Post-Cold War Period Causes of Conflict
The end of the Cold War meant that the ideological conflict of
dominance between East (Soviet Union and Eastern Europe) and West (USA
and Western Europe) was over. Contrary to the expectations that world
would be much safer in the post-Cold War, United States and Soviet
Union were faced with new security issues that they did not know how
to deal with.
The objective of this essay is to show that with all these changes
that occurred with the end of the Cold War, causes of the conflict
indeed altered from the classic ones. First the end of the Cold War
and the changes in the world order that followed will be outlined.
Secondly, the increase in wars within states and the question of
whether today's conflicts are, in fact, new, will be discussed.
Finally this essay will argue that there is a new type of threat:
worldwide terrorism, and it will look at what measures are being taken
to tackle this problem.
The end of bipolarism
The democratic countries (USA and Western Europe), enjoyed 50 years of
peace and economic development, because of the measures they took
after the World War II, not to repeat the same mistakes that initiated
the previous wars. They developed a democratic-political culture,
which emphasised respect for human rights, rule of law, civil society,
and independent media. However, apart from 1953, 1956 and 1968, the
eastern bloc enjoyed peace and relative stability as well. The
military power of both the super powers made US and Soviet leaders
very reluctant to start a war. This was clearly illustrated by the
Cuban missile crisis in 1962.
The end of the Cold War end...
... middle of paper ...
... Soon Miss The Cold War (August)
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/foreign/mearsh.htm
Muldoon, J. (1999) The Challenges of Multilateral Diplomacy in 1999,
United Nations Association of USA, (February),
http://www.iwa.org/Publications/Lectures/muldoon.html
Pfetsch, F.R & Ch. Rohloff, Ch. (2001) Global Change, Conflicts and
Conflict Research 'New Data
On Armed Conflict' at the 42nd Annual ISA Convention, Chicago, IL
20-24 (February)
http://www.uni-duisburg.de/Institute/INEF/Intra/debate_Rohloff_Pfetsch.htm
Sens, A G. (2000) Canada on the Security Council :International
Security in the 21 Century:
Challenges facing UN,
http://www.unac.org/en/link_learn/canada/security/21_century.asp.
Snow, D. (1991) The Shape of the Future, The Post-Cold War World;
M.E.Sharpe,
Armonk, New York and London.
The purpose of this essay is to inform on the similarities and differences between systemic and domestic causes of war. According to World Politics by Jeffry Frieden, David Lake, and Kenneth Schultz, systemic causes deal with states that are unitary actors and their interactions with one another. It can deal with a state’s position within international organizations and also their relationships with other states. In contract, domestic causes of war pertain specifically to what goes on internally and factors within a state that may lead to war. Wars that occur between two or more states due to systemic and domestic causes are referred to as interstate wars.
The political ideologies of the USA and of the Soviet Union were of profound significance in the development of the Cold War. Problems between the two power nations arose when America refused to accept the Soviet Union in the international community. The relationship between the USA and the Soviet Union was filled with mutual distrust and hostility. Many historians believe the cold war was “inevitable” between a democratic, capitalist nation and a communist Union. Winston Churchill called the cold war “The balance of terror” (1). Cold war anxieties began to build up with America and the Soviet Union advancing in the arms race for world dominance and supremacy. America feared the spread of Communism
During the late 1940's and the 1950's, the Cold War became increasingly tense. Each side accused the other of wanting to rule the world (Walker 388). Each side believed its political and economic systems were better than the other's. Each strengthened its armed forces. Both sides viewed the Cold War as a dispute between right and wron...
Odd Arne Westad, Director of the Cold War Studies Centre at the London School of Economics and Political Science, explains how the Cold War “shaped the world we live in today — its politics, economics, and military affairs“ (Westad, The Global Cold War, 1). Furthermore, Westad continues, “ the globalization of the Cold War during the last century created foundations” for most of the historic conflicts we see today. The Cold War, asserts Westad, centers on how the Third World policies of the two twentieth-century superpowers — the United States and the Soviet Union — escalates to antipathy and conflict that in the end helped oust one world power while challenging the other. This supplies a universal understanding on the Cold War (Westad, The Global Cold War, 1).
