Category: Cold War

Introduction

The international system after the Cold War changed the appearance of the world order drastically. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the United States of America remained the most powerful country in the world. Thus, the post-Cold War era is characterized by the so-called unipolarity.

The dominant position of the United States is a distinctive feature of the post-Cold War period. The relationships between the US and the Middle East underwent significant modifications too. The shift from bipolar to unipolar international system gave the USA possibility to promote the peaceful coexistence of countries in the Middle East, but the failure to resolve the Arab-Israeli conflict and the terrorist attacks on 9/11 made the USA prove its supremacy as a superpower.

The International System during the Cold War

The aim of the essay is to evaluate the impact of the shift from bipolar to the unipolar international system on the Middle East. Consequently, it is necessary to provide an overview of the Cold War period first. The Cold War commenced after the end of the Second World War. The timeframe of this period is 1945-1989. After the overthrow of the Nazis Germany, the whole world expected to enter the era of democracy.

Nevertheless, the most devastating human war gave rise to the next conflict. The principal feature of the Cold War world was the rivalry between the United Stated of America and the former USSR (Phillips 2001). One should understand that the Cold War was not a conflict only between the USA and the USSR. The whole world was divided into two parts. It was the conflict of ideologies.

Several reasons preceded the development of the world order during the Cold War. The role of the USSR in the Second World War predetermined its future position. Thus, the country enlarged its territories after the war. Besides, the USSRs army achieved the victory at Stalingrad, and it became the watershed moment of the war.

This event changed the perception of the USSR. It was known as the country that changed the march of history. Also, the USSRs ideological system began spreading in European countries. The last significant factor was that the demobilization did not concern the Red Army at the end of the war.

The Soviet Union had a superiority regarding military power (CVCE 2015). At the same time, the Soviet Union damages were the most devastating. The country lost almost thirty million people during the war. Its industry was utterly ruined. The USSR had no air or navy forces. It had no nuclear weapon too. Despite all these disadvantages, the country remained the other significant power due to its contributions to the war (Painter & Leffler 2005).

The role of the United States of America in the WWII was also significant. Although the country did not have substantial losses, it contributed substantially to the achievement of the common victory. Almost all US Army was demobilized a few months before the end of the war. Nevertheless, the US Army remained the strongest in the world. The US air and navy forces were incomparable to any other in the world.

Also, the economy of the country was the most powerful. The war destroyed everything in other European countries while the US retained its industrial and agricultural capacities. As a result, the dollar became the primary international currency, and the country established its position in the arena of global politics (CVCE 2015).

Even more, the country benefited significantly from the war. Thus, its gross domestic product almost doubled during the period of the WWII. The country was the only producer of nuclear weapons until 1949 (Painter & Leffler 2005).

National Interests in the Middle East

The Cold War did not begin in the Middle East. Nevertheless, the Middle East always a played a substantial part in the international affairs. Khalidi (2009) provides readers with four main points concerning the role of the Middle East in the international system during the Cold War.

The author starts with the fact that territories of the Middle East have always been used for particular activities of European states. Khalidi (2009, p. 15) writes that the Middle East was an important arena for the operation of the traditional European state system, but Middle Eastern countries were not fully accepted as a part of that system. The author provides the Ottoman Empire as the example. The Empire controlled vast areas in the southern Europe.

Although European states participated in the intensive rivalry with the Ottoman Empire, the latter was not regarded as a part of the international system despite its might. Khalidi (2009) also emphasizes the fact that the European countries do not want to recognize non-Christian societies as equal.

The second point refers to the idea of the promotion of independence and integration. During the Cold War period, the United Nations Charter and the Covenant of the League of Nations were proclaimed. According to these treaties, countries unified as participants in the new international order. Again, some states of the Middle East were not included in these agreements. For example, the Palestinians, the Armenians, and the Kurds were not given the possibility to enjoy the international world order (Khalidi 2009).

The third idea of the author concerns the role of the Middle East territories in Western rivalries. Despite changes in the international system, the Middle East remained the primary field for the struggle between two supreme powers  the US and the Soviet Union. Thus, both states aimed at achieving dominance over the region. Khalidi (2009, p. 16) claims, states and peoples in the Middle East were essential objects but were generally not allowed to be subjects, of international relations.

The bipolar Cold War engaged such countries as Iraq, Iran, Turkey, Syria, Israel, and Egypt in the rivalry. Consequently, people and weak states were victims of the polarized world. Finally, the author points at the ineffectiveness of the international systems. The task of the international unions such as United Nations is to promote a peaceful existence of all countries.

It is logical that United Nations should restrict USAs intentions to became a dominant power in the Middle East. On the contrary, it seemed that such actions were even favored. The degree to which the US was allowed to act in Iraq and Palestine should serve as examples of the statement.

Plans for the Middle East

Both the United States of America and the Soviet Union had particular intentions concerning the Middle East. However, their targets were not interconnected initially. Before the development of rivalry with the USSR, Americas primary interest in the Middle East concerned oil.

According to Sasley (2014), the United States produced two-thirds of the total oil output in the world. A few years later, the government realized that the source of petroleum was not endless. The only solution was to look for foreign sources of oil. Otherwise, America would lose its power.

Initially, the Soviet Union had domestic motives for the expansion in the Middle East (Dannreuther 2012). As Sasley (2014) writes, all Russian czars shared the idea of the necessity to expand Russian territories. Central Asia and the Middle East were ideal areas for expansion.

However, the plan was difficult to realize because of crucial differences between nations. Also, Communists were afraid of potential rebels. The competition between countries began when both the US and the Soviet Union realized the need to prevent the expansion of the rival state. Haliday (2005) differentiates four stages of the Cold War that are characterized by particular effects on the Middle East.

The first phase commenced immediately after the end of the WWII in 1945 and lasted until 1955. The conflict occurred in the northern tier  non-Arab countries (Turkey and Iran) that underwent massive devastation from both the USSR and the USA (Harbutt 2010). During the second stage, the USSR enhanced the power of several radical countries of the Middle East including Syria, Iraq, and Egypt. At the same time, the USA supported Jordan and Saudi Arabia (conservative countries).

This period resulted in deep crisis known as the Arab Cold War (Immerman & Goedde 2013). The next stage started in 1975 and lasted until 1985. It was the period of the most intense rivalry between the US and the USSR. During that phase, the relationships between countries of the Middle East aggravated. It resulted in the protracted Afghanistan war. According to Ajami (1978), such situation led to the end of the pan-Arabism.

The decline of the Muslim order and unity was caused by rivalry between the US and the USSR, the Palestine defeat, the Six Day War, and the Arab-Israeli conflict. The last stage had positive effects on the Middle East. Mikhail Gorbachev became the leader of the USSR.

He promoted the idea of new thinking. As Zubok (2007, p. 304) writes, this man [Mikhail Gorbachev] did more than anyone else to the end of the Cold War between East and West. Gorbachevs political activity resulted in the recognition of Israel by PLO, the end of the Iraq-Iran war, the withdrawal of Soviet troops from Afghanistan, and the unity of two Yemens (Haliday 2005).

The International System during the Post-Cold War Period

The Cold War ended with the collapse of the Soviet Union. As a result, only one major power left  the USA. The international system shifted from bipolar to unipolar. The end of the Cold War had both positive and adverse effects on the world and the Middle East, in particular. On the one hand, the rivalry between ideologies ended. Consequently, conflicts between them ended too. On the contrary, other conflicts arose, especially in post-Soviet areas (Yilmaz 2008).

Monteiro (2012) defines three distinctive features of the unipolar system. First, an inter-state system presupposes the peaceful coexistence of many states. Second, the unipolar system is anarchic. Anarchy means the inability to control all places in the world at the same time. Third, power is not balanced in the unipolar system due to the lack of competition. Once there is a competitive force, it is no longer a unipolar system.

The impact of the USAs dominance on the Middle East

The history of the Middle East changed drastically since the end of the Cold War. The United States of America increased its hegemony in the Middle East region. There were no rivals to oppose the country. As a result, countries of the Middle East fell under the influence of the US. The history of the USAs impact on the Middle East during the post-Cold War era concerns four major events.

These events include the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, the Israeli-Palestinian Declaration of Principles, terrorist attack on September 9 in 2001, and the occupation of Iraq in 2003. All these experiences are extremely controversial from the point of view of their effectiveness and necessity.

On the one hand, the US promoted peace in the Middle East and opposed terrorist organizations. On the contrary, the US followed particular national purposes and interfered in the political system of the Middle East. In the following part of the paper, all main events will be examined separately.

The Iraqi Invasion of Kuwait

Saddam Hussein, being the president of Iraq, initiated the invasion of Kuwait by Iraqi troops in 1990. Hussein engaged one hundred thousand troops to invade small Kuwait. The latter had no more than fifteen thousand troops to oppose Iraqi forces (Rice 2009). The reason for conflict referred to Iraqs urgent need to stabilize its economy. After the war in 1988, Iraq was bankrupt. Kuwait was rich in oil resources.

