From Last Lecture…
1. China and the effects of it becoming communist
Especially with Third World power vacumn
2. The US therefore tried to influence events in the Third World and confronted revolutionary forces.

US / USSR driven to intervene in third World because of their idoeologies.
Both saw a natural progression to change the world order, by wanting to extend their ideas or freedom of justice.
Or is it an extension of another form of European Imperialism.


3. De-colonisation

So why were the 2 sides so intent on spreading their beliefs?

USA

- Wanted to spread its beliefs .i.e based on liberty and free market.
- It had a vision that what it was, all countries would be in the future.
- Reform states

For the US

- Decolonisation was welcomed as it brought an end to European colonial empires and provided avenues for US political and economic beliefs and liberties.
- There was a need to make the world safe for capitalism and this meant intervening in places where this was threatened.
- This meant that the US government also poured great amount of aid in many places in the Third World.
- Japan was the prime example.
- On the other hand it also meant a threat of collective ideologies getting the upper hand in the Third World. (Korea, Vietnam, China, Malaya, Philippines where the US supported wars against Communists forces.)

USSR

- Marxism called for a worldwide revolution so its core ideal was for the spread of Communism.
- Like the USA there was a desire to spread its ideology. The Third World provided this opportunity because it was a vacuum.
- It was also inherited from a history of Russian expansion.
- But also called for Worldwide Revolution
- Communism was seen as a vehicle for revolution in former territories.


After the World War
- Security issues also began to play a role.
-For e.g. The USSR wanted a foothold in Africa and it thought that Lybia would be a good starting point.
- Iran, it supported the Soviets supported seperatist or rebel groups like Democratic Party of Kurdistan.

Khrushchev wanted to allow the transition to Communism in the Third World in various ways and not just in the prescribed Stalinist model. Stalin had failed to see that the transition could take various forms.



Decolonisation

The war caused a strain on European power
So they lost their grip on their colonies because they lost them in the war or it became too much a burden
Also many leaders became Western educated.

Revolutionaries
- WWII helped to end the colonial system.
o It ended the will and ability of the European elites to hold on to these possessions.
o Process of decolonisation began in the 1940s and lasted till the 1970s. Throughout this time, the battle for the hearts and minds of the people lasted was in full swing.
o In many places, like Africa decolonisation was quick
o But sometimes the presence of outside forces created long lasting rebellions and insurgencies after independence

2 Models of De-colonisation
Options for the 3rd World

1. Symbolised by the US, promised intensive urban based growth in both public and private sector, imports of advanced (consumer) goods and the latest technology.
But this meant an association with US style imperialism
Many countries thought that The US was the more powerful of the 2 and therefore held a greater attraction.

2. The other offered politically induced through centralised planning and focused on heavy industries and colectivised agrucultures, independent of the unpredictable market forces. But this meant, that those that follwed it were in danger of taking the secondary option.
Some countries felt safer with the USSR model. E.g. Zambia, Algeria, Syria, Indonesia.

Both however, meant entry into modernity so both were attractive. But which one? So there was a battle for the hearts and minds.



THE THAW AND A CHANGE IN THE COLD WAR

In the USSR

By 1953, Stalin dies.
- G.M. Malenkov becomes Head of State, There was a pressing need to reduce investment in heavy industries and improve consumer industries.
- Molotov: Foreign Minister

Nikita Khrushchev becomes Party Secretary. Eventually would gain almost complete control because he was incharge of the Party and able to put supporters in key positions. Even managed to escape a Politburo vote to oust him by having a Central Committee vote…managed to remove or force the resignations of key opponents
While never had complete control as Stalin because he still was answerable to the Politburo. Nonetheless dominated till 1964.

20th Party Congress – Secret Speech

1956 – Scathing attack on Stalin. It was against his rule of terror and purges. It was done to try and improve the standing of the Party and it was directed solely at Stalin and the secret police, which became brought under party control.
Especially his abuse of power
- De-Stalinisation – removed Stalin from mauseleum he shared with Lenin, Stalingrad renamed Volgograd

Secret Speech (Once it leaked out, had consequences) Because Stalin was denounced many of his policies were seen as wrong and to be changed. If Khrushchev could denounce Stalinism, why not they.

It also retreated from Stalin’s belief in “capitalist encirclement” and his belief that the 2 sides would be forced to fight

Looked towards peaceful coexistence (That is there was no need for there to be an ultimate conflict between the 2 sides). Setting the stage for détente. (N.B. Détente did not mean the end of conflict but, for the USSR, it meant creating favourable conditions for peaceful socialist and communist construction.)

He believed that Communism would eventually win. But there was no lead for a war between the 2 that might prove catastrophic.

N.B - However, while this seemed like détente, peaceful coexistence, it did not mean that they 2 sides were willing to give up their power and influence. This was especially true in their spheres of influence.