The goal at the end of WWII was prevent further disputes that splashed over a global playing field. Thought to be a goal within reach, it just wasn’t possible. Not even five years later had the Cold War commenced. A war “marked by ideological hostilities and a daunting arms race, [the Cold War] was chiefly between the United States and the Soviet Union and their respective allies” (Goff 282). This global war induced many effects in Europe and East Asia, from division of lands, struggling economies to a massive power struggle for influence. The Cold war was a wrinkle in time that created similarities despite having dissimilar experiences relating to land divisions, economic strife and power struggles.
The ‘Cold War’ is one of the most interesting ‘wars’ fought in world history. The sheer number of countries both directly and indirectly involved is enough to pose the question – To what extent was the Cold War a truly Global War? This essay will examine this idea. It will identify two main areas of argument, focusing on the earlier part of the conflict (1945-1963). Firstly it will examine the growing US and Soviet influence in the world post 1945. Secondly it will examine three main conflicts, the Berlin Blockade, the Korean War and the Cuban Missile Crisis that these two super powers were involved in. Overall this essay will argue that the Cold War was no doubt a truly global war.
The time period between 1945 and 1991 is considered to be the era of the Cold War. The Cold War, known as the conflict between the United States and the Soviet Union, each known during this time as the “super powers”. This conflict consisted of the differing attitudes on the ideological, political, and military interests of these two states and their allies, exte nded around the globe. A common political debate covers the issue of who, if anyone won the Cold War. Many believe the United States won the Cold War since (it) had resulted in the ultimate collapse of the Soviet Union. While others are to believe the United States had not won it as much as the Soviet Union had lost it since they feel Reagan did not end the Cold War, but that he prolonged it (Baylis & Smith, 2001.) This has lead me to believe that there is no winner, only losers of the cold war. The cold war for the Soviet Union was to ensure security, block out capitalism, gain power, and improve their economy. While, on the other hand the United States just wanted to stop the spread of communism, which they felt, would spread rapidly throughout the world if they did not put an end to it soon. Both the United States and the Soviet Union wanted to avoid WWIII in the process of trying to achieve their goals.
The end of the Cold War was one of the most unexpected and important events in geopolitics in the 20th century. The end of the Cold War can be defined as the end of the bipolar power struggle between the United States and the Soviet Union, which had existed since the end of the World War II. The conclusion of the Cold War can be attributed to Gorbachev’s series of liberalizations in the 1980s, which exposed the underlying economic problems in the Soviet Union and Eastern bloc states that had developed in the 1960s and 70s and prevented the USSR from being able to compete with the US as a superpower. Nevertheless, Reagan’s policies of a renewed offensive against communism, Gorbachev’s rejection of the Brezhnev doctrine and the many nationalities
Dwight D. Eisenhower once said, "Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signified, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold but not clothed." There was never a war that this idea can be more correct applied to than the Cold War. According to noted author and Cold War historian Walter Lippman, the Cold War can be defined as a state of tension between states, which behave with great distrust and hostility towards each other, but do not resort to violence. The Cold War encompasses a period from the end of the Second World War (WWII), in 1945, to the fall of the Soviet Union, in 1989. It also encompassed the Korean and Vietnam Wars and other armed conflicts in the Middle East and Africa, that, essentially, were not wars for people but instead for territories and ideologies. "Nevertheless, like its predecessors, the Cold War has been a worldwide power contest in which one expanding power has threatened to make itself predominant, and in which other powers have banded together in a defensive coalition to frustrate it---as was the case before 1815, as was the case in 1914-1918 as was the case from 1939-1945" (Halle 9). From this power contest, the Cold War erupted.