Iraqs government claimed to Kuwait as a territory of Iraq. Initially, the United Stated did not interfere in the conflict. Together with UN, they imposed sanctions on Iraq and followed the policy of condemnation. Nevertheless, such reaction did not bring any result. Later, Saudi Arabia, the neighbor of Kuwait, asked the US to provide military assistance. The US became interested in the protection of Kuwait as far as it was close to Saudi Arabia.

As far as Kuwait was not far from Saudi Arabias oil fields, Hussein had the opportunity to seize them as well. Consequently, there was a need to react adequately. The US initiated the mission known as Operation Desert Storm to prevent the invasion (Gulf War, n.d.). Kuwait was liberated although the conflict was not resolved. This event aggravated the relationships between Iraq and the US. On the other hand, the US protected rights of the state and promoted peace in the Middle East.

The Israeli-Palestinian Declaration of Principles

The US participated in the long-lasting Arab-Israeli conflict since its inception. In the post-Cold War period, the US aimed at promoting peace in both Israel and Palestine. The interference of the US positively affected this issue. The USA, being the superpower, did not need Israel to oppose the Soviet Union anymore. At the same time, Palestine lost the support of the USSR and was more open to collaboration (Ross 2010).

Consequently, the USA promoted the collaboration. The USA insisted on negotiations. As a result, both countries recognized each other according to the Israeli-Palestinian Declaration of Principles in 1993. (Beinin & Hajjar 2014). Unfortunately, armistice did not last for a long time. In September 2000, the second intifada (military resistance) started again. This event became one of the prerequisites that changed the USs attitude towards the Middle East.

9/11 and the US occupation of Iraq in 2003

Terrorist attacks in 2001 altered the USAs intentions towards the Middle East. At September 11, two hijacked planes were purposely directed into twin towers of the World Trade Centre (McGoldrick 2004). This event was extremely stressful for the whole world. It undermined hope into bright future. The superpower of the world, the USA, turned out to be vulnerable to terrorist attacks.

As Rice (2008, p. 5) stated, the United States of America supported the Middle East for sixty years, but after September 11, it became increasingly apparent that this old bargain had produced false stability. This event made President Bush proclaim the War on Terror and change the foreign policy towards the Middle East. The USA aimed at proving its superiority and ability to protect residents of the country.

Events of 9/11 were directly connected to the occupation of Iraq in 2003. President Bush accused Saddam Hussein in the organization of the terrorist attack. Nevertheless, these claims remained unproven though they led to the invasion of Iraq. According to Hinnebusch (2007), there were other motives for the invasion.

The advantageous location of the Middle East countries and the hegemony over oil market were unacceptable for the USA. Besides, the country faced the urgent need to increase its oil bases. Iraq had the second largest reserve of petroleum in the world. As far as Saddam Hussein hold the office of president, it was impossible to come to the agreement. Thus, the war with Iraq as a terrorist country was the ideal solution to the problem.

Conclusion

During the Cold War, the rivalry between the USA and the Soviet Union aggravated the situation in many countries in the Middle East. The end of the Cold War led to the formation of one superpower, the USA, and its dominance in the international arena. The USA assisted the Middle East in opposing Iraqs invasion of Kuwait and resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Nevertheless, the terrorist attacks on September 11 changed the USAs foreign policy drastically.

Reference List

Ajami, F 1978, The End of Pan-Arabism, Foreign Affairs, vol. 57, no. 2, pp. 355-373.

Beinin, J & Hajjar, L 2014, Palestine, Israel, and the Arab-Israeli Conflict. Web.

CVCE 2015, The Cold War. Web.

Dannreuther, R 2012, Russia and the Middle East: A Cold War Paradigm, Europe-Asia Studies, vol. 64, no. 3, pp. 543-560.

Gulf War. n.d. Web.

Haliday, F 2005, The Middle East in International Relations, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Harbutt, F 2010, Yalta 1945: Europe and America at the Crossroads, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Hinnebusch, R 2007, The American Invasion of Iraq: Causes and Consequences, Perceptions, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 9-27.

Immerman, R & Goedde, P 2013, The Oxford Handbook of the Cold War, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Khalidi, T 2009, Sowing Crisis, Beacon Press, Boston.

McGoldrick, D 2004, From 9-11 to Iraq War 2003, Hart Publishing, Oxford.

Monteiro, N 2012, Unrest Assured, International Security, vol. 36, no. 3, pp. 9-40.

Painter, D & Leffler, M 2005, Origins of the Cold War, Routledge, London.

Phillips, S 2001, The Cold War: Conflict In Europe and Asia, Heinemann, Frankfurt.

Rice, C 2008, Rethinking the National Interest: American Realism for a New World, Foreign Affairs, vol. 87, no. 4, pp. 1-10.

Rice, E 2009, Overview of the Persian Gulf War, 1990, Mitchell Lane Publishers, Inc., Newark.

Ross, S 2010, The Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, Hachette, Paris.

Sasley, B 2014, The Cold War in the Middle East, Mason Crest, Broomall.

Yilmaz, M 2008, The New World Order: an Outline of the Post-Cold War Era, Turkish Journal of International Relations, vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 44-58.

Zubok, V 2007, A Failed Empire: A Soviet Union in the Cold War from Stalin to Gorbachev, University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill.

Introduction

The world order is an essential phenomenon in international politics because it helps structure various affairs among states and avoid severe disputes. After World War II ended, the United States and the Soviet Union dealt with establishing the order as they were the most powerful nation. The collapse of the USSR in the 1990s strengthened the position of the USA in the whole world. However, the information above does not mean that the US is the hegemon having no influential competitors. At present, the rise of China is considered a great challenge for the existing world order. It refers to the fact that Chinas aggressive domestic and foreign policies can make the USA respond sharply to them. This state of affairs is said to result in the second Cold War, this time between the United States and China. Thus, it is necessary to apply the concepts of liberalism and constructivism to understand the real reasons and probable consequences of the rise of China for the world.

Theoretical Approaches

Liberalism is a requested political approach that is applied by many developed states. This theory is based on such concepts as equality, freedom of speech, private property, and anti-war movements. According to Doyle, it is not a homogenous phenomenon since it is represented by liberal pacifism, liberal imperialism, and liberal internationalism, each of which has its own peculiarities.¹ On the one hand, liberal pacifism stipulates that countries are peaceful and do not initiate aggression of any kind. It is based on capitalism and democracy, which explains the unattractiveness of war for these states. Warfighting rarely happens to be beneficial, both economically and socially. On the other hand, liberal imperialism justifies and welcomes expansion. This expansion is said to be a response of a nation to the existence of other states with the same objectives.² In turn, liberal internationalism is the combination of the previous two. Thus, Ikenberry mentions that this theory makes states cooperate to achieve mutual goals.³ However, Doyle argues that many liberal nations have fought wars with non-liberal ones because of the conflict of interest.⁴ Thus, different kinds of liberalism represent various approaches to international politics.

At the same time, constructivism represents a different political thought. This theory supposes that identities are of crucial importance in international politics since they help states realize their positions and relations in the world.⁵ These identities help nations make decisions and expect appropriate actions from other countries. In addition to that, constructionists emphasize that both material and discursive power are required to be a fully-fledged member of international politics.⁶ When everything is evident with the material strength, discursive one stands for the significance of knowledge and ideology. Finally, constructivism explains that both foreign and domestic social practices are principal for a state to shape its foreign policy actions.⁷ In other words, various social shocks can make a country follow either a moderate or sharp strategy in the domain of international politics.

The Rise of China

The rise of China is considered a substantial issue because it can bring some changes to the world order. This term mainly refers to developments seen in various economic spheres of the Asian country. Furthermore, the state implements foreign policy decisions that evoke severe concerns in the USA. It refers to the fact that Chinas aggression is said to focus on reshaping the distribution of powers in East Asia.⁸ In addition to that, one should not forget that some economic and political tensions exist between Beijing and Washington. For example, higher tariffs and appropriate limitations on some Chinese products prove this state of affairs. What is more, this situation is evolving against the background of precise social problems within China. If the US responds to this sharply, it is possible to expect another Cold War that will have negative consequences for the whole world.

Case Analysis

Both liberalism and constructionism can be used to explain Chinas actions outlined above. On the one hand, liberal imperialism is suitable to justify the Chinese foreign policy. It refers to the fact that Beijing sees that other states strengthen their positions, which makes China expand their interests to get an impact on the region of East Asia. At the same time, liberal internationalism stipulates that various visions of the world order can be a significant reason for China to enter a war against the US. On the other hand, constructivism mentions that the Chinese foreign policy is a response to some domestic affairs. Beijing realizes its identity and that of the United States, which makes it unreasonable to initiate severe conflicts.

