ideologies is clearly the underlying factor which caused tensions for the superpowers of the world during the Cold War and the years 1945 to 46; however it cannot be denied that personalities of the leaders running these countries, were a contributing reason for the ever growing hostilities between them. Joseph Stalin, leader of the USSR and communist regime, was a figure known for being shrewd, manipulative and ruthless, instantly suggesting that relations with other countries, so different from his, were to be quite strained. Though he was known for these negative traits, he was also commended for his sense of practicality and his skills as an administrator, this suggesting that perhaps his ability to put aside differences, may be better than necessarily believed. It was common knowledge that Stalin was an......

Words: 2497 - Pages: 10

One Significant Change That Has Occurred in the World Between 1900 and 2005. Explain the Impact This Change Has Made on Our Lives and Why It Is an Important Change.

...TWENTIETH-C ENTURY H ISTORY In the series Critical Perspectives on the Past, edited by Susan Porter Benson, Stephen Brier, and Roy Rosenzweig Also in this series: Paula Hamilton and Linda Shopes, eds., Oral History and Public Memories Tiffany Ruby Patterson, Zora Neale Hurston and a History of Southern Life Lisa M. Fine, The Story of Reo Joe: Work, Kin, and Community in Autotown, U.S.A. Van Gosse and Richard Moser, eds., The World the Sixties Made: Politics and Culture in Recent America Joanne Meyerowitz, ed., History and September 11th John McMillian and Paul Buhle, eds., The New Left Revisited David M. Scobey, Empire City: The Making and Meaning of the New York City Landscape Gerda Lerner, Fireweed: A Political Autobiography Allida M. Black, ed., Modern American Queer History Eric Sandweiss, St. Louis: The Evolution of an American Urban Landscape Sam Wineburg, Historical Thinking and Other Unnatural Acts: Charting the Future of Teaching the Past Sharon Hartman Strom, Political Woman: Florence Luscomb and the Legacy of Radical Reform Michael Adas, ed., Agricultural and Pastoral Societies in Ancient and Classical History Jack Metzgar, Striking Steel: Solidarity Remembered Janis Appier, Policing Women: The Sexual Politics of Law Enforcement and the LAPD Allen Hunter, ed., Rethinking the Cold War Eric Foner, ed., The New American History. Revised and Expanded Edition E SSAYS ON _ T WENTIETH- C ENTURY H ISTORY Edited by Michael......

Words: 163893 - Pages: 656

Cold War

...To what extent was the Cold War a result of World War II? Often, the Cold War is said to have been a result of World War 2, but the question arises of whether there would have been an inevitable confrontation between the USSR and the US without the Second World War. World War II ended with the US and the USSR as the only remaining world superpowers. The ravaged post WWII Europe provided perfect conditions for imperialism by other countries; the war created two superpowers with polarizing ideals. Due to the defeat of Nazi Germany and the concern over post-war settlements, their alliance broke and the ideals of communism and capitalism turned on each other in an effort to control the influence in Europe. The arguments pertaining to the Cold War being the cause of the Second World War has been going on for a long time and historians can’t seem to agree one perspective. The cold war was, to a certain extent, the result of the Second World War. World War II saw the union of the western democracies and the USSR due to the desire to defeat a common enemy: fascism and Germany. Once the war was over, this interdependency ended as well, and the result was two victorious superpowers with totally different ideologies. The defeat of fascism meant the ideologies of capitalism and communism were left to clash. The US used the atomic bomb on Japan without informing her ally, the USSR. Not only was this lack of contact a problem, but it also marked the start of a deadly new arms......

Words: 971 - Pages: 4