Reactions to Speech

West
Some saw it as Soviets relaxing control but not really

China
By mid 1950s, China seemed to pull away from Moscow.
At first, hey seemed to be on the same wavelength.
E.g. - helped fight the Korean War.
In Feb 1950, they signed a 30-year alliance and the USSR tried to get PRC the UN Security Council seat.
So at first it seemed that The USSR had a strong ally.

BUT soon cracks began occurring – Loans to China were seen to be not enough. Border disputes occurred frequently as well

The worse was the aftermath of Khrushchev’s speech.
- His call for Peaceful Existence made Mao believe that Khrushchev was veering away from Marxist-Leninist thinking. Mao believed that Khrushchev had no right to decide policies for the Communist world and began challenging his leadership of the Communist world. Mao believed that they should work towards defeating Capitalism.
Further conflict would continue to strain relations between the 2.
- Both sides believed in different ways to communism with China wanting to put emphasis on the Great Leap Forward method of collectivisation and therefore not following the Soviet Model of industrialisation.
- The Soviets denounced Chinese pledge of military support to Taiwan rather than supporting them against the US.
- By the 1970s the Chinese would move closer to the West
The feud would continue till the 1980s, with an increase in relations under Gorbachev.





Eastern Europe

Yugoslavia – Even visited Yugoslavia. His visit to Tito may have showed that he believed that there were “many roads to socialism”. 1956 visit seemed to show acceptance. Khruschev believed that if Stalin had understood that Tito never wanted to breakaway but believed in attaining Communism its own way, it would never have split for the Communist bloc.

Poland – After Stalin’s death, many Eastern bloc countries began seeking partial independence.

1956 – strikes and riots in city of Poznan. The United Worker’s Party wanted Wladyslaw Gomulka returned to power (he had been imprisoned during Stalin’s purges and recently released). He was soon admitted into the Polish Politburo. This led to to Khrushchev leading a team to Poland to try to stop Gomulka but they realised it was not woth the risk of fighting Poland. Gomulka had no desire to share power with non-communists and take Poland out of the Warsaw Pact. He could be tolerated because he was willing to toe the line

Hungary – Imre Nagy came to power after internal fighting between Hungarian communists party. The mood in Hungary seemed to mean that just the removal of Stalinists was not enough and people’s protests became worse. Resentment and economic problems meant led to Nagy’s announcing on 1 Nov 1956 that Hungary was independent, with elections promised and a possible end to communist party rule. Khruschev sent the Red Army in 3 days after proclamation and after savage fighting, executed Nagy and brought in Janos Kadar, a conservative. He would later introduce reforms that raised the Standard of living. The combination of carrot and stick kept Hungary quiet.

Why the difference in approach?

Soviets were not willing to allow the split in its defense bloc. Poland never wanted out of the Warsaw pact. Hungary’s actions were too severe. Khrushchev was never willing to allow the other countries to break away. While he was willing to allow some leeway he would not tolerate the break up of the USSR’s position. Security was still the main factor.
Many road to socialism could be tolerated but it still had to be socialism and the Soviets leadership still had to be recognized.

Consequences for the West – They were appalled at the actions but did nothing. The West was not willing to go to war over Eastern Europe. Spheres of influence dominated. The Soviets and other countries in Eastern Europe recognised this and the Soviets maintained control with little incident till 1968.

Khruschev vs Mao. – peaceful competition as treason.

By 1960s, USSR: Soviet idoelogy reached a stage whereby the Third World was essential to the existence of Socialism –
- China was no longer an ally
- March towards a historical goal
- Stalin’s successor felt this was possible without conflict between each other. This manifested itself in conflicts for control of the Third World.

Sometimes
Events that were / are considered part of the Cold War had very important domestic / internal reasons for happening.
(Korea, Vietnam)

Intervention in 60s and 70s
- Sino –Soviet Split – Mao (in charge of a third world country, seemed to believe he had more auntority about Marxism then Khrushchev)
o Mao wanted to opposed the US more readily than Khruschev did.
o Did not like the idea of peaceful coexistence (against Marxist-Leninist Doctrine)
- USSR actually irritated but at the same time awed by Cuba and Vietnam’s actions against USA.
- USSR’s policy seemed to change with different leaders – Stalin harsh and very dogmatic, Khrushchev allowing many road to socialism, Brezhnev’s renewed activism.
o Khruschev saw decolonisation as creating a new world where the USSR could operate.
o A Leninist concept of building relations with countries who are struggling against colonial (capitalist) rule
o Belief that Marxist could instill unity and revolutionary ideas into the emerging working class
o Also instill an ‘internationalist’ ideal.
o CMC changed things
o As well as numerous coups in Third Worls in mid-1960s
 ‘Losses’ in Indonesia, Algeria etc showed that there had to be a building up of the Communist Parties rather than vague radicalism

- USA’s policies had more consistency
o Despite the problems of Vietnam, there was a lessening of the sense og “danger” that seemed to be in the rhetoric of Eisenhower and Kennedy.
o Places like Congo, Indonesia, Algeria seemed to settled down away from USSR
o “successes” also done without large scale involvement. Just some covert CIA work.
o However, by late 1960s, there was a danger that Vietnam would lead to others like it.


