Essay Writing Service http://StudyHub.vip/Analysis-Of-The-Causes-Of-The-Cold-War 👈

1. Analysis of the Causes of the Cold War
Since the cold war, several theories/statements have arisen as to the primary cause. The American
fear of communism is frequently attributed as a leading cause of developments which led to the cold
war. In March, 1947, US President Truman addressed Congress, urging for financial support to be
provided to Greek and Turkey, as well as other eastern nations, to “ensure the peaceful development
of nations, free from coercion.” [1] Truman explicitly discusses communists, and hints the true intent
of the doctrine is to prevent the spread of communism. In addition, the subtext suggests Truman is
equating communism to a disease, in which case nations must be “quarantined”, which indicates the
potency of America’s fears. As such, it is arguable that the UN led assault (driven by the US) on Korea
the first confrontation between the Soviets and Americans - is largely a product of American fear of
communist expansion [2].
The preceding argument is in alignment with the revisionist view, that of the United States being
primarily responsible. Furthermore, it suggests US foreign policy was governed by “dollar
diplomacy,” i.e. that the containment of communism may be attributed to a need for unimpeded
trade and secure Americanized markets. [3] American historian M.J. Hogan stresses the goals of the
Marshall plan (a product of the Truman doctrine) were the “removal of trade barriers” and to
“modernize industry.” [4] As such, the Marshall plan provides evidence for the revisionist argument.
Political economist G. Alperovitz proposed that the US was the principal aggressor, and that the
utilization of atomic weapons in Japan was to intimidate the Soviet Union, rather than force the
Japanese surrender. [3] However, the strong revisionist view is highly criticized; historian R.J.
Maddox states the thesis commits “unscholarly use of ellipsis,” i.e. exclusion of critical sources which
do not support the revisionist viewpoint. Maddox stresses “[When Truman] authorized the use of
atomic weapons against Japan, he did so to end a bloody war that would have been bloodier still
[had invasion been necessary].” [5] Indeed, there is evidence to support Maddox’s claims; Winston
Churchill boldly stated “I am very surprised that very worthy people [...] should adopt the position
that rather than throw this bomb, we should have sacrificed a million American and a quarter of a
million British lives].” These figures are somewhat supported by historian R.P. Newman who
predicted had the conflict prolonged, “[each month] upwards of 250,000 people, mostly Asian but
some Westerners” would have died [6].
The antithesis of the revisionist interpretation is dubbed the orthodox view; superficially it “generally
holds that the Soviet Union was responsible for the Cold War.” [3] The theory accuses the Soviets of
being irredentists due to a “suspicion of the West.” Based on an analysis of the psychopathology of
Stalin Prof. Marina Stal (Columbia University), the belief that Stalin was paranoid of the West is
justified. However, if the Alperovitz hypothesis is true, the paranoia was not unprovoked; rather it
was a consequence of the United States’ actions in part.
Orthodox historian A.M. Schlesinger asserts, “Marxism-Leninism gave the Russian leaders a view of
the world according to which all societies were inexorably destined to proceed until they achieved
the classless nirvana. [Given the resistance of the capitalists] the existence of any non-communist
state was by definition a threat [to the USSR].” [7] Such behaviour is reflected in Stalin’s actions;
during the introduction of the Marshall plan, neighbouring Eastern nations were commanded to
refuse American economic support, for fear of the ‘dollar diplomacy’ and a potential to halt the
spread or grasp of communism. As philosopher and historian I.A. Gwinn states, “Proof of Moscow’s
intentions could be found in Soviet unilateral movies to install communist or pro-communist

