Political Policies Between The United States and The Soviet Union During the 1970s
One can not effectively interpret world political policies of the 1970's without the inclusion of the relationship known as détente, and the breakdown there of. The breakdown of the 1970's détente can be attributed to many different issues and events. In researching these events the varying opinions from both world superpowers which would establish the failure of détente in history, as a breakdown in communication and talks between the United State's White House and the Soviet Union's Kremlin with the collapse of détente marking the end of the 1970's.
During the 1976 presidential campaign, the tension between the objective of transformation and the importance of coexistence became crucial. Conservatives criticized détente for not moderating the Soviets involvement in the Third World transformation to communism. In the United States, many saw accumulative series of Soviet interventions which involved military means; Angola, Ethiopia, Kampuchea, Afghanistan, as a pattern of Soviet expansion, which was not consistent with détente. Many actually believed that these expansionist moves were encouraged by détente. Ultimately, the expectations that détente would achieve more were held by both powers. It was the failure to satisfy these expectations which led to its demise. Kissinger suggested that "détente, with all its weaknesses, should be judged not against some ideal but against what would have happened in its absence. Détente did not cause the Soviet arms build-up, nor could it have stopped it. However, it may have slowed it down or made it more benign" (Garthoff 1994:1123). Perhaps détente could be viewed, not as a method of preventing or deterring tension which might lead to war, but as a way of postponing their effect until the United States could more effectively deal with them. By 1976, détente was a controversial term with both left and right hands of the disagreement criticizing its development. With the Administration of Jimmy Carter, a campaign for restoring confidence in government institutions and reforming American foreign policy was implemented (Froman 1991:74). President Carter appointed Zbigniew Brzezinski as National Security Adviser and Cyrus Vance as Secretary of State. The ongoing differences between Brzezinski and Vance resulted in turmoil for the Carter administration as well as destroyed Carter's efforts to develop a set of boundaries for the principles of détente.
Détente began to collapse almost as soon as it had begun. Watergate undermined President Richard M.
associated blackness as a curse by god that justifies their lifetime servitude. The black Africans
The presidencies of George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton both exemplify a desire to reshape world affairs after the ending of the Cold War in 1991 and the subsequent dissolution of the Soviet Union. Although the United States had unrivalled economic and power after the war, neither president sought to adopt the aggressive rhetoric of predecessor Ronald Reagan, as it was feared that this may impair relations with nations that the U.S. wanted to maintain. Both Bush and Clinton considered the fostering of positive relationships around the world hugely important on the basis that it was hoped former Soviet states in Europe and countries in East Asia would adopt a democratic political system and laissez-faire neoliberal economy much like the U.S., thereby ensuring the
“The distinct differences in the political systems of the two countries often prevented them from reaching a mutual understanding on key policy issues and even, as in the case of the Cuban missile crisis, brought them to the brink of war” (Library of Congress). The Soviet Union and The United States were complete opposites, The United States was a democracy whereas The Soviet Union was a dictatorship. This only began their differences though, their economies, beliefs, goals, and even their fears, everything about them made them different except for their enemy. The
During the Cold War, the United States engaged in many aggressive policies both at home and abroad, in which to fight communism and the spread of communist ideas. Faced with a new challenge and new global responsibilities, the U.S. needed to retain what it had fought so strongly for in World War II. It needed to contain the communist ideas pouring from the Soviet Union while preventing communist influence at home, without triggering World War III. With the policies of containment, McCarthyism, and brinkmanship, the United States hoped to effectively stop the spread of communism and their newest threat, the Soviet Union. After the war, the United States and the Soviet Union had very different ideas on how to rebuild.
Reagan rose into power after years of turmoil and the American pride was dipping. About a decade before he became president, the war in Viet-Nam was winding down and the troops were returning home to negative demonstrations towards their duty. Then, during the Carter years, America transitioned into a détente policy, which meant that the United States would try to ease the tensions with the Soviet Union by not expanding the military, but not doing anything to acting ease the tension. The idea behind this became known as MAD, mutually assured destruction, (Hannaford) which meant that both the United States and Soviet Union would maintain and even number of nuclear weapons so that if one would fire, the other would be able to fire back equally. Reagan completely disagreed with this philosophy and created a whole new policy when he became president. The foreign policy he established was to create the Reagan Doctrine. According to a speech by Peter Hannaford, the Reagan Doctrine was that America would support democratic movements in any Communist country until that country could enjoy the fruits of freedom (Hannaford). This meant that the United States would help any country who wanted to leave the influence of the Soviet Union and create their own democracy. Also, to counter the Soviet Union and end the Cold War, a race between the United State and Soviet Union to create the best technology and become the world powerhouse, Reagan increased military spending. Ronald Reagan knew that the Soviet Union was unable to keep up the United States in military spending and still having enough funds to fund their own economy to keep it stable. Reagan used this knowledge to convince Congress to increase military budget to build up technology, causing the Soviets decide on what to do. The United States had the funds to continue, but the Soviet Union could not keep up. The breaking point
The Cold War was a post-World War II struggle between the United States. and its allies and the group of nations led by the Soviet Union. Direct military conflict did not occur between the two superpowers, but intense economic and diplomatic struggles erupted in the country. Different interests led to mutual suspicion and hostility in a rising philosophy. The United States played a major role in the ending of the Cold War.
