4172 words
Historians have disagreed about the origins of the Cold War. What is your view about the
origins of the Cold War?
The origins of the Cold War have been disputed for decades, but it is clear that they lie in the
period surrounding the Truman Doctrine. Trailing the end of the Second World War was a
fragile period for the United States and the Soviet Union of playing ping-pong with threats and
proxy wars. The Cold War was a time of intense ideological clashes concerning the political and
militaristic concerns of these two superpowers. The term ‘Cold War’ was first used in 1945 by
George Orwell, to describe the new political climate with the threat of nuclear war lurking1. It
was first used to describe the dynamic relationship between America and Russia in 1947 by
Bernard Baruch, announcing in a speech that they were “amidst a Cold War”2. The origins of the
Cold War evidently lie between the years 1945 and 1947, and the most significant event in
these years leading to the Cold War was the Truman Doctrine, on the basis that it damaged
American-Soviet relations to an irreversible extent. Walter La Feber in ‘America, Russia, and the
Cold War encapsulates this argument, shrewdly dissecting the geopolitical tension and
correspondingly blaming America’s hegemonic and confrontational nature for the Cold War. In
contrast, Cleon Skousen antithetically holds Russia responsible throughout the book ‘A Naked
Communist’, where he assesses the widening schism of the mid-20th century to be a result of
Soviet Russia’s expansionist desires and the strict communist regime. Enclosed by these two
historians stands Vladislav Zubok who, in ‘A Failed Empire’, highlights the weight that each
superpower holds when investigating the escalation of tension, emphasizing the role of specific
Soviet personalities – due to it being an analysis of the Soviet perspective - but acknowledging
how both countries brought themselves to a political impasse. Factoring in the political and
personal backgrounds of these historians, alongside the time of writing and how this might
influence their argument in terms of accessibility and how balanced their assessment of each
perspective was, La Feber’s revisionist argument - that the Cold War was a result of America’s
contentious foreign policy behaviour in the years 1945-47 such as the Truman Doctrine – was
the most compelling.
Despite representing vastly different economic and political systems, America and Soviet Russia
cooperated up until the breaking point in 1947. They both found each other fighting a common
enemy, Nazi Germany and hence worked together to take down the Axis powers. In particular,
the US provided significant supplies – over 11 billion dollars worth - through the Lend-Lease
Act3. This shows that, under the conditions that there was a bigger immediate threat than each
other, the US and Soviet Russia were capable of cooperating. This relationship diminished
towards the end of the war as it became clear that they were losing reason to work together.
The Axis powers continued to fade in strength until their eventual defeat in 1945, leaving a void
between the global powers. As Germany fell, the huge differences between communist Russia
and America came to light. In 1946, George Kennan sent the ‘Long Telegram’ to Washington
1 (Dunton, n.d.)
2 (Baruch, 1947)
3 (Office of the Historian, 2013)
, from Moscow outlining his perception of the Soviet threat, analysing their fear of invasion as a
potential driving factor to hostility and aggression to the countries around them. This
perspective formed the basis of American ideology towards communist Russia and introduced
the policy of “containment” 4. This shows a clear shift in direction for US-Soviet relations. A year
prior, America had loaned weapons and resources to the Soviets but was now focused on
containing and resisting Soviet expansion. This means that America was the first to step in the
direction of the Cold War. However, this was not the beginning of the Cold War as the ‘Long
Telegram’ was not a policy, it was a set of ideas that would shape the Truman administration
and the decisions in 1947 that would go on to begin the Cold War. As America became more
vigilant of Soviet Russia because of Keenan, policies like the Truman Doctrine were introduced
which shattered the relationship between the two countries because it was a political shift,
rather than just an ideological one. This highlights the deterioration of Soviet-American
relations; therefore, the beginning of the Cold War and how America was responsible for it.
When considering how confrontational America had become by the mid-1940s, it is no surprise
that Walter La Feber blames them for the Cold War. La Feber emphasises how Truman’s
inflexibility stirred up trouble post-war. La Feber’s book ‘America, Russia, and the Cold War’
explains why this alliance crumbled and investigates the “limited bargaining room” 5 left behind
by Potsdam, and how “Truman’s toughness… stiffened”6 Stalin’s position regarding Eastern
Europe. La Feber highlights how Truman gave Russia minimal wiggle room during the Truman
Doctrine, and it was more of an indirect attack rather than a statement. In his doctrine, Truman
declared that they would do “whatever was necessary”7 to prevent the spread of communism
abroad. This conveys the American attitudes towards Communist Russia and shows the
provocative nature of the Doctrine and exactly how it was an attack on Russia. La Feber’s
assessment of primary evidence makes his argument increasingly convincing because he
explores the passively violent behaviour from America towards Russia, using the direct words of
the individuals like Truman who were involved. This evaluation of America’s accountability for
the outbreak of the Cold War is extremely persuasive because it considers the extent of which
America was provocative, and whether their political and militaristic decisions were made to
undermine the Soviet Union. Furthermore, La Feber evaluates both perspectives of the Truman
Doctrine. During Stalin’s election speech, he talks of the “violent disturbance” 8 that Truman’s
statement brought and La Feber interprets this as Stalin believing “war was inevitable”9. This
concludes that the Doctrine was the starting point of the Cold War, which holds considerable
weight against Zubok’s and Skousen’s argument because of the criteria of which he holds the
parties involved against to understand how the Cold War begun. La Feber measures the extent
of which the relationship between America and America deteriorated and summarizes the
origins of the Cold War because of American actions post-war. The revisionist view holds
4 (Keenan, 1946)
5 (LaFeber, America, Russia, and the Cold War, 2006)
6 (LaFeber, America, Russia, and the Cold War, 2006)
7 (Truman H. S., 1947)
8 (LaFeber, America, Russia, and the Cold War, 2006)
9 (LaFeber, America, Russia, and the Cold War, 2006)
