Effects of the Cold War (1945-1991)

Effects of the Cold War (1945-1991)

Introduction

The Cold War (1945-1991), as the name suggests, was a “chilly standoff” between the United States and the Soviet Union, the 90's superpowers (Sherman, 2004, p.1). It was different from a “hot war”, wherein through military and weapons nations engage in real-time conflict. A “cold war” is more pertinent to psychological warfare and one of the most well-known examples of the application of Nash's Game Theory. The Cold War stretched across the known world, from Asia to South America, with the threat of a full-fledged nuclear war hanging over the world like a sword.

Discussion

America's “win” in the Cold War

Many historians question the notion of America's “win” in the Cold War. According to the Orthodox approach, conservative analysts argue that the “ideological offensive” of the Reagan-Thatcher administration led to America's “win” and exposed the hollow roots of socialist utopia. Continually, they advocate that when “negotiated from strength”, the military and economic might of the United States overpowered the Communist Soviet Union. The centralist view asserts that the long drawn out war eventually depleted Soviet Union's energy, resources, and commitment to the Cold War. America's strict strategies and military caution led to the apparent “win” in the Cold War. Hyland believes that America secured victory by complying with the Truman Doctrine, the containment policy, and the vigilance in affirming military strength.

Gaddis explains that economic and technological dexterity does not ensure world domination. He furthers his argument by saying that the scale of the arena of war and the scale of resources needed to maintain that war, extended exponentially. Any nation with military power could not simply utilize its military strength without the fear of escalating the war to an extent that it destroys both countries. The Cold War, nearing its end, took another route - one comprising of concepts of collective security, preventive diplomacy, and global interdependence among others.

All of these signify the move towards recognizing humanitarian needs, rather than the desperation to maintain the “balance of power” as seen in the early years of the Cold War. With the end of the Soviet Union, unknown uncertainties resulted in a new world “disorder”, once again propelling leaders into scrutinizing the “peace” obtained from the Cold War. The notion of America's “win” is debatable, especially when challenging the orthodoxy associated with it. There is no doubt that it was a moment of triumph for ...