The Nuclear Arms Did Little to Restrain the Action of the Usa and the Ussr

In: Historical Events

Submitted By rids12
Words 1514
Pages 7
The nuclear arms did little to restrain the actions of the USA and the soviet union in the cold war in the years of 1949-63?

On the surface, it can be argued to a partial extent that the arms race did restrain the actions of the USA and the USSR due to the fact that both leaders had mutual understanding of the impact that nuclear weapons would have on both nations, therefore, they couldn't condemn their nations to that sort of destruction.The establishment of MAD was an attempt of both nations to restrain the use of arms race. However, the fact that nuclear weapons were been produced at a rapid pace means that there was still underlying fear that one nation would use the weapon against the other which highlights that arms race did little to restrain the arm to a partial extent.

On one hand, it can seem that both leaders, Khrushchev and Eisenhower felt that the prospect of nuclear war was too terrifying, thus, we can argue that nuclear weapons played as a deterrence as both nations could not condemn their nations to nuclear annihilation. For example, the USA detonated their first hydrogen bomb on the first of November 1952 on Enwetak and this created a cloud of 100 miles and 25 miles high, killing every species near it, this highlights the destructive force of a weapon. The fact that the USA did not intervene during the Hungary crisis in 1956, even though, it would have been an beneficial for them as they would have had a democratic nation in a soviet sphere of influence, this strongly shows the willingness of the USA to not enter a war which uses nuclear weapons with the USSR, thus, demonstrating the USA restraint. However, this argument can be argued to be simplistic to a small extent as other factors could have restrained the USA and the USSR actions, for example , the fact that Khrushchev had a strong believe in the idea that the fall of capitalism will one…...

Similar Documents

Explain How the Attitudes of the Usa and the Ussr in 1945 Helped Cause the Cold War.

...creating the Cold war. As we can see the USSR and the United States, both had different ideologies and points of view which set the base for confrontation after the Second World War. The soviet attitudes were straight-forward. Stalin´s main aim was to safeguard and rebuild the Soviet Union. However, his actions created hostility over the West. His foreign policy was based on taking advantage of the military situation in Europe to strengthen the Soviet influence and prevent another invasion from the west. To the nations of the west this was seen as evidence of the expansionist nature of communism, but Soviet aims were based on attitudes that were more complicated than this. Russia had been invaded from the west 3 times in the 20th century; by Germany in WWI, by those helping the whites during the russian civil war, and by Germany again in WWII. Each time russian loses had been substantial, but the sacrifice required during the WWII was unprecedented. The need to ensure such a devastating war was was not again inflicted upon the Soviet Union was undoubtedly a weighty and pressing concern. The situation in Europe in 1945 provided Stalin with an opportunity to establish a buffer zone of Soviet-influenced states in Eastern Europe, which would act as a barrier against further invasion of the USSR from the West. The soviet obsession with security was difficult for the American government to understand. To the American government, the USSR was more interested in spreading......

Words: 675 - Pages: 3

The Nuclear Threat During the Berlin Crisis

...Mark Dissen 4/15/2013 Nuclear Arms Race Term Paper The Nuclear Threat During the Berlin Crisis Introduction On November 10, 1958, Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev gave a speech at a Soviet-Polish meeting in Moscow that would ultimately culminate into one of the most profound crises of the Cold War. The Soviet leader accused the Western Powers of violating the 1945 Potsdam Agreement and sabotaging the German Democratic Republic (GDR) and recommended that the Federal Republic abandon, “the hope that we shall cease to support the German Democratic Republic.” (Address by Premier, 1958). Soon after, Khrushchev delivered a speech giving an ultimatum to the allies and gave them six months to demilitarize West Berlin. The Allies' subsequent refusal and the resulting tension put both the U.S.S.R. and the United States in a particularly dangerous situation. Although it is unlikely that full-out thermonuclear war would have resulted from the Berlin Crisis, there was a very real threat of a limited nuclear strike or conventional warfare to both of the superpowers until the tension over Berlin was assuaged. Although November 1958 marked the official beginning of the crisis, Berlin had been a source of contention between the US and the Soviets from the initial division of Germany after WWII (Tine, 2005). The three territorial zones in Western Germany, controlled by France, Britain, and the US, contrasted greatly with the Soviet-controlled East, which upheld socialism. Berlin......

