Sunday, June 3, 2018

The reason the Cold War never became a hot one is…




My last week’s presentation focused on the Revolutions of 1989. The topic of the fall of communism and the collapse of the Soviet Union was commented on by my classmates, providing great insights. One thing we all agree on, is that neither Goldstein and Keohane, nor Laffey and Weldes are able to provide a full explanation of why communism collapsed. In this week’s blog, I’d like to address the topic through Kenneth Waltz’s article The Origins of War in Neorealist Theory (1988).

 
I’d like to start by pointing out one distinction I often see confused, which is the difference between the Soviet Union (one country) and the Soviet Bloc (the Socialist countries in Eastern Europe, not part of the Soviet Union).

The collapse of the Soviet Union was a confluence of many factors leading to its demise. The unsustainable nature of the communist regime was fueled by economic hardship and ethnic tensions. Later, the collapse of the Soviet Union produced all “new” nation states, returning to their ethnic roots and pursuing their values. In turn, they affected other states and the relations among them.

Yet another explanation is a leader-led change, by President Reagan and Soviet leader Gorbachev, as well as the nuclear arms race (and ultimately deterrence) between the Americans and the Soviets. President Reagan’s preferred method of containment was escalation of military spending, and he was credited for winning the Cold War “by his willingness to spend the Soviets into oblivion through expensive programs such as his Strategic Defense Initiative, or “Star Wars,” as a means of defending the U.S. and its allies from nuclear attack.


Back to Waltz’s article, the characteristics of the bipolar world are: “self-dependence of parties, clarity of dangers, certainty about who has to face them.” Waltz explains that Realist theory draws attention to the crucial role of military technology and strategy, and nuclear weapons dissuade states from going to war much more surely than conventional weapons do. Waltz is a believer that deterrence is not too hard to achieve, when it comes to a nuclear world. Because a country cannot rationally attack unless it believes that success is assured. “A nation will be deterred from attacking even if it believes that there is only a possibility that its adversary will retaliate. Uncertainty of response, not certainty, is required for deterrence because, if retaliation occurs, one risks losing all.”
Waltz believes the reason the Cold War never became a hot one is because of the presence of nuclear weapons. What are your thoughts?
 

Engel, Jeffrey A., Mark Atwood Lawrence, and Andrew Preston, America in the World: A History in Documents from the War with Spain to the War on Terror. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2014.

Kenneth N. Waltz:“The Origins of War in Neorealist Theory,” Journal of Interdisciplinary History 18:4 (1988)

1 comment:

  1. The Cold War did not escalate into a full out war due to several factors including the involvement of nuclear weapons as mentioned in The Origins of War in Neorealist Theory. According to Kenneth Waltz the main reason the cold war tensions remained diffused is because the competition between the United States and the Soviet Union became unmistakable. He states, “a major reason for the prolongation of the postwar peace is the destruction of the old multipolar world in WWII and its replacement by a bipolar one. (Waltz 624)” Waltz asserts that relationships and situations are more manageable in a bipolar word where clarity of dangers are evident. But, he admits that bipolarity alone cannot maintain peace. In fact, it was the added presence of nuclear weapons, the “other great force for peace”, that kept the war between the U.S. and the U.S.S.R. a cold one. In Anarchy is what States Make of It, Alexander Wendt discusses the identity transformation that the Soviet Union underwent and how it contributed to the peace that ensued between U.S. and the U.S.S.R. Mikhail Gorbachev played a key role in abolishing the distrust between the two powers by taking actions that would show the West the Soviet Union could be trusted. For example, by withdrawing from Afghanistan and reducing spending on military weapons. Although the articles by Waltz and Wendt focus on different theories both authors have helped shed light on the changing cold war dynamics that helped establish a new relationship between the U.S. and U.S.S.R which helped prevent the cold war from becoming a hot one.

    References

    Waltz, Kenneth N. "The Origins of War in Neorealist Theory." The Journal of Interdisciplinary History 18, no. 4 (1988): 615-28. doi:10.2307/204817.

    Wendt, Alexander. "Anarchy Is What States Make of It: The Social Construction of Power Politics." International Organization 46, no. 2 (1992): 391-425. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2706858

    ReplyDelete