John Lewis Gaddis: The Cold War: A New History

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

The end of World War II has opened a new era in human relations and particularly, how Russians and Americans viewed the new world and each other.

The book by John Lewis Gaddis titled The Cold War gives accounts, different perspectives and analysis, as to what has happened after Hitler and Germany were defeated and what exactly transpired between the two superpowers.

The book not only looks at facts but also tries to explain why things happened the way they did, taking a deeper look into human emotions and governments of countries.

The book starts on a good note by creating a uniting link between Americans and Russians. Both nations were very much ready to start rebuilding the world but it was not as easy as it seemed.

The fear that started spreading became material and filled everyone with feelings of anxiety and lack of knowledge what to expect next. Of course, these sorts of things do not happen without a reason but here, the causes were not so apparent.

From the first triumphant celebrations it was adequate to conclude that the peaceful expectancies from Russian leader Josef Stalin and American, Franklin D. Roosevelt would be quite natural. But it turned out that there was tightness in the first moments of the wars end celebration.

When looking for the beginning stages of the Cold War, John Gaddis reasonably asks of the reasons why the two nations have had separate surrender ceremonies.¹ It is obvious that the feelings that overwhelmed Russians and Americans were somewhat different.

For the Soviet Union, the war was a significant devastation and the amount of people and cities lost was enormous. Russian people felt torn into pieces and at the same time, proud that their unified efforts have helped to end the war.

The Americans felt that they have achieved a great step in the relationship with the Russian people and that it could not have happened without own efforts and cooperation. The first few events proved to be critical for the beginning of the conflict between two nations.

The suspension of shipments by Americans to the Soviets was seen as a specific gesture. For U.S.S.R. people and government this was an uncertain but factual display of some uncertainty and delayed hesitance.

At first glance, these minor events have been signs of animosity that existed between Russians and Americans, despite of winning the war.²

It is obvious that the governments of the two powerful world nations had their own expectations and assumptions, as to what has and might take place after the war was over. This was a political conflict that showed each nation with its unique qualities and differences towards the new world order.

The deep ideological views of the two nations have developed separately and events in each country have shaped what people were expecting of themselves and the governments.

John Gaddis compares the Bolshevik Revolution and the American Revolution as two great turns in each nation but the outcomes have been based on own reasons and expectancies.

The Russian leaders seemed eager to rebuild the world but what really happened, was further segregation and destruction of the order, peace and peoples hopes.

At the time of the Cold war, specifically its start, little was known of the regime that was taking place in the USSR. Even though the majority of people were led to believe that new brighter and better world was being born, the reality was much different.

The authority and truly cruel pressure that took place under the surface, was felt by the Soviet people but not seen from the side. It was known that people were being ruled with an authoritarian power but the interests of the government were not openly revealed which quickly created animosity between two peoples.

John Gaddis compares how the Second World War was fought by Russians in comparison to the Americans. The Soviets have lost 27 million by official counts while Americans, just under 300,000.³

He reiterates that Americans very much had a choice of where and when to fight the battles and the war itself left the United States a country that had all the necessary resources to prosper.

Comparing to the Soviet Union, Americans have achieved a better world while the Soviets were in ruins and had to rebuild everything. This fact alone had placed a dividing line between the two nations and moved each one further away from understanding what had to be done and how.

The tight control that Josef Stalin had over the devastated people was surprising and undeniable. He has commanded for the Soviet troops to continue their pursuits in Iran, demanded control of the Turks and refusal to participate in some matters proposed by the Americans, which have distanced the nations.

The communication and cooperation that was expected by the American government did not take place and this has set even further misunderstanding in the matter of affairs.

An extensive part of the reasons, John Gaddis explains by the way other countries behaved and the actions of the superpowers in relation to smaller nations. These were actions that were not taken directly by the Soviets or Americans but the outcomes and alliances that each nation has had at that time.

The battles that were fought on invisible fronts between the USSR and Americans were numerous. The Korean War was one such example where interests of other countries and nations were involved.⁴ The Cuban Crisis and the Helsinki Process are other examples of indirect action between the powers.

The American government was using its resources to set control while the Soviet one was trying to do the same. Each newly elected government official had predispositions and plans that had their own ways of reaching the desired result.

The overall impression made by John Gaddis of the governments, is that all the conflicts were only a kind of show that seemed to be cutting and ending points in the Cold War.

These were mere isolated events; whereas the causes that led up to these events, as well as what took place after the conflicts died down, were the real perturbations of the Cold War conflict.

This was the time when peoples views of the world emerged. Every nation was in pursuit of its own order for itself and the remaining world. The reputation that the Soviet Union had in Europe was evident. It was respected and people had been given a glance of communism, lured by its benefits.

The rest of the world got the idea of how the Americans were going to set order, having an enormous amount of resources and liberal views of peace and human rights. Even though these between the lines conflicts and differences in opinions and goals might seem minor, they were the majority of what took place in the world.

Peoples personal feelings, dreams and insecurities were spread over large populations of individuals and countries which were fuelling the Cold War and heating up suspicions.

John Gaddis acknowledges that it is not only the governments that partook in the warregimes, personal views of selected groups, local rebellions and the fanatical reach for a better world order have upset the balance within nations and internationally.

Nations and societies were also at war, in their political ideologies, expectancies of peace and avenues of getting or forcing this peace onto others.

It is mentioned how easily the conflict could have been ended but people are often unable to see far into the future and thus, are left to their own intentions in fighting the immediate dangers, which are often produced out of insignificant insecurities and imprecise facts.

This goes to show how much limited cooperation and understanding there was between nations and people. It is shameful that history is full of examples when people acted towards fellow human beings in such a devastating and mistrusting way.

It would be safe to say that the Cold War was not between the two great nations but amounts to all people and their interests, and understating of what the world and life is all about.

These sorts of historical events should become an example of what animosity and antagonism lead to, while they are based on personal insecurities and thought up unreasonable fears.

Reference

Gaddis, John. The Cold War. New York, United States: Penguin Group Incorporated, 2006.

Footnotes

¹ J Gaddis. The Cold War, Penguin Group Incorporated, 2006, p. 6.

² J Gaddis. The Cold War, Penguin Group Incorporated, 2006, p. 7.

³ J Gaddis. The Cold War, Penguin Group Incorporated, 2006, p. 8.

⁴ J Gaddis. The Cold War, Penguin Group Incorporated, 2006, p. 60.

Click Here To Order Now!

John Lewis Gaddis: The Cold War: A New History

Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?

We have qualified writers to help you.

We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.

You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)