Words: 3913 - Pages: 16

Affirmitive Action and the Usa College System

...American society and Economy – BMAN 20610 Has Affirmative Action had any positive results? Should the policy be abandoned? ‘Affirmative Action has had an indelible imprint on the university environment’ [1] With primary focus on the impact that affirmative action (AA) has had to African Americans in regard to College admission, this essay will seek to ascertain to what extent the policy has lead to positive results. While in addition, evaluating whether this policy is both a legitimate and a necessary feature within Universities in contemporary America, or should be abandoned. Following President Johnson signing into law, executive order 11246 in 1965, the concept of affirmative action was formed and subsequently integrated within the college admission process in the United States. The primary intention of the policy was to ‘redress the disadvantages associated with overt historical discrimination’. [2] While furthermore, seeking to ensure that institutions, such as Universities, were more ‘representative of the populations they serve’. [3] Since the implementation of the policy, throughout American University Campuses and the corridors of power in Washington, both debate and discourse has taken place in regard to the fairness and necessity of the practice of Affirmative Action within the College Admission process. As asserted by Garcia, those in favour of Affirmative action programs within Colleges viewed that the implementation of the policy was evidently......

Words: 3238 - Pages: 13

How Far Was the Nuclear Arms Race a Threat to World Peace in the Years 1949-1962?

...The nuclear arms race between the years 1949 and 1962 was a threat to world peace. The main threat to world peace was the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962 but there were many other occurrences that made people truly believe that the Cold War could be the end of the world. 1949 is the year that the Soviets tested their first Atomic Bomb on August 29th. This shocked the US Government as they believed that the Soviet nuclear technology was much further behind than it actually was. Unbeknownst to them, the Soviets had spies in America who were giving information about the US’s nuclear technology back to the Soviet scientists. This sped up their Nuclear weapon program. The West were already suspicious of the Soviets; this suspicion played a huge part in the creation of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation in April 1949. This was a step towards maintaining world peace. So although there were threats towards World Peace throughout 1949, the formation of NATO encouraged the general public that the Western governments were making sure that Communism wasn’t spreading and World Peace would be maintained. The development of delivery systems also unnerved both sides and threatened World Peace. When Sputnik was launched by the USSR in 1957, the US became nervous. If the Soviets could send a satellite into space, then they should be able to get a nuclear weapon to mainland America. The American public could turn on a radio and hear the beeping noise that Sputnik was transmitting. This......

Words: 1020 - Pages: 5

To What Extent Did Peaceful Coexistence Ease Cold War Tension Between Us and Ussr 1953- 1961?

...To what extent did peaceful coexistence ease cold war tension between US and USSR 1953- 1961? Between the years 1953-1961 the Soviet Union under the control of Nikita Khrushchev adopted a rather ‘friendly’ and calm approach regarding American-Soviet relations. Following the death of Stalin, Khrushchev adopted the policy of ‘peaceful coexistence’ that sought a friendly approach to the west limiting the threat of direct confrontation. Through the use of this foreign policy Khrushchev could build up the soviet nation directing resources in order to better the Soviet Union’s national situation. This new policy eased cold war tensions as it saw an age of negotiating and the end of a fierce opposing ideological battle upon the surface, yet it is clear that beneath a rather more sinister situation was occurring that would create the most dangerous period in the cold war; ‘the threat of total annihilation’ so therefore it is not fair to say that peaceful coexistence was close to being reached during this period even though the attitude of the Soviet Union had changed. Although it may seem that peaceful coexistence eased cold war tensions as a friendly approach however, it is clear that the change of attitude to a peaceful approach only created further suspicion and the need for security. The threat of total annihilation and the development of a nuclear race created an increasingly tense and dangerous situation. After the development of the atom bomb and hydrogen bomb on both sides......