Cuba

History
Part of the West Indies
- Havanna is 170km from Florida’s Key West
- Very near Jamaica, Bahammas and Haiti
- Fertile lands, and mountain ranges
- Temperature between 22-27 degrees
- Currently – State controlled economy
- Main exports are sugarcane, tobacco, fruits, nickel and ore
- Rich in music and culture
o Mambo, Rumba etc
- Education is mandatory and free schooling
- Roman Catholic

Cuban Revolution
Began as a Nativist rebellion and gradually developed into a Marxist experiment
- Fidel Castro
o Born in 1926
o Saw Fulgencia Batista’s regime as allied with US exploitation of resources and a governement that could not reform society and the economy
o Wanted to show that Cubans (and all Latin Americans) could rule themselves
o In early 1950s had launched numerous attacks against the Batista regime
o Imprisoned and went to Mexico upon release. Met Ernesto Che Guevara and began learning about Marxism
- The US had been arming and supporting Batista, despite his repressive regime (“he may be a son of a bitch but at least he is our son of a bitch). This was a familiar policy of the US in Latin America, where numerous opressive regimes were backed by US money asl long as they were anti-Communist.

- Castro’s forces defeated Batista’s and took over Havana in Jan 1959
- The US were afraid of this new Communist threat in its backyard. Castro also had plans for revolution in other parts of Latin America
o This meant that there would be less dependence on the US for trade and an increase in trade with the USSR
o Responded by prohibiting most exports to Cuba, thereby cutting off the economic lifeline
o CIA trained Cuban exiles
o CIA made plans for an invasion
o John F. Kennedy, who did not want to seem soft on Communism gave the go ahead
o He knew that this wasa threat to Latin America
-
- Bay of Pigs Invasion 16 April 1961
o Happened at Playa Giron because it was lightly defended
o But it turned out to be a disaster. CIA and Cubans forced to surrender by 3rd day. JFK had been unwilling to provide air support
o This only made Castro turn even further to the left. Saw the US as imperialist
o Increasingly impressed with USSR. Hoped to follow their model especially the model for social justice and equality.
o Feb 1960, signed a trade agreement with USSR – (offerred trade and protection)
o Tried to get into COMECON


Cuban Missile Crisis

Why did Khruschev do it?
- Because the strategic advantages were temporary at best especially since long range missiles could already reach the USA
- Maybe it was to get concessions from elsewhere.
- Especially with US stationing missiles in Turkey, next to USSR
- Saw a new young President in JFK


Asia
– Role of Japan. – lost their colonies, as well as showed that Asian could rule themselves
– While the new leaders of these countries merely replaced colonialism with their own form, they did promote nationalism
– America – also promoted the cause of Nationalism, e.g. making plans for giving independence to the Phillipines (4th July, 1946)

Another example was India. British were far more willing to give up independence. Howver, they could not prevent the break up of India along religious lines. The Muslims wanted an independent state and on 15 Aug, 1947 2 new states were created – India and Pakistan. This was followed by great migration of Muslims.

French in Indochina. French not so willing to give up their colonies.
Early Vietnamese nationalists could not fight the French because of fear of reprisals. (guillotine)

Some like Ho Chi Minh were attracted to Communism. – “it dealt a great deal with the colonial question.”
After the war, USA tried to get the French to follow the British lead and grant Vietnam independence, but the French were not as willing.
By the end of the War, Ho controlled much of Vietnam and declared independence which led to war versus the French.
17 Aug 1945, Sukarno had declared independence. 2 week after that Ho did the same.
He even quoted from the 1776 America Declaration of Independence.
“All men are created equal”
“all the peoples on the earth are equal from birth…have a right to live, to be happy and free.”
How is this relevant? Did the French and USA have a right to fight them?

Using guerilla tactics they were able to fight on, despite disadvantages of technology.

By 1950, USA had been concerned about the communist offensive in Asia and provided aid.
The USSR provided aid to Ho.
To the US, revolutions did not have indigenous caused but were planned from out side.
By spring 1954, the battle of Dien Bien Phu (“hell in a very small place”0 meant French involvement was over.

By 1954, the big powers once again showing how much the controlled everything. USSR and US had bigger issues such and so ignored Ho’s calls for help and divided Vietnam along the 17th parallel with elections to be held in 1956
The Americans, which wanted democracy, delayed elections and became increasingly tied to the repressive Ngo Dinh Diem.
Once this belief in stopping the Communists in Asia took root it became identified with the survival of the US and “democracy”. The localised conflict then began to signify much about the cold war as an ideological struggle that was played out in much of the Third World.

Africa
French in Algeria
- Hypocrisy?
- On the same day the French were liberated from Germany, they