Even though each theory has some value in understanding the case above, constructivism seems to be the most suitable. It refers to the fact that Chinese aggression is said to be diversionary. At present, Xi Jinping, the Chinese leader, is facing some problems with the elite because of his anti-corruption campaign and desire to rule for life⁹. Thus, he needs an external threat that would consolidate society and deflect attention from these domestic affairs. This decision would influence ideology, and this is another characteristic feature of constructivism. The information above makes it clear that China does not have direct intentions to enter a war against the US. However, some aggressive foreign policy actions can evoke the United States to take sharp retaliatory measures that would escalate the existing tension.

Conclusion

International politics is a complex phenomenon that is represented by many issues. Now, the rise of China is the most challenging question for the whole world. The Chinese foreign policy is considered by the US as reshaping the existing distribution of powers in East Asia, which can have negative consequences. Two political theories can be used to analyze this case, and they are liberalism and constructivism. At the same time, the latter is said to be the most suitable because it explains that the Chinese foreign policy is a result of its domestic issues. Thus, it is possible to avoid any war between China and the USA if Washington realizes the reasons for the rise of China.

Bibliography

Carter, Erin B. Diversionary Aggression in Chinese Foreign Policy.Brookings Institution, 2019. Web.

Doyle, Michael W. Liberal Internationalism: Peace, War and Democracy.The Nobel Prize. 2019. Web.

Hopf, Ted. The Promise of Constructivism in International Relations Theory. International Security 23, no. 1 (1998): 171200.

Ikenberry, John G. The End of Liberal International Order? International Affairs 94, no. 1 (2018): 723. Web.

Footnotes

1. Michael W. Doyle, Liberal Internationalism: Peace, War and Democracy, The Nobel Prize, Web.
2. Doyle, Liberal Internationalism: Peace, War and Democracy, para. 17.
3. John G. Ikenberry, The End of Liberal International Order? International Affairs 94, no. 1 (2018): 12, Web.
4. Doyle, Liberal Internationalism: Peace, War and Democracy, para. 25.
5. Ted Hopf, The Promise of Constructivism in International Relations Theory, International Security 23, no. 1 (1998): 175.
6. Hopf, The Promise of Constructivism, 177.
7. Hopf, The Promise of Constructivism, 179.
8. Erin B. Carter, Diversionary Aggression in Chinese Foreign Policy, Brookings Institution, 2019, 1, Web.
9. Carter, Diversionary Aggression in Chinese Foreign Policy, 1.

Introduction

This paper is about Oleg Penkovsky and his profound contributions to the UK and US military intelligence. He is considered one of the most valuable double agents during the Cold War because the information he provided was critical to the United States throughout the Cuban Missile Crisis. The political race of the Soviet Union and the United States began after the end of the Second World War. It was a confrontation between the two states in economic and military spheres.

The Cold War lasted until 1989, and observing countries chose allies based on their interests. The culmination of these hostile relations occurred in the 60s. During the Caribbean Crisis, the whole world was on the verge of the start of the Third World War. Self-preservation driven by the principle of mutually assured destruction helped the sides to avoid nuclear confrontation.

The USSR and the USA tried to gain leadership on the world stage, and at that time, it was not without espionage. The task of spies was to obtain secret intelligence about the enemy, particularly data on military research and experiments. Penkovsky offered his service to the UK through a British businessman named Greville Wynne. He then, between the spring of 1961 and the autumn of 1962, passed a substantial number of photographs of classified documents to the British intelligence before being captured and executed by the Soviet government.

Summary

Oleg Penkovsky was born in the Caucasus region in 1919. His father died during the hostilities of the civil war, and his mother had to raise him alone. After high school, Penkovsky enrolled in a military school in Kyiv. He participated in the Second World War, and by the age of 30, Penkovsky already became a colonel. In 1953, Penkovsky began working in GRU and was sent to work in Turkey as a senior assistant of the diplomatic representative at the Soviet Embassy. His first alleged attempts to make contacts with foreign intelligence agencies took place in Turkey.

In 1960, Penkovsky started working as a deputy director in the foreign affairs department of the Office of International Relations. Officially, the purpose of the organization was the promotion of cooperation with other countries in all sectors. Special attention was paid to attracting foreign scientists to scientific research, but in fact, the spies traveled abroad to acquire intelligence on the latest technologies and developments. Penkovsky began working for British intelligence in 1960. He was paid well, but his account was registered in a foreign bank, and the spy needed to emigrate to be able to use his financial resources. Penkovsky was arrested and executed after the discovery of his connections with an uncovered MI6 agent Janet Chisholm.

Recruitment

On May 1, 1960, during a traditional military parade in Moscow, an American aircraft was shot down in the sky over Sverdlovsk. Pilot Francis Powers survived but was captured by the Soviet forces. This provided the Soviets with undeniable evidence of persistent US espionage activities against their country. A month later, through a group of American students in Moscow, a letter was relayed to the US embassy. In the communication, details of Powers capture and imprisonment were contained which have not been publicly disclosed by Soviet authorities. The letter presented an offer of cooperation and espionage against the Soviets. When US officials received Penkovskys message, it was determined that he was not a basic operative but had potential access to valuable classified information.

Towards the end of 1960, Penkovsky was contacted by British intelligence to discuss cooperation. Greville Wynn, a prominent English businessman in the USSR with ties to British intelligence acted as the middleman for the MI6. As part of a Soviet delegation to London in April of 1961, Penkovsky had the first meeting with CIA and MI6 officers. The Soviet colonel discussed terms of the mutual partnership with American and British agents. It is then that he was provided with tools such as a camera, tape recorder, notebooks with encrypted information, encryption keys for transmitting data, and the contact information for Western agents in Moscow. Penkovsky was initially given the codename Alex, and a year later, Hero.

It is not thoroughly known what motivated Penkovsky to betray his country, but according to his own words at the trials, he loved easy life, money, and women. He also wanted to feel himself an important person by sending classified information to foreign intelligence agencies. During the trials, Penkovsky confessed that he was promised a rank of colonel from both American and British military forces.

Discovery

Until 1959, the KGB believed that Western intelligence meets with their agents only outside the borders, and within the USSR, they limit themselves to communications through mailboxes. In October 1959, however, Colonel Pyotr Popov, who was recruited six years before by the CIA in Vienna, was arrested for espionage. It was discovered that Popov occasionally met with his foreign agent in Moscow personally. Then in 1960, the head of KGB subdivision General Oleg Gribanov decided to monitor the US and British embassies periodically. These large-scale operations were carried out twice a year for two weeks, with observations being made both on the embassy staff and the family members of the diplomats, as well as correspondents and businesspeople living in Moscow.

During one of these operations in early 1962, KGB started watching Janet Chisholm, the wife of an SIS agent, just at the moment when she left the embassy to get another batch of microfilms from Penkovsky. An observer witnessed one-touch contact between Chisholm and an unknown Russian. From that moment on, KGB knew that SIS had an agent in Moscow, but they did not know who that was. However, it remains unclear to this day how Penkovsky was compromised, and both his experience and caution do not suggest that errors in tradecraft were involved. A Soviet double agent George Blake is suspected of turning over information regarding Penkovskys activities.

With the help of a camera with remote control, which was installed in the flower box on Penkovskys neighbors window, the security officers managed to photograph how he carefully tuned the radio to a specific wave, listened, and then made some notes. In July 1962, when English businessman Wynn arrived in Moscow, Penkovsky held a meeting in Wynns hotel room in Hotel Ukraine. To silence the conversation, Penkovsky turned the radio on and opened the faucets in the bathroom. But KGB still managed to decipher the fragments of the conversation, and this was the first evidence that Penkovsky was engaged in espionage. After secretly installing a camera in his apartment, the KGB witnessed him engaging with spyware and equipment but did not arrest him immediately, in the hope that Penkovsky would lead them to a larger spy group.

Just at the moment when the Caribbean crisis reached its critical point, a miniature camera, which was hidden in the ceiling of Penkovskys apartment, allowed KGB to see how he was observing a fake passport. Fearing that Penkovsky was preparing to leave the territory of the USSR, Gribanov ordered his immediate arrest. In October 1962, KGB arrested Penkovsky on his way to work.

Conclusion

Oleg Penkovsky spied for the UK and the US during a crucial period of the Cold War. Known as one of the most prominent spies of the 20th century, his role in the Cuban missile crisis has been described as of great importance. Other specialists have questioned this statement, while some think that apart from working for the West, Penkovsky was a tool of Soviet strategic deception. Official documents on US and British intelligence in the Cold War have highlighted the significance of Penkovskys espionage and the accomplishments of Western intelligence agencies in aiding his role. Others have doubted Penkovskys credibility, stating he may have worked against the west. Numerous arguments and counterarguments about the benefit of Penkovskys spying have been given, especially concerning the Cuban missile crisis.