Words: 1227 - Pages: 5

How Far Did Peaceful Coexistence Ease Tension Between the Usa and the Ussr

...How far did peaceful coexistence ease Cold War tensions between the USA and the Soviet Union in the years 1953-61? The idea of peaceful coexistence emerged after the death of Soviet leader Joseph Stalin. His eventual successor, Nikita Khruschev wanted a complete overhaul in the policies of the Soviet Union leading to his ‘Secret Speech’ in which he denounced Stalin and brought his horrendous actions to light. This was known as destalinisation and marked the start of peaceful existence, the idea that both the Soviet Union and the United States of America could peacefully exist without waging a war. While peaceful coexistence did indeed ease tensions to some extent between the USA and the USSR in the years 1953-61, it largely had the opposite effect and actually increased tensions. Firstly, in regards to diplomacy, it can be argued that peaceful coexistence did ease tensions between the USA and the USSR in the years 1953-61. Although nothing of crucial significance was agreed at the Geneva Summit of July 1955, the fact that both superpowers had agreed to meet, and it being the first summit between the two since Potsdam must show that peaceful coexistence had eased tensions to an extent. The summit marked a change in attitudes and almost presented the two superpowers to have matured simply by the fact that they had agreed to meet. Similarly, although the Paris summit never took place due to the U2 spy plane incident, the choice to have it in the first place, and the Vienna......

Words: 828 - Pages: 4

How Far Was the Nuclear Arms Race a Threat to World Peace in the Years 1949 to 1965

...In 1949 the USSR developed their first nuclear bomb, and in doing so, entered the nuclear arms race, which would prove to continue for the following sixteen years. The United States had already developed their first nuclear weapons and were well on their way to improving and replacing them. The Soviets were well aware of this, and the missile race was created by the two countries wanting to constantly out-do each other. This race appeared to be based on having the best defences from opposition attack, however it was also somewhat of a childish competition between the two to see who could build the bigger bomb. The weapons being developed were never actually used militarily, only in test situations. Had they been used, the safety of the entire world’s population would have been at risk, as both sides had enough weapons to ensure that in the event of a war, there would be Mutually Assured Destruction. As the technology, and the weapons being developed with the technology, was getting more and more advanced, the potential for mass-scale destruction became very real. Bomb sizes, ranges and tactics were being improved at a vast rate, and this put a huge danger to the world. The volatility of these weapons can be exemplified by the USA’s Jupiter missiles, based in Turkey, which, more than once, were struck by lightning, initiating their launch sequence. The range of the missiles was one thing that changed drastically during the arms race. Originally missiles had to be fired......

Words: 1267 - Pages: 6

Why Did Usa Expand in 1890?

...In 1890, the USA was far from being a world power its foreign policy was essentially defensive, seeking to keep America out of wars and foreign entanglements. Most Americans were hostile to the ideas of imperialism. However, the events of 1890s pushed USA into rapid naval expansion, Spanish-American war and annexation of territories in the Pacific Ocean- far from the USA. One reason why the USA expanded was due to economic reasons. Rapid increase in economy proved that the US needed to control new markets. America’s industrial economy experienced a downturn after a rapid growth in the 1870s-1880s by 4% annually .The successful war between Spain allowed the USA to expand and establish an empire as the war included the annexation of other Spanish possession in the Caribbean and pacific this lead to USA also gaining control over Puerto Rico, Guam, the Philippians and Hawaii. Taking over new colonies meant cheaper raw materials would be available and more money would be coming in; this was especially needed with growing industrialisation. Another reason why the USA expanded was because of the militarily. Spain made peace at the Treaty of Paris in July 1898 and Cuba remained under American military rule until 1902, when it became an American. Expansion of the Navy meant better protection interests and trade abroad. Protectorate. The war of 1898 also lead to the Platt Amendment which allowed the USA to protectorate smaller colony such as Cuba this lead to the Guantanamo Bay......