With the shock of two destructive world wars and then the creation of the United Nations, whose aim is to preserve peace, it is unconceivable for these two nations to fight directly in order to promote their own ideology. But the US and the USSR end up to be in competition in numerous ways, particularly in technological and industrial fields. In the same time they start to spread their influence over their former allies. This phenomenon have led to the creation of a bipolar world, divided in two powerful blocs surrounded by buffer zones, and to the beginning of what we call the Cold War because of the absence of direct conflicts between the two nations.
There have been many attempts to explain the origins of the Cold War that developed between the capitalist West and the communist East after the Second World War. Indeed, there is great disagreement in explaining the source for the Cold War; some explanations draw on events pre-1945; some draw only on issues of ideology; others look to economics; security concerns dominate some arguments; personalities are seen as the root cause for some historians. So wide is the range of the historiography of the origins of the Cold War that is has been said "the Cold War has also spawned a war among historians, a controversy over how the Cold War got started, whether or not it was inevitable, and (above all) who bears the main responsibility for starting it" (Hammond 4). There are three main schools of thought in the historiography: the traditional view, known alternatively as the orthodox or liberal view, which finds fault lying mostly with the Russians and deems security concerns to be the root cause of the Cold War; the revisionist view, which argues that it is, in fact, the United States and the West to blame for the Cold War and not the Russians, and cites economic open-door interests for spawning the Cold War; finally, the post-revisionist view which finds fault with both sides in the conflict and points to issues raised both by the traditionalists as well as the revisionists for combining to cause the Cold War. While strong arguments are made by historians writing from the traditionalist school, as well as those writing from the revisionist school, I claim that the viewpoint of the post-revisionists is the most accurate in describing the origins of the Cold War.
The end of the Second World War brought about great change in the world. This was especially true in Europe, where some battles left areas completely devastated. With Hitler regime fallen, it was clear the leaders of not only European nations but other nations like the United States wanted to change the structure of land that was once occupied by the Nazi army. The U.S. and Western Bloc would be in a chess match over this land with the Soviet Union and the Western Bloc. This chess match is better known as the Cold War. The following paragraphs will discuss how this war where no blood was shed played out throughout Europe. These paragraphs will examine and provide examples of how the Cold War created a new a set of geopolitical, social and economic relationships throughout the continent as well as which of these factors was of most importance.
The Cold War did not directly involve Europe, but Europe and its various states were key players and key sources of tension between the two great powers, the USSR and the United States of America. The dates of the beginning and end of the Cold War are debated but 1947-1991 is generally agreed upon. In this paper, I will attempt to outline the events of the Cold War which were relevant to Europe and how this affected European integration and relations. ‘Integration’ here refers to the process of transferring powers of decision-making and implantation from national to supranational level. Europe was weakened after World War Two, especially in contrast with the USSR and the USA. Traditional European hegemony was at an end and Europe had to find a new dynamic without becoming involved in conflict with the two new superpowers.
Whenever world politics is mentioned, the state that appears to be at the apex of affairs is the United States of America, although some will argue that it isn’t. It is paramount we know that the international system is shaped by certain defining events that has lead to some significant changes, particularly those connected with different chapters of violence. Certainly, the world wars of the twentieth century and the more recent war on terror must be included as defining moments. The warning of brute force on a potentially large scale also highlights the vigorousness of the cold war period, which dominated world politics within an interval of four decades. The practice of international relations (IR) was introduced out of a need to discuss the causes of war and the different conditions for calm in the wake of the first world war, and it is relevant we know that this has remained a crucial focus ever since. However, violence is not the only factor capable of causing interruption in the international system. Economic elements also have a remarkable impact. The great depression that happened in the 1920s, and the global financial crises of the contemporary period can be used as examples. Another concurrent problem concerns the environment, with the human climate being one among different number of important concerns for the continuing future of humankind and the planet in general.
The causes of ethnic conflict cannot be generalised to fit all incidents, as the conflicts in Sri