2. governments in Eastern Europe, efforts to destabilise governments in the Near East.” Nevertheless,
there is widespread criticism of the orthodox view, wherein the USSR are cast as aggressors. During
its conception in the 1950s, it was the product of “American political leaders and government
officials” as well as “prominent American intellectuals” [8] which suggests it is biased. Ron Robin
(University of California) recounts “[behaviourists] discounted the power of ideas and values as
motivating forces preferring, instead, to treat ideology and belief systems as mere rationalizations of
behavioural modes.” Gwinn argues such a choice in methodology to evaluate the causes of the cold
war helped to “perpetuate totalitarian images of the Soviet Union.” [8]
Regardless, there is evidence which supports the orthodox view, to some extent sufficient to assign
partial blame to the USSR; the Yalta agreement explicitly specified free elections in Eastern nations,
a clause broken by Stalin. Furthermore, in 1988, Oleg Bogomolov “implicitly acknowledged that the
Kremlin had violated the Yalta agreement,” which according to a national security advisor for the US,
“vindicates much of the Western view that largely initiated the Cold War.” [9]
Led by John Lewis Gaddis, a mixture of the orthodox and revisionist views was conceived, known as
post-revisionism, which claimed to overcome “the unscholarly emphasis on blame throwing” and
limitations of previous paradigms [3, 8]. Gaddis argues both major powers were reacting to each
other, and their competing ideologies - that of self-determinism (dating back to Wilson’s fourteen
points), capitalism, communism - inevitably would have resulted in a conflict. In addition, we argue to
some extent the inefficacy of the United Nations, although still in its infancy, may have contributed
to the cold war to some extent. The viewpoint was held by Truman, as he stated in an address to
congress, “the United Nations and its related organizations are not in a position to extend help of the
kind that is required.” [1] Other factors, apart from the USSR and US, may also be attributed as
causes. The ​Iron Curtain speech by Churchill highlights Stalin’s attempt to form an Eastern bloc, not
in collaboration with the rest of Europe - Churchill emphasizes these nations may be ​lost to
communism, and subtly demonizes the Soviet Union, thus influencing upcoming responses to
Stalin’s actions. In addition, the 1946 Iran-Azerbaijan crisis due to a Soviet unwillingness to surrender
Iranian territory motivated President Truman’s doctrine of containment, according to historian G.
Lenczowski. However, it could be argued the doctrine was almost inevitable, given the report by
Kennan in a telegram and other attempts urging for a dismissal of cooperation with the USSR in
favour of maneuvers to halt the spread of communism by constructing “spheres of influence.” [10]
In conclusion, there is sufficient evidence to support all three schools of thought - revisionist,
post-revisionist, orthodoxy. As to the cause of the cold war, and the primary aggressor. Although a
single nation cannot be held accountable, as demonstrated, key to the cold war was a development
of tension and paranoia between the two major powers through incidents such as the Iran crisis,
Yalta disagreements, bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, as well as the formation of an eastern
bloc. In addition, other factors may have acted as catalysts, or influences in the powers’ decisions,
such as the aforementioned Iron curtain speech.

3. References
(In order of first appearance in the text.)
[1] ​Avalon Project - Truman Doctrine​ (2008), Yale Law School Avalon Project
<​http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/trudoc.asp​>
[2] ​The Truman Doctrine: Containing Communism and Modernity (2006), D. Merrill, ​Presidential
Studies Quarterly​, Vol. 36, No. 1
[3] ​20th Century World: The Cold War​ (2008), K. Rogers, J. Thomas, Pearson Education
[4] ​The Marshall Plan: America, Britain and the Reconstruction of Western Europe (1989), Hogan,
Cambridge University Press
[5] ​Hiroshima in History: The Myths of Revisionism​ (2011), R.J. Maddox, Missouri University
[6] ​Downfall: The End of the Imperial Japanese Empire​ (2001), R.B. Frank, Penguin Books
[7] ​Origins of the Cold War​ (1967), A.M. Schlesinger, p. 49-50
[8] ​Towards a Critical Historiography of Orthodox-Revisionist Debates on the Origins of the Cold
War: Between Disciplinary Power and US National Identity (2009), I.A. Gwinn, University of
Birmingham (Thesis, M.Phil) <​http://etheses.bham.ac.uk/426/1/Gwinn09MPhil_A1b.pdf​>
[9] ​Soviets Concede Stalin Violated Yalta Agreements in East Europe (1988), R.C. Toth, Los Angeles
Times, <​http://articles.latimes.com/1988-07-10/news/mn-9461_1_east-european​>
[10] ​George Kennan sends “long telegram” to State Department (1946), author n/a, CBS History,
<​www.history.com/this-day-in-history/george-kennan-sends-long-telegram-to-state-department​>