Words: 909 - Pages: 4

Did the United States Win the Cold War

...Did the United States win the Cold War? The forty-five years from the dropping of the atom bombs to the end of the Soviet Union, can be seen as the era of the new conflict between two major states: United States of America (USA) and Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR). According to Hobsbawm, ‘cold war’ was the constant confrontation of the two super powers which emerged from the Second World War. At that time the entire generation was under constant fear of global nuclear battles. It was widely believed that it could break out at any moment. (Hobsbawm, 1994) The consequences of the ‘power vacuum’ in central Europe, created by the defeat of Germany, gave rise to these two super powers (Dunbabin, 1994). The world was divided into two parts. The USSR controlled the zone occupied by her Red Army or other communist armed forces. On the other hand, USA exercised control and dominance over the rest of the capitalist world as well as the western hemisphere and the oceans. (Hobsbawm, 1994) It is rather very difficult to argue that a particular country like the USA has won the cold war completely. Cold war gave birth to lots of problems in the world. During the cold war period, various events occurred subsequently. So the whole period was a combination of different issues and various factors related to it. Yet, evaluating the climax and the aftermath situation of the cold war, it can be argued that USA and its allies have succeeded to a great extent. On the other hand, as a......

Words: 2093 - Pages: 9

Why Did the Usa Get Involved in Asia in 1950?

...Why did the USA get involved in Asia in 1950? (30) After the end of the Second World War, the two war time allies the USA and Soviet Union became involved in a war of ideologies, the cold war. The US saw communism as a threat to democracy and capitalism. Therefore the US set out a new foreign policy, the policy of containment, in the Truman doctrine. There were however other reasons for the USA’s involvement such as their military confidence, UN agreement, domestic pressure which called for Truman to be more tough on communism and their economic interest in Japan which led to the US government’s decision to intervene in the Korean War. One of the main reasons for the US’s involvement was due to the ‘Policy of Containment’. The aim was for the USA to work with its allies to contain the spread of communism in eastern Europe and Asia using political, economic and if necessary military pressure to prevent the spread of the every growing ideology of communism. The US’s main worry was the communism would spread as most of the eastern European countries were devastated by the war were weak and communism could easily spread through these weakened countries such as Hungary. Europe was divided by ‘an Iron curtain’, the west with capitalism views, and the east with growing communism views. Furthermore, China had fallen to Communism under Mao, which may have been a huge wake up call for President Truman. In addition, Mao had signed the treaty of friendship with Stalin; therefore the......

Words: 896 - Pages: 4

How Far Did Peaceful Coexistence Ease Cold War Tensions Between the Soviet Union and the Usa in the Years 1953

...How far did peaceful coexistence ease cold war tensions between the Soviet Union and the USA in the years 1953-61? In the years 1953-61 some might say that the cold war tensions were eased by peaceful coexistence, with super power negotiations and key agreements paving the way for better relations. Despite this, the stronger argument suggests that ultimately, cold war tensions were not eased, the cold war continued for another 30 years. This was due to failure to negotiate anything of substance at conferences such as Geneva 1955 and the lack of change in superpower attitude with Eisenhower’s new look policy and the USSR’s approach to Hungary. One argument suggests that peaceful coexistence did ease cold war tensions due to the superpower negotiations. Between 1953-61 there was improved relations between the USSR and USA, they were more willing to meet, and despite it not being the leaders, representatives from both countries met at the Geneva conference in 1954. It was then in 1955 at Geneva again that both superpower leaders met for the first time in 10 years. Despite not agreeing anything of substance, it is worth noting that this was the first step in the right direction which lead to many key agreements and reforms over the following years. Camp David in 1959 was the largest step towards permanent peaceful coexistence, the leader of the USSR was invited over to the USA where both superpower leaders met. Despite the superpower negotiations there was nothing of substance...

Words: 1015 - Pages: 5

How Far Was the Ussr Responsible for the Outbreak of the Cold War 1945-1949?

...How far was the USSR responsible for the outbreak of the Cold War 1945-1949? To a certain extent, the USSR’s responsibility of the Cold War cannot be underestimated as their policies following the Second World War may have been seen as aggressive by USA. The forceful take-over of Eastern Europe through the Red Army occupations, especially in distinctive cases such as Poland and Czechoslovakia, can be seen as being far from the “liberation” over which the two war-time allies had agreed, while the rigging of elections did not conform to the Yalta agreement of the organisation of free ones. Stalin responded to the Americans’ policies of containment by creating his own agencies, therefore creating even more hostility between the two superpowers, while also refusing the existence of anything but Soviet puppet states in Eastern Europe. However, the event which cemented the outbreak of the Cold War was Stalin imposing the Berlin Blockade, taking direct action towards weakening the Americans’ position. One may see that Stalin’s blockade resulted in the official creation of two separate German states, one of the most significant events of the Cold War. On the other hand, revisionists point out that the USSR was taking defensive measures to protect itself from anything that could have caused as much damage as the Second World War, while the Americans, who were superior economically, adopted provocative policies. They challenged the patience of the Russians by hiding crucial events......