Penkovskys real-time impact is not apparent, but he indirectly played a vital role in resolving the Cuban Missile Crisis. The information that came from him may have shaped Kennedys rhetoric on Carribean Crisis. Eventually, what gave him away was the practice of one-touch contacts. The same method uncovered Popov, so intelligence bureaus had to develop better ways of passing classified information between their agents. Some, however, claim that it was a Soviet agent in the U.S. who uncovered Penkovsky.

Penkovsky is an example of vigorous self-acclamation because there is an impression that financial benefits were not the ultimate motivating factor, and that he may have had psychological problems. There is no single cause that may force a person to deceive and abandon his cultural values. Penkovsky was ready to leave his family, never to return. There are also numerous conspiracy theories claiming the whole story around Penkovsky was a KGB operation. Facts state the opposite, however, that Penkovsky was put on trial, and by the courts decision was sentenced to death.

Bibliography

Duns, Jeremy. Dead Drop: The True Story of Oleg Penkovsky and the Cold Wars Most Dangerous Operation. London: Simon and Schuster, 2013.

Garthoff, Raymond L. Documenting the Cuban Missile Crisis. Diplomatic History 24, no. 2 (2000): 297-303.

A Journey Through the Cold War: A Memoir of Containment and Coexistence. Harrisonburg: Brookings Institution Press, 2004.

George, Alice L. Awaiting Armageddon: How Americans Faced the Cuban Missile Crisis. Chapel Hill: UNC Press Books, 2004.

Hitz, Frederick P. The Myths and Current Reality of Espionage. International Journal of Intelligence and Counter Intelligence 18, no. 4 (2005): 730-733.

Trenear-Harvey, Glenmore S. Historical Dictionary of Atomic Espionage. Lanham: Scarecrow Press, 2011.

Scott, Len. The Spy Who Wanted to Save the World. Intelligence and National Security 8, no. 4 (1993): 138-146.

Espionage and the Cold War: Oleg Penkovsky and the Cuban Missile Crisis. Intelligence and National Security 14, no. 3 (1999): 23-47.

Oleg Penkovsky, British Intelligence and the Cuban Missile Crisis. In Learning from the Secret Past: Cases in British Intelligence History, edited by Robert Dover and Michael S. Goodman, 344-374. Washington: Georgetown University Press, 2011.

The CIA and Oleg Penkovsky, 1961-63. In Exploring Intelligence Archives, edited by R. Gerald Hughes, 141-172. London: Routledge, 2008.

Introduction

Historians attribute the occurrence of the conflicts in the 20^th and 21^st centuries to misperceptions among the nations. In this view, historians argue that Word War I, World War II, and the Cold War among significant wars rode on misperceptions among the major nations of the world. Misperception is a nations wrongful interpretation of the other nations in terms of actions and behavior.

The misperception between the Soviet Union and U.S after the WW II was the main cause of Cold War. After the WW II, the America rose to become the most powerful nation in the world, however, the USSR perceived this negatively, which resulted into fierce rivalry between the two nations and the war hang on this misperception.

Misperception; the cause of the Cold War

After the WW II, America emerged the most powerful country. Being the most powerful in the world therefore, the U.S was determined to spread the doctrine of capitalism to most nations in Europe. The USSR perceived this move as the United States attempt to control and colonize the other nations.

Since colonization and its effects, had spread across the world towards the end of First World War, USSR did not want the U.S. to bring back such situation in the world. In response, USSR began to spread communism to the close allies of the U.S. According to Ingimundarson, the Soviet Union started to spread communism to the Western Europe countries, which were U.S capitalist territories (1994, p.56).

Since the U.S was committed to combat any international influence in the region, severe rivalry between the two powers arose. Because of the superiority the U.S had gained in terms of economics and politics, USSR viewed it as a threat to communism in the world. In order to strengthen communism, USSR stretched beyond Europe with particular target to the U.S capitalist territories.

This led to clash of the two powers in Asia where communism controlled China and Korea. On its side, the U.S viewed USSRs communism as outdated and autocratic and the U.S authorities had to do whatever possible to decimate its spread.

The U.S government developed Marshal Plan through which it provided support to the European nations and the rest of the world to discourage the spread of communism and embrace capitalism. Therefore, the rivalries preceding the Cold War were result of misperceptions between the USSR and US.

The two powers misperceived the technological advancement by the either side. In a step to strengthen its security, USSR invested significantly in military technologies. It was the first to design one of the most powerful weapons in history. In fact, the U.S started making hydrogen bombs immediately after USSR had constructed its own.

The U.S perceived the USSRs military expansion as a threat to its security and that of the world. As a result, the U.S government strongly invested in armament and by the end of 1980s, its nuclear arsenal had greatly grown. Economically, the U.S technological advancement in economy elicited uncertainties to the USSR authorities. To USSR, the economic expansion aimed to attract the third world countries into capitalism.

Since the expansion of capitalism created discontent among the Soviets, they developed competitive economic strategies. This further increased rivalry between the two nations, which precipitated into Cold war.

Stein clarifies that, in order to maintain its economic dominance in Europe, America developed the Marshal Plan that offered financial support to these regions to ensure that they purchased the U.S products (1992, p. 470). However, Soviet Union viewed this as a means to spread Americas dominance in the world.

The plausible truth is; Americas Marshal Plan was just a marketing strategy to capture and control a considerable international market. The plan did not aim to colonize any country at all. Due to their misperception, USSR vetoed its states from this plan.

The continued logic implantations between the belligerents resulted into growth in antagonism. The antagonistic activities led to formation of two rival groups in the world: the communist and the capitalist communities. The division of Germany into West and East blocks through the Berlin wall evidenced this rivalry.

Conclusion

The wrongful judgment of the other nations and their acts is what historians refer to as misperception. The Cold War occurred as result of the misperception between the USSR and the U.S. The Soviet Union viewed the U.S economic expansion as strategy to colonize the world while the U.S perceived the USSRs communism as a threat to the expansion of capitalism.

Moreover, the U.S viewed USSRs military advancement as a threat to its close allies such as Western Europe and Asia. The U.S technological advancement elicited discontent among the Soviet Union territories and resulted into competitive responses. The Soviet Unions ascend into the moon was purposely to set standards and challenge the U.S technological achievements.

Because of these misperceptions, rivalry grew between the belligerents in support of their ideological allies. These rivalries led into splitting of Germany. They further resulted into arms race between the capitalists and communists, which culminated into what historians have come to refer to as the Cold War. It is therefore justifiable that misperception played a major role in the Cold war.

References

Ingimundarson, V. (1994). Cold War Misperceptions: The Communist and Western Responses to the East German Refugee Crisis in 1953. Journal of Contemporary History, 29(3), 463-481.

Stein, A. A. (1992). When Misperception Matters. Journal of World Politics, 34(4), 41-103.

Most countries of the world were significantly influenced by World Wars I and II and other major conflicts. In particular, Japan bore the greatest brunt of the Second World War and was forced to surrender in 1945 (Sebata, 2010). Virtually all countries sought to enhance their national intelligence services for purpose of self-defense. However, after the WWII, Japan embarked on more international-friendly policies.

Its foreign policies were harmonized with those of the United States and the United Nations which promoted cooperation among countries of the world. During the Cold War, Japan subscribed to the interests of the Western world especially in dealing with threats from the Soviet Union (Sebata, 2010).

Having assumed a relatively peaceful stand, Japan was able to recover from the impacts of WWII to become one of the most powerful countries in the world at the end of the Cold War in early 1990s (Hayashi, 2006). Japans international policies during this period were geared towards enhancing economic and technological growth. The essay explores how the role of Japan has evolved since the end of the Cold War.

Japanese foreign policy drastically changed soon after the end of the Cold War. The government declared its support for global peace advocated for by the United Nations. Japan started sending its troops to war-torn countries in the 1990s and beginning of the 21^st century (Hayashi, 2006).

In the meantime, the country sought to reform its national security and intelligence services which had collapsed due to continued threats from the US. This was triggered by the launching of ballistic missile, Tepodong I, fired over its territory by North Korea in August 1998 (Sebata, 2010). The East Asian region became a point of focus for Japan since it was also not in good terms with China.

It resolved to launch its reconnaissance satellites. By March 2003, it had launched two of the current four satellites. With the threats posed by international terrorism, Japan has continued to improve its security and level of intelligence since the end of the Cold War. These efforts, however, have been faced with the difficulty of implementation of proposed policy reforms.

It is evident that Japans regional and international roles and responsibilities have expanded significantly since the conclusion of the Cold War (Hayashi, 2006). Unlike the combative spirit during the Cold War period, Japan has resorted to the promotion of developmental efforts at the international level. Some countries have regarded these as reconciliatory initiatives to apologize for past mistakes (Sebata, 2010).

After the Cold War, Japan has modeled itself as a democratic state and has sought, together with the US, to spread this to other parts of the world. The country has also campaigned for the respect of human rights and dignity as well as the liberalization of world economy. This indicates that Japan has not only sought to pursue its own best interests but also those of the world at large.

