Assigment:
Based on previous lectures, your knowledge, handouts, and your opinion, what explains the outcome of the first bipolar era (World War II) and the result of the second bipolar era (the “Cold” War). That is, one ended in conflict, one in “peace.”
My response:
The era if 1919-1939 and the events leading up to WWII can best be described as such: terrible economic conditions, Western appeasement towards German expansion, and growing tensions between particular ideologies. The two polar powers were the United States and Great Britain, the first being on good economic footing, and the latter a leading military and political power. With German nationalism on the rise, as well as exhibiting a complete disregard for previous agreements (particularly restrictions placed upon them prior to WWI meant to limit their power) Great Britain and her allies felt threatened. Global powers aligned with one another, the Allies vs. the Axis, and a bloody war ensued causing the lives of 60 million people to be lost. Following the war we see the formation of the United Nations, but also the continued trend of not respecting borderlines and rearranging the actual number of states on the continent. We see Great Britain fall from her polar power throne due to over extension from the power that was Germany, we see America strengthen itself thanks to a continued favorable economic standing, and we also see Russia align itself with a Bolshevik agenda, consequently things got a bit mixed up.
While the era of 1919-1939 can be called a bipolar era, and while that is mostly accurate, there were also a lot of rising minor powers to be contended with. After the war, the vast majority of Europe was in ruins, all powers, major and minor alike were weakened, while the newly formed U.S.S.R. was rising and spreading.
At this point in history, the span of 1947-1989, we truly do have a bipolar system and the two players possessing the most power so far surpass other states so as to almost render them insignificant. Germany, now a duet, no longer contends, and depressed Italy, France, Austria-Hungary, and Japan all gladly sit out this inning. Truly the only signature on the Warsaw pact that mattered was the Soviet Union’s, just as the United States put the vast majority of power behind NATO. But this ‘Cold War’, that is, the conflict that subsequently happened at the close of this era, has a completely different resolution than its predecessor, so why is this?
First we must take a look at leadership. America under Truman was devoted to preventing a domino effect from tainting the world with communism, while the Soviets complained of capitalism and the degradation of the proletariat. What was once confined to a battle of ideologies quickly turned into the Korean and Vietnam Wars, both technically police actions. It was under the banner of brinksmanship that lead Truman, Kennedy, Johnson and oppositely Stalin, Khrushchev, and Brezhnev into increasing states of animosity towards one another. What was different between this era and its predecessor? In my opinion it was the increasing price of technological advancement. It cost both powers a lot of money to participate in the space race and also to build up nuclear arms. Neither could go on at the current pace and both knew it, subsequently boats were turned around, a certain American missile base was taken down in Turkey, and various S.A.L.T. treatise were signed enabling a slackening of arms manufacturing. Instead of full out military involvement (as Korea and Vietnam were vicariously carried out graciously by other parties) both powers decided it was in their best interest to back down, an action that was possible in this setting but not necessarily in the prior era. Since 1947-1989 proved to be more of a bipolar situation, that is two main powers, as opposed to two main powers and several growing states, the number of players was greatly reduced, thereby making it a simpler procedure.
In closing, it is a realist’s opinion that humans will always experience conflict, and it just so happens that growing technology, budding in an environment of hostility, produces bigger and better ways to kill one another. In the first bipolar era that meant machine guns, long distance artillery, and armored cavalry, but approaching 1947 and continuing on to 1989 it meant Sputnik, Oppenheimer, and this crazy little idea called Star Wars. Fortunately national coffers ran red before any prospective battlefields got the chance too (once again not counting our police actions), and the globe’s two powers took a step back into a space of tensioned peace which the previous generations' leaders didn’t have access to, already being too far involved with Poland disappearing from the map and the Rhineland beginning to fill with bodies. Different circumstance caused different outcomes for two similarly distributed generations, I conclude that it wasn’t the advancement of human intellectualism and improved political dealings that are at the cause, but rather the human dislike of empty wallets and genetically mutated children
No comments:
Post a Comment