Words: 4209 - Pages: 17

Disarmament and Nuclear Non-Proliferation

...Disarmament and nuclear non-proliferation Dmitry M. Kuritsyn group 429 MOSCOW 2013 Contents Introduction…………………………………………………………………3 1. Historical background ……………………………………………….5 1. Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START I)…………………5 2. New non-proliferation agreement……………………………………6 1. New START ………………………………………………….7 2. The future of disarmament ……………………………………10 Conclusion…………………………………………………………………..11 References…………………………………………………………………...13 Introduction The complexities in implementation of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Regime, which includes nuclear disarmament as one of the principle integral parts, have always been the issue in difficult and controversial discussions attended by all members of international community. Nuclear disarmament, which has eventually become the safeguard and a key condition of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Regime’s successful performance, have always been an effective factor reducing the risk of unleashing a nuclear war and reinforcing the confidence of nuclear-free countries that the threat to their security is contained. The logic of nuclear disarmament is to curtail the lethal nuclear arms race and to provide for better predictability and transparency in this field. The aforementioned factors altogether enable defining the nuclear disarmament as the process crucial to global strategic stability. The......

Words: 3354 - Pages: 14

India-Usa Relationship

...towards Terrorism Vis-à-vis India and Pakistan 132-169 9.Chapter - 6 : India’s Nuclear Links with the USA 170-204 10. Chapter - 7 : Conclusion 205-214 11. Select Bibliography 215-237 Preface Indo-U.S. relations constitute important and influential relations in this world politics. It influences not only the U.S.-Pakistani and the Sino-Indian relations to a great extent; ‘Indo-U.S. relations in the post-Cold War period (1992-2006)’ has been the title of the present dissertation. Beginning against the back ground of the U.S.-Pakistani Arms Assistance Agreement of 1954, the Indo-U.S. relations had witnessed many ups and down in the following years. For example, there had been flourishes in Indo-U.S. relations in the early years of 1960s under the Kennedy Administration. This ascent in relations continued until the mid 1960, when the U.S. changed its South Asia policy and adopted a balanced relationship vis-à-vis India and Pakistan in the subsequent years until 1970. The Seventies saw a pro-Pakistani tilt in the context of the Bangladesh crisis, Indo-Pakistani War (1971) and the developing Sino-U.S. detente in the 1970s. The Seventies decade, thus, saw India and the USA antagonized towards each other. The Eighties witnessed India, rejecting the anti-U.S. policy of the 70s and giving more attention in the development of its relations with the U.S. in lieu of the USSR. During the post-Cold War era, marked mainly by the demise of the......

Words: 72424 - Pages: 290

Arms Control (Nuclear Disarmament)

...Arms Control (Nuclear Disarmament) Arms control refers to any international limitation or regulation where developing, testing, producing, deploying, or even using weapons is concerned on the basis that it is inevitable for some national military establishments to continue existing. This concept points to some type of collaboration between states that are antagonistic or competitive in general when it comes to military policy, in a bid to lower the chances of war and in the event of such, to limit its damage (Jones 4). From a broader perspective, arms control is a product of historical state practices involving disarmament that has seen many successes and challenges since the 20th century. The two terms have at some point been differentiated where disarmament agreements are often deemed as direct prohibition of weapons possession and production, while arms-control agreements often start by limiting testing, deploying, or using of some types of weapons. Arms-control efforts especially between the Soviet Union (U.S.S.R.) and the U.S. during the Cold War were crucial to limitation of the nuclear arms race, and by the 20th century’s end, arms control as a term started denoting any arms-limitation or disarmament agreement (Browne, Shetty and Somerville 377). The most important are the NPT (Non-proliferation Treaty) and the CTBT (Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty). The main benefit or importance of the NPT is that of ensuring that international peace and security are enhanced.......

Words: 1285 - Pages: 6