In general, Japan has moved from its reactive role to a more assertive and proactive role since the end of the Cold War (Hayashi, 2006). Rather than wait for guidance from the United States, it is now making authentic contributions to the global community. Asia has for a long time been characterized by selfish interests of member countries especially during the Cold War period.

European countries have pulled their resources for a common course and mission, ranging from economic cooperation to security matters (Hayashi, 2006). With an aim of introducing a sense of unity in the East Asia region, Japan has proposed the formation of a Pacific Alliance.

Aware of the great challenge of developing shared values and interests, Japan is determined to create a political and security framework for the Asian region. This will go a long way in the development of quality human resource, advanced research opportunities, as well as intellectual and technological contribution that will in turn aid in creating a peaceful world.

Reference List

Hayashi, S., 2006. Japan and East Asian monetary regionalism: towards a proactive leadership role? Taylor & Francis.

Sebata, T., 2010. Japans defense policy and bureaucratic politics, 1976-2007. University Press of America.

Introduction

The cold war is a historical event that took place between1945 to 1960. This is a period where there was an intense conflict between the nations in the Soviet Union (communist nations) and the democratic nations (for example, United States of America). The war is perceived to have started because the democratic nations and the communists nations had two different systems of government and neither of the two governments could compromise theirs to follow another (Gasiorowski 1998, 6).

Other factors that contributed to the war include; economic indifference where U.S wanted the world to practice free trade while the Soviet union wanted nothing to do with international trade, the power rivalry where each of the nations wanted to dominate the other, another cause of the war was that the Russians, a member of the Soviet Union had extended Its influence to Europe which displeased many politicians in the united states advocating for the resistance against Russian expansion.

It was then in 1947 when the United States secretary of state, George Marshall announced that the United States would aid in the regaining of a well economic trend in the world but laid conditions that implied the European countries that were to get their aid from U.S would have to disclose their economic records to the united states a move that the Soviet union regarded as intrusion of states affair.

Together with many other factors the Soviet Union declined U.S offer but America, Britain and other nations got together to form the military alliances that resulted to the cold war.

When it came to Middle East, the Americans and British had their own reason to not favor the influence of the Russian spreading across the region. Britain and the United States had certain interests on the Iranian soil including the oilfields. To prevent Iran from falling into the hands of the USSR and to recover the oil company, the British and Americans responded by helping in the coup. The Iranian coup de tat of 1953 set the stage for this Islamic revolution that would come twenty six years later.

When the weak Mosaddeqs government nationalized a British oil company, Afterwards in 1979, the virulent anti American Islamic regime ousted the Shah, who was an American sympathizer. It is thus practical enough to hypothesize that the coup, brought about by the cold war (Amuzegar 1991, 28; Curtis 2007).

Iranian revolution is also called the Islamic revolution. It can also be referred to as the 1979 revolution. 1979 is the year which the Iranian monarch was ended by the emergence of the Islamic Republic. This phenomenon was preceded by demonstration against the monarch in the year 1978 (Ruud 2008, 454).

The main difference with this revolution and other world revolutions was that this revolution was not caused by normal factors like the under privileged classes opposing oppression from the elite class of people nor was it because of issues of inequality, but it was seen different from other revolutions experienced there before in countries like France and the US. This revolution was supported by the whole society from the rich to the poor all these people revolted against their own state governance (Iran Chamber Society, 2010).

Despite this lack of customary causes, the revolution resulted into rigorous changes within a short time. It was a massive and popular revolution that ended up toppling the system of monarch led by Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi. Thus, the revolution oversaw the replacement of the modernizing monarch by a theocracy. It is therefore believed that the cold war was a recipe for the Islamic revolution.

Summary of the evidence

This study tries to explain how the major superpowers who were once allies during the Second World War influenced the emergence of the Iranian revolution. As a matter of fact, the end of the Second World War was a precursor to the beginning of the cold war. As already stated, Cold War started as a result of hostile relationships between the United States of America and the former USSR. The conflict arose due to issues related to sharing the plunder of the Second World War.

Since Iran was one of the victims of the plunder, the United States wanted to avoid the fall of Iran into Russias hands. The U.S. and Britain strengthened their interests in Iranian oil by overthrowing the democratically elected civil government and helping an American friendly government seize control of Iran. By doing this, Americans were trying to spread their influence into Iranian soil thereby blocking the USSR influence (Nayeri & Nasab 2006, 7).

However, more than two decades after, the Iranian government faced strong rebellion because of its monarch system and the anti-American movements, in 1979; the same government of the Shah was overthrown by the Iranian revolution that oversaw the reinstatement of a religious system of governance that persists up to date (Houghton 2001, 74).

The Iranian coup de tat of 1953

The Americans and the British joined in the cold war in order to have control over the Iranians oil, because at the set time the Russians were gaining control over Iranian oil fields (Gottfried 2003, 18).

Mosaddeq and his colleagues wanted to attain a complete oil independence to establish a lasting democratic government in Iran. This objective was obliterated by the 1953 coup de tat that was carried out by a combination of domestic and foreign forces. The 1953 coup marked the first important turning point in post war Iranian history (Gasiorowski & Byrne 2004, 11).

After Iranian Prime minister, Mohammad Mossadegh, was ousted from office, Shah Pahlavi assumed his position. Shah Pahlavi was actively involved in the coup of 1953. He was a pro-American figure who received a lot of support from the United States in return.

After the Iranian coup, he began projects that aimed at westernizing Iran in all sectors including academic institutions. The shah wanted the universities to follow after the highly esteemed United States universities. The 1960s saw the adoption import substitution industrialization approach to development.

Enormous efforts were being made to industrialize Iran by building factories to ensure that goods no longer had to be imported to Iran. Thus, he wanted the goods to be produced within its borders (Wagner, H. 46). As a result, there were several huge construction projects that were launched in Tehran. Roads, dams, railways, airports and hospitals were built because of this initiative.

Oil output also increased, thereby guaranteeing greater revenue for Iran. To expound on the success of the Shahs ambitious project, Iran was able to rise from the smallest oil producing and exporting country in 1960, during the formation of OPEC, to one of the largest in 1967. The shah saw Irans oil as a way for the country to change the global political dynamics (Hogan 1992, 153; Kinzer 2008, 59). His strength of leadership was obliterated after the Islamic revolution that oversaw his downfall.

Evaluation of sources

During the research of the study, a number of reference books were used including other reference material like the periodicals in the internet, and journals about Iranians Revolution among others.

Specifically, from an online periodical titled MacroHistory and world report: The Iranian revolution the author has cited the precise happenings dates as to why and how the revolution took place in Iran. The article has elaborated profoundly the happenings before up to the time the revolution was said to have taken place at a point the author states, After returning to power in 1954, the shah launched an effort to modernize Iran economically and socially.

He was seeking to balance his increase in power with changes, which would be favored by the normal Iran people. Another reference material used was the Encyclopedia of the Cold War, Volume 1 that clearly brings out the facts about Iranian revolution. The book is written in simple English that as a reader I was able to understand it very well. It defines the historic times events between 1945 and 1991 when the United States was in collusion with a group of nations that dominated world politics the USSR.

From this reading, discussions of how states joined together to act against the other in way to show who was more superior are clearly brought out it also examines how nations continuous anxiety arose, widened and eventually calmed down. The author of the book is keen to note the time line of each occurring event: The 1960s and 1970s saw significant rise in the observance of religion in part as a reaction to Shahs reforms whish directly targeted the clergy and the core supporters (Wagner 2010, 53).

He also examines the military (CIA) efforts that contributed to the success of the coup that heard planned on including the diplomatic help from states that saw Iran not falling into Russians hands together with the evolution of the political arrears in Iran not forgetting its impact to the people of Iran. Using a geopolitical style of writing, the author is able to capture the readers attention to try and help the reader get to know the perspective of all the nations that participated in the cold war.

From the two sources it is clear that as a researcher, is well equipped to analyze whether the Cold War had any impact to the revolution of Iran. The accounts produced were meaning full to the coming up with the study above. Without the referencing over the accounts mentioned in the study, the events would be seen as unclear occurrences that leaves a reader having doubts as to whether the events that have been mentioned are true or just a story has been made up (Macrohistory and world report, 2011).

Analysis

When doing the research going through the historical context is quite important as the researcher gathers information and facts necessary to support the research question. When using a historical context, one needs to note the precise dates to establish the sequence of events instead of having vague dates.

Knowing the historical background of an event from a historical context makes it easier to analyze the event thoroughly and more accurately. Hence, by considering historical context during a study it means there is essential balanced view to critically analyze the event or happening since there is enough evidence to prove its a true happening and the information present is usually needed for its restoration. The analysis of a historical context forms the base of the study conducted.

Conclusion

The cold war between Russia, the United States and Britain, and the Mosaddeq government played a major role in the onset of the 1953 Iranian coup that led to the subsequent downfall of the Shah Pahlavis government and the revolution of Iran came to birth. Pahlavi was a pro-American figure who had good diplomatic relationship with the United States.