Discussions of the causes of the Cold War are often divisive, creating disparate ideological camps that focus the blame in different directions depending on the academic’s political disposition. One popular argument places the blame largely on the American people, whose emphasis of “strength over compromise” and their deployment of the atomic bomb in the Second World War’s Pacific theatre apparently functioned as two key catalysts to the conflict between US and Soviet powers. This revisionist approach minimizes Stalin’s forceful approach and history of violent leadership throughout World War 2, and focusing instead on President Harry Truman’s apparent insensitivity to “reasonable Soviet security anxieties” in his quest to impose “American interests on the world.” Revisionist historians depict President Truman as a “Cold War monger,” whose unjustified political use of the atomic bomb and ornery diplomatic style forced Russia into the Cold War to oppose the spread of a looming capitalist democratic monopoly. In reality, Truman’s responsibility for the Cold War and the atomic bomb drop should be minimized. Criticisms of Truman’s actions fail to consider that he entered a leadership position set on an ideological collision course, being forced to further an established plan for an atomic monopoly, and deal with a legacy of US-Russian tensions mobilized by Roosevelt prior to his death, all while being influenced by an alarmist and aggressive cabinet. Upon reviewing criticisms of Truman’s negotiations with Soviet diplomat Vyacheslav Molotov and his involvement in the atomic bomb drop, the influence of Roosevelt’s legacy and Truman’s cabinet will be discussed in order to minimize his blame for starting the Cold War.
The idea of freedom and equal opportunity that America was built on has sadly been lost and replaced with a system of quality education only being accessible by the wealthy. In-state college tuition should be free for all students meeting admission requirements, allowing students from the full spectrum of economic backgrounds to have the same opportunity to receive the same education. The incidence of poverty in the U.S. is directly linked to educational level. When a college degree is earned, income levels rise (College Board). The best use of federal government anti-poverty funds is not another welfare or assistance program; it is to make college education affordable for everyone.
In the United Stares, a President compromises a Presidential doctrine with key goals, attitudes, and/or stances for the United States foreign affairs outlines. A lot of the Presidential doctrines came after the cold war and a lot of the doctrines are passed upon the Soviet Union, which was trying to become an independent super power country. The global events of the Cold War started for the Soviet Union right after World War II, in which the Soviets quickly began breaking the agreements made at the 1945 Yalta conference. Instead of holding a free, democratic election in East Europe, the Soviet Union installed a Communist regime in Moscow. The global events during the Cold War which helped and lead to the formation of the Truman Doctrine were,
The future American commuter will undoubtedly have to transition from the use of fossil fuels to new alternatives due to the diminishing availability of the nation’s oil resources. How will America respond to this upcoming issue? It is difficult to predict which alternative fuel source America will ultimately choose, but with the premier of Nissan’s electric powered Leaf and other companies; such as Tesla Motors and Chevy, with their electric cars ready for market, the electric car may be winning the race to become the new standard for the gasoline alternative. Electric cars resolve long standing environmental issues, but it will need to maneuver around many roadblocks to become a marketable consideration for the general public. The cost of electric cars, currently on the market, makes them an impractical purchase for the average consumer. If cost is not the growing concern in today’s economy which prevents the consumer from considering this option; they may deny the technological advance due to battery storage capabilities and the inadequate infrastructure in place to refuel and provide for them.
“What we need to do is really improve energy efficiency standards, develop in full scale renewable and alternative energy and use the one resource we have in abundance, our creativity.” (Lois Capps) There are many ways we can utilize our abundance of creativity. Some have yet to be discovered, but some are being sought out today. One of these is the rise of the electric car. Despite a rough start competing with petroleum cars, electric cars will see a spark in popularity in the automotive market within the next few years with new models being developed and more charge stations being installed world wide. With more efficient ways of harvesting energy, the electric car will see more practical use and make its way into the lives of the average
Shortly after the Kohlsaat race, Thomas Edison said he believed gasoline, not electricity, would provide the dominant power source for the automobile of the future. "As it looks at the present," he s...
[ix] Karl Marx. Manifesto of the Communist Party, ed. Friedrich Engels (The Avalon Project at Yale Law School), Section IV. Position of the Communist In Relation to the Various Existing Opposition Parties.
A: According to Marx, historical materialism has been controversial and is a part of the evil that has caused class struggle. Ruling and lower were two classes that were struggling against each other till one finally wins and becomes the new ruling power. Marx and Eagle clearly highlighted the importance of both classes in Communist Manifesto, “The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles” (pg. 344). Marx, who began his argument by stating his belief that all humans should be able to live equivalent lives under self-governing rule, and materialism, is a system that stops such equality from being achieved. A great example is that Marx connects the existence of classes through the ownership of private property and the desire to gain more property. According to Marx those who own their own property (bourgeoisie) force others who do not have their own property (Proletariat) to work for them. For Marx, materialism is the desire to accrue more possessions and belongings therefore forms an unequal society and if the society is unequal in nature some people will gain more than others and will be in position of power over others. According to Marx, materialism is a key factor of the class struggle and inequality.
Karl Marx may have been the most influential socialist thinker of them all, he referred to his own philosophy as historical materialism, which is thought to be, the evolution of society historically driven by class struggle. According to him, class conflict within capitalism arises because of intensified contradictions between highly productive and socialized production which is performed by the proletariat and the private ownership and the private surplus product/surplus value performed by the small minority of private owners known as the bourgeoisie. When the contradiction becomes apparent to the proletariat, the social unrest...