As a result the United States through the CIA helped the Shah oust Mosaddeq from the prime ministers position through an organized institutional coup. The main reason for this action was because Mosaddeqs government had nationalized British property. Mosaddeqs government was also weak and the U.S. and Britain feared that Iran would fall into Russias hands.

Shah Pahlavi succeeded in the coup and engaged in major infrastructural and economic developments. However, not every Iranian citizen benefited from his projects.

Consequently, students started demonstrating thereby paving way for stronger anti-Shah campaigns. The Americans overlooked the strength of these anti-Shah protests. Mainly who were the conservative Shiite Muslims who wanted their nation to be governed using Islamic Law. This led to the Islamic revolution that oversaw the ousting of the Shah in 1979.

The revolution in 1979 had been supported for by practically every person in the Iranian society. Though during that time there were conflicts within some Muslims groups to mention: Islamic tendencies that included Islamists, Marxist-Islamic and democratic-Islamic and Marxist-Leninist tendencies that included fadaI, Tudeh, Maoist, and others this conflict was seen not to be major as compared to the Shahs rule that they wanted to over through. These groups did not let their conflicts deter them from overthrowing Shahs governance. Instead, they united together in efforts to bring down the Shahs governance and overthrowing the state.

Although there were several Muslims who were of no particular tendencies, they were also said to participate in the overthrowing of Shahs governance in Iran. These people were regarded as the modern middleclass people who single solidly objected the removal of shah but were threatened to be accused of treason if they didnt join the rest of their Muslim brothers in removing Shah from power.

References

Amuzegar, J., 1991. The Dynamics of the Iranian Revolution: The Pahlavis Triumph And Tragedy. New York: State University of New York Press.

Curtis, M., 2007. The Coup in Iran, 1953. WordPress. Web.

Gasiorowski, M. & Byrne, M., 2004. Mohammad Mosaddeo and the 1953 Coup in Iran. Syracuse: Syracuse University Press.

Gasiorowski, M., 1998. The 1953 coup de tat in Iran. Department of political sciences, Louisiana State University. Web.

Gottfried, T., 2003. The cold war: the rise and fall of the Soviet Union. Brookfield, Connecticut: Twenty first century books.

Hogan, M., 1992. The End of the Cold War: Its Meaning and Implications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Houghton, D., 2001. US Foreign Policy and the Iranian Hostage Crisis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Iran Chamber Society, 2010. A Short Account of 1953 Coup. Iran Chamber Society. Web.

Kinzer, S. 2008. All the Shahs Men: an American Coup and the Roots of Middle East Terror. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.

Macrohistory and world report, 2011. The Iranian revolution. Macrohistory and world report. Web.

Nayeri, K. & Nasab, A., 2006. The Rise and fall of the 1979 Iranian Revolution: Its Lessons for Today. Google Documents. Web.

Ruud van D., 2008. Encyclopedia of the Cold War, volume 1. Philadelphia, PA: Tailor & Francis.

Wagner, H., 2010. The Iranian Revolution. New York: Infobase Publishing.

Introduction

Economic issues formed a core axis in defining power structure in the expansive Europe. The French revolution, for instance, was based on economic issues in France. (John 117) After the war, immense ideological shift emerged in the European nations. Most countries realigned their policies and ideology in tandem with the new political and socio-economic dispensation presented by the prevailing post-war conditions. (John 187)

After the war, the nations faced humongous economic slump, the pecuniary implications of the war took toll on the European Nations. Industries were affected with decline in business; there was thus an urgent need to resuscitate the civilian apathy in the region.

Cold war

An ideological dialectics emerged between the USSR and the US that polarized Europe into blocks. Factually speaking it was based on economic issues.

The emergent of capitalists who believed on a free market economy and the socialists who emphasised on the need to control the market structures catapulted Europe into an economical and industrial frenzy. The ideological inclination of European countries during the cold war defined the government of the day. (John 78)

Emergence of NATO, brainchild of North America, and the Warsaw pact, championed by the USSR led to a significant epoch in the region. The Eastern Europe aligned itself towards the USSR and were signatories of the Warsaw pact. It included such countries such as Bulgaria, Hungary, East Germany, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Romania; The NATO housed the Western Europe countries.

The orientation of the European nations in relation to the cold war greatly influenced the membership of both the NATO alliance and the Warsaw pact; USSR and the US were in a rush to attract the European nations under their influence. It would be very accurate therefore to argue that the two treaties were based on how the European nations read and balanced the equation of Communism and Capitalism.(John 97)

The formation of the UN in 1945, delivered an ideology in the post war era that remains significant in Europes history. The emergence of Human rights and freedom activism played a leading role in the post war era.

European governments responded differently at the inception of this ideology that opened up the socio-political space in Europe, one arm believed in civil liberty based on the respect for human dignity and social emancipation, the other axis of Europe ignored human rights and pursued governance where the civil participation was limited to the lowest level.

Germany, United Kingdom and Italy

Germany remained heavily polarised into western and eastern blocks according to their orientation in the Capitalism-communism axis. The Eastern bloc leaning towards the USSR while Western Germany were capitalists. End of cold war saw the demolition of the wall followed by immense industrial and market rationalization (John 101)

The UK ended the war with very large debts, they eventually withdrew from the lend lease program where they were to purchase American goods as the Americans offer them aid. One year after the war, the government introduced bread rationing. Policy changes took form to accommodate the nationalisation of industries. (John 179)

Italy underwent rapid economic rise after the war. It formally joined the European community in 1958; however, in 1970s and 1980s, Italy faced immense unrest after the actions of the Leftists Red brigades. Currently, Europe is facing an economic slump of unprecedented quotient.

Works cited

Merriman, John M.. A history of modern Europe: from the French Revolution to the present.. 3rd ed. New York: W.W. Norton, 2010.print

Introduction

The period of the Cold War can be considered the time of depression or the time of dramatic progress and changes. As two superpowers competed in all possible domains, it was apparent that athletic fitness and physical training could become the same premises for a competition as the arms race or other areas where some rivalry between the United States of America and the Soviet Union occurred.

As such, Thomas M. Hunt analyzes the rise of competition in the field of physical training, especially in Olympic Games in the period of the Cold War. The author claims that the time of Lyndon B. Johnson presidential administration shifted the priorities in the sports national policy and vision of sports rivalry in the United States.

Analysis of the thesis

Addressing the subject in terms of federal initiatives during the 1960s, this article will argue that the years of the Lyndon B. Johnson presidential administration served as an important transition period between competing visions of American sport policy (Hunt 274).

Though Hunt suggests that vision of the rivalry in sport shifted in the years of Johnson administration, this change had efficient premises and was a matter of time. I believe that the thesis is rather strong though it makes the readers think about other factors that could have contributed to reorganization of the sports policy in the United States.

However, the thesis in this article is well-though and formulated on the basis of an introductory part where the author explains his point of view. For instance, Hunt discussed rivalry between two superpowers in the period of Cold War and inferred from it that sport policy is another area for competition and that the administration of Lyndon B. Johnson contributed greatly to shifts made in physical training policy and vision of the conflict between the Soviet Union and the United States.

Evidence to support the thesis

Hunt uses reports and facts to support the thesis why I believe that the entire discussion of the topic lacks analysis of other perspectives that could be interesting in this issue. First, the author mentions Kennedys attempts to propagate physical fitness as a way to make the mute conflict even more tensed as well as Eisenhowers vision of the level of physical fitness in the national framework.

As such, Kennedy claimed that Communist system possesses the vigor and determination necessary to satisfy awakening aspirations for progress (Hunt 275) which can be treated as a way to make people more ideologically concerned with their physical fitness in order to be ready to reflect the enemys aggression. On the other hand, this fact supports the ideas introduced in the thesis: Cold War period shifted priorities and the nation became more concerned with the rivalry in the domain of sport policy and Olympic Games.

The rivalry in physical fitness could also reflect the desires of the nation and its administration to attain superiority and show that the American people can succeed in other areas than technological development and arms race.

Hunt did not discuss rivalry broadly in other domains in terms of failures and victories of each side while other factors could be essential for Johnson administration to bring the concept of physical fitness into a brand-new level. The war in Vietnam was not as effective as the Americans thought it to be and thousands of people were not satisfied with the policies of the President administration to get involved into other military conflicts.

As such, the only way to distract the population from the administration was to give people another enemy to fight against. Consequently, physical fitness concept and sport policies, as well as competitions in the international athletic arena, became the primary goal of all people whereas this strategy was not more than a mere propaganda.

Two superpowers in the period of Cold War were in the condition of permanent stress and every event was treated as a chance to demonstrate superiority over the rival. The arms race is the most essential domain in which no winner could be while physical fitness and sports competitions became a matter of efforts, propaganda, sacrifice, and many other issues that became important for people who thought about the conflict and believed it necessary to do everything to support their compatriots.

Hunt analyzes the emergence of physical fitness concept and its increasing importance in the period of Cold War which is the strength of the authors argument while every domain was the field of battle and people specializing in different domains were encouraged to perform a labor feat as a means to demonstrate patriotism and loyalty to the country.

In this respect the weakness of the argument is that it could have focused on physical fitness and sport policy as one of numerous displays of the Cold War but not emphasize that the President Johnson and his administration catalyzed desire of the American people to win all the competitions in sport by means of telling them that it is great to develop physical fitness.

Conclusion

The tension apparent for the period of Cold War can be evaluated with regard to achievements in different domains though Hunt attempts to prove that sport policies are the result of shifts in the consciousness of the president administration in the years of Johnson when the matter of physical fitness and victories at the Olympics were considered a feat in the name of the country.

The evidence is rather convincing, while many other ideas emerge while reading the article. The author focuses on the sports policies and tries to identify who began the shift in the domain whereas there are other important factors that could have been evaluated in terms of contribution to the development of sports propaganda.

Work Cited

Hunt, Thomas M. American sport policy and the cultural Cold War: The Lyndon B. Johnson presidential years. Journal of Sport History, 33.3: 273-297. Print.

Americas corporate connections and role to Hitlers Holocaust

The role that corporate America (the likes of IBM, General Motors, the Rockefeller Foundation, Ford Motor Company and the Carnegie Institute of Science) played on Hitlers Holocaust cut across corporate, academic and financial relations. This was evident in the 1920s and 1930s leading up to the Second World War.

The relations were also seen during the war. However, a question still lingers on whether the German genocidal desires would have taken place without this help from corporate America. Black states that the holocaust would always have occurred with or without assistance from America, however, the assistance the Hitler regime did receive, enormously magnified the astronomical dimensions and statistics of that genocide (45).

Black outlines the role of Carnegie Institute of Science, and Eugenics, in the plot to create a master race. According to Black, Hitlers war against humanity was always wrapped in pseudo-academics, falsely medicalized, coated with fallacious race science and twisted intellectualism (39).

Hitlers desire to create a race that represented him and his interests according to Black was postulated that heredity not only transmitted physical features, such as hair color and height, but mental, emotional and creative qualities as well (15, 459). Eugenics refers to the study of all agencies under social control which can improve or impair the racial quality of future generations (18).

The holocaust was carried out by Hitler and his cohorts. He victimized a whole continent and turned Germans against a whole race and finally exterminated millions of Jews in his pursuit in creation of a master race. But this cannot be said to have started with him. The notion of a white, blond-haired, blue-eyed master Nordic race didnt originate with Hitler.

The idea was created in the United States, and cultivated in California, decades before Hitler came to power. Californian eugenicists, played an important, although little known role in the American eugenics movements campaign for ethnic cleansing (27).

These corporate firms knowingly committed themselves to supporting Hitlers barbaric action in Europe. From Fords, Jew hatred and political racism-Hitler was especially, personal had a high regard for the anti-Semitism of Henry Ford-; to the Carnegies involvement in creation of a Master Race; the relationship between Rockefeller and Joseph Mengele; and GMs Motorization of the Reich.

Ironically, most of these corporations have admitted their crimes and apologized. This includes Ford, Carnegie, Rockefeller and even General Motors. Only IBM has remained silent a decade after the revelations of its genocidal conduct first became known (Black 180).

IBM Germany, known in those days as Deutsche Hollerith Maschinen Gesellschaft, or Dehomag, did not simply sell the Reich machines and then walk away. IBMs German subsidiary in full knowledge of its New York headquarters, enthusiastically custom-designed complex devices and specialized applications as an official corporate undertaking for the Reich.

Dehomags top management was comprised of openly rabid Nazis who were arrested after the war for their Party affiliation. IBM NY always understood-from the outset in 1933- that it was courting and doing business with the upper echelon of the Nazi Party. The company leveraged its Nazi Party connections to continuously enhance its business relationship with Hitlers Reich, in Germany and throughout Nazi-dominated Europe (Black 59).

Corporate America was mainly driven by realizing profits for their organizations. Black stated that each of these corporations had a direct involvement in the actual genocide perpetrated by Hitler against the Jews (423).

COINTELPRO and its main purpose

COINTELPRO or better known as Counter Intelligence Program was widely used by the FBI-Federal Bureau of Investigation- especially during the 1960s and 1970s. It is characterized by a series of covert and in most cases illegal ventures being carried out by the United States of Americas FBI in opposition to domestic groups.

These ventures were aimed at providing surveillance, infiltration, discrediting, and disruption of domestic political organizations (Friedman 237). Among the strategies the FBI used by utilizing COINTELPRO were, discrediting of targets through psychological warfare; smearing reputations through forged letters; harassment and aggravation; use of extralegal violence and assassinations; planting false reports in the media; and unlawful imprisonment/detention (Zinn and Arnove, 507).

These covert operations mainly took place between the period after the Second World War and the beginning of the cold war. They became widespread between 1956 and 1971 even though the Federal Bureau of Investigation has made use of clandestine operations to counter domestic political groupings since it was set up (Friedman 271).

Friedman stated that the main purpose of COINTELPRO was to neutralize political dissidents, and that the formal COINTELPROs rationales of 1956-1971 were broadly targeted against radical political organizations; for instance, in the early 50s, the Communist Party was declared illegal in the United States (236). COINTELPRO was mainly driven by the urge to protecting national security, preventing violence, and maintaining the existing social and political order (Zinn and Arnove, 507).

During the period between 1960 and 1970, the role of the FBIs COINTELPRO program was involved in neutralizing individual leaders such as; Black Liberators such as; Martin Luther King Jr., Malcolm X, Stokely Carmichael, H. Rap Brown, Elijah Muhammad, Maxwell Stanford, Dick Gregory, Huey Newton, David Hilliard; and Key Activists such as, Tom Hayden, David Dellinger, Jane Fonda, John Lennon, Jean Seberg, David Herreshoff, David Simpson among others (Zinn and Arnove, 507).

The techniques were adopted wholesale from wartime counterintelligence, and ranged from the trivial (mailing reprints of Readers Digest articles to college administrators) to the degrading (sending anonymous poison-pen letters intended to break up marriages) and the dangerous (encouraging gang warfare and falsely labeling members of a violent group as police informers).

Martin Luther King, Jr. was a target of the bureau all through his life from December 1963 until his death in 1968 due to his alleged subversive activities (Friedman 157). The bureau stage an intense campaign to investigate and neutralize Martin Luther King, Jr. as an effective civil rights leader (Zinn and Arnove, 507). There were also deep feelings among the bureau that he had communist leanings or influences.

The targeting of Martin Luther King Jr. and john Lennon came on the backdrop of effects of the just concluded Second World War. FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover directed that any groups, or individuals that were considered subversive, including communist and socialist organizations; organizations and individuals associated with the civil rights movement were to be stooped and reports indicate that more than 85% of COINTELPRO resources were used for this (Friedman 157).

Friedman states that those specifically targeted were Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., and any persons associated with civil rights movements within the United States; the Congress of Racial Equality and other civil rights organizations and black nationalist groups, to name but a few.

The targeting on Martin Luther King Jr. and john Lennon was meant to expose, disrupt, misdirect, discredit, or otherwise neutralize them especially due to their being vocal on issues to do with civil rights and against the war in Vietnam for the later (Zinn and Arnove, 507).

The FBI tried to justify the use of COINTELPRO and covert/illegal missions as protecting national security by preventing violence. Friedman states that the only explanation that offers insight into COINTELPROs main purpose is that the Bureau has a role in maintaining the existing social order, and that its efforts should be aimed toward combating those who threaten that order, this somehow sheds light on the use of actions by the Federal Bureau of Investigation which had no conceivable rational relationship to either national security or violent activity (275)

Extent to which media control exists today and why

Noam Chomsky in his book, media control: the spectacular achievements of propaganda, looks into the possibility of being able to live in a free society or whether individuals are satisfied with living in what amounts to a self imposed totalitarianism.

Democracies the world over have utilized propaganda to create a general feeling that serves the interests of a few. As a result of media control, people have long lived devoid of awareness of how media has been diverting the bewildered herd. The question therefore is what extent does media control exist today and why does it? (Jowett, ODonnell and Jowett 64).

To understand the extent to which media control exists in todays present world one has to first grasp the relationship between the role of the media in contemporary politics. Chomsky extensively explains this by stating that the question on having a free society or not is wholly dependent on the type of democracy one wants to be (Chomsky, 7).

There are two conception types of democracies according to Chomsky. One states that democratic societies are places where the public has a right of participation in administration of their own personal affairs and that information is free and open to each individual (Jowett, ODonnell and Jowett, 256).

On the other hand, the second alternative notion of what democracy is, states that the public have got to be excluded from administering their own affairs, and that information should be narrowly and firmly controlled. This is where media control comes into play. The later conception though it may seem odd but is the most prevalent in todays society (Chomsky, 8).

Propaganda has been widely used and is still in use today as a tool of media control. From the First World War to the conflicts affecting the world today, there are strong inclinations of the use of propaganda. The Nazis used propaganda, Americas election of president Woodrow Wilson in 1916 on a platform of Peace without Victory in the middle of World War 1 necessitated the use of propaganda to win the war (Jowett, ODonnell and Jowett, 44).

Chomsky states that each divergence in opinion is at any rate fought on two grounds: on the battleground and in peoples minds and aided by propaganda (26). Its always a question of who is misleading the public, but both the good guys and the bad guys are guilty of controlling the masses actions and thinking by use of distortion of information, exaggerations, subjectivity, inaccuracies, fabrications and misleading in order to serve their interests and gain legitimacy (Jowett, ODonnell and Jowett, 15).

Media control/propaganda use was also evident when Germany was preparing for the Second World War. There were various forms of this and it was necessitated by two primary reasons (Nazi agendas): 1) to be able to persuade the public to join in the war and fight; and 2) that it was necessary to go to war.

Woodrow Wilsons administration committed itself to going to war and had to convince the public of why they had to engage Germany in war. The Creel Commission (a propaganda commission) established to undertake convincing of the public, managed within six months, in turning a pacifist population into a hysterical, war-mongering population which wanted to destroy everything German, tear the Germans limb from limb, go to war and save the world (Chomsky, 8).

Jowett, ODonnell and Jowett state that this was a major achievement for the commission and the government and was also utilized during the red scare. The hysterics whipped up during this time succeeded pretty much in destroying unions and eliminating such dangerous problems as freedom of the press and freedom of political thought (44).

Promoting or fabrication of information with an intention of misleading mainly by providing a negative aspect/image of what one deems as his enemy is usually reinforced by a rhetoric about the righteousness of those promoting propaganda (Chomsky, 32). Media control in most cases tries to make the public be afraid of the government but in real sense it is the government that should be afraid of the public.

Chomsky touches on how the modern public relations industry has been influenced by Walter Lippmanns theory of spectator democracy, in which the public is seen as a bewildered herd that needs to be directed, not empowered; and how the public relations industry in the United States focuses on controlling the public mind, and not on informing it.

Media controls are usually an attempt to gather together support for government and nurture belief in people that the actions intended by the government are necessary and positive and will be beneficial to the interest of everyone (Jowett, ODonnell and Jowett, 44). Chomsky states that over and over again, the main ideologies put into use to demonize perceived enemies, are not used to judge the self, leading to accusations of double standards and hypocrisy (47).

Works Cited

Black, Edwin. IBM and the Holocaust: the strategic alliance between Nazi Germany and Americas most powerful corporation. Crown Publishers: New York, 2001. Print.

Black, Edwin. Nazi nexus: Americas corporate connections to Hitlers Holocaust. Dialog Press: Hesse, Germany, 2009. Print.

Black, Edwin. War against the weak: eugenics and Americas campaign to create a master race. Four Walls Eight Windows: Arundel, 2003. Print.

Friedman, John. The secret histories: hidden truths that challenged the past and changed the world. Picador: Iowa City, 2005. Print.

Jowett, Garth, ODonnell, Victoria and Jowett Garth. Propaganda and persuasion. Sage: New York, 2006. Print.

Zinn, Howard and Arnove Anthony. Voices of a peoples history of the United States. Seven Stories Press: New York, 2004. Print.

Several reasons resulted to the emergence of the cold war, which involved the USA and the USSR right after the World War II. However, the most significant underlying factor was the growing suspicion between the two countries (Hurst 156). Some of these reasons included the Americans fear of attacks from the communists because the Russians disliked capitalism. Additionally, the development of mass destruction weapons was also of concern.

During the Second World War, America and the USSR were strong allies. However, this turned different after the war as they shared different views about various aspects. They eventually grew apart confirming that their union was illusionary. Furthermore, before the war, the US described the USSR as a reincarnation of the devil but the feeling was mutual; the USSR did not see the US any different from the devil.

The US and the USSR only became allies during the Second World War because they had a common enemy. The suspicion grew even further when the United States refused to share its nuclear secrets (Hurst 156).

Moreover, Joseph Stalin (The Soviet leader) did not know about the nuclear weapon that the Americans were going to use to destroy Japan until reports came back to Moscow about the Hiroshima bombing. The major difference between the Russians and the Americans was that the Americans had sophisticated technology in terms of weapons while the Russians had a vast army.

Some of the ideologies that led to the emergence of the cold war include elections, whereby the Americans believed that elections should exist, and they should be free, while the Soviet Union believed that there should be no election. Secondly, the American believed in democracy, while the Soviet Union supported dictatorship or Autocratic form of leadership.

The third reason is that Americans were capitalists, while the Soviet Union supported communism. Furthermore, the Americans believed in survival for the fittest, while the Soviet Union believed in helping each other.

The difference in the economy, for instance, America being a superpower while the Soviet Union was a small and poor economy also contributed to the emergence of the cold war. Similarly, The American believed in personal freedom, while the Soviet Union was in support of secret police controlled society. In addition, the United States believed in freedom of the press, while the Russians completely censored the media.

In 1945, the Americans dropped a bomb in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, which led to the arms race. Consequently, in 1947 Stalin refused Marshall from providing aid to Eastern part of Europe. Additionally, the establishment of NATO in 1949 and china becoming a communist also contributed to the emergence of the cold war. In 1950, the South Korea started a war with North Korea where the United Nations supported the South Koreans, while the republic of China supported the North Koreans.

In 1953, the Americans tested their first hydrogen bomb hence confirming that they were engaging in the development of mass destruction weapons. As a result, the suspicion increased between the United State of America and the USSR. Furthermore, Hungry broke away from the USSR in 1956, which also majorly contributed to the emergence of the cold war. Czar Nicholas II contributed to the Bolshevik revolution in 1957, when he made eleven million people to participate in the First World War.

As a result, the Russian people were extremely agitated and could not take the injuries and loss of lives caused by the war any more hence this set the stage for one of the biggest revolution in the history of Russia. However, after the revolution erupted, Czar Nicholas tried to use force to contain the situation, by the use of military action but the protestors supporting the revolution converted the military.

The formation of a provincial government replaced the fallen Czar regime. However, the provincial government did not live up to its promise of putting to an end Russian involvement in the war (Hurst 156). Instead, things deteriorated; the formation of the Bolshevik party rose against the government and seized various social amenities and institutions in the night of November 6, 1917 with the order and guidance of the Soviets Military committee.

The Bolshevik formed the new government, which supported socialism. This was the beginning of the soviet regime, which supported socialism. Such a development was one of the causes that led to the emergence of the cold war because of ideological conflict between the US and the USSR. Most of the people in Russian believed that the Bolshevik party was going to provide better leadership and direction to the country through their Communism.

In 1959, Cuba let by Fidel Castro became a communist nation. Similarly, in 1961, the United States sent military troops to Vietnam, and it is in the same year that the Germans built the Berlin wall.

The difference in ideologies between the super powers was also evident in the allies of these super powers. As a result, there was a distinct separation between the United States allies and the USSR allies. However, throughout this period, the United States and the Soviet Union openly showed their might through space expeditions and advancement in technology.

As a result, it increased the fear between the two countries. The cold war did not start until Truman who was by then the current president of Russia embarked on the Marshall plan. Additionally, the extension of the Russian influence into Europe by use of the red army also contributed to the development of the cold war. Similarly, eastern Germany also fell under the Russian control.

Towards the end of the Second World War, Russia started to put together her control in Europe. The Russians did this by intimidating the voters of the newly formed states and imposing their influence on them. Due to this, the bulk of the votes went to the communists hence making Russia have an enormous influence on the newly formed governments.

The Russians were incredibly tactful; they took control of the military and the entire defense of these newly formed governments. In addition, these were the strongest sectors of the newly formed states. However, there are several reasons that made the cold war not to start until the end of the Second World War for instance; both Russia and the United States of America were busy developing their own economies and form of governance.

In addition, Russia was not stable politically, it was going through revolutions and their internal affairs were not in order. Similarly, neither the United States nor Russia had come up with unique capabilities for instance the bomb, which could raise suspicion and instill fear. These were the reasons that delayed the cold war until the end of the Second World War.

In conclusion, the cold war was because of mistrust and fear between the Soviet Union and the US. This suspicion grew even more when the United States of America invented the bomb, which was one of the most powerful mass destruction weapons at the time. However, Russia also went ahead and invented the bomb hence showing stiff competition between the two countries. In addition, there was a rush between the two countries to form allies. The reason for this was to get support for their ideologies and forms of governance.

Works Cited

Hurst, Steven. Cold war US foreign policy: key perspectives. Edinburgh, UK: Edinburgh University Press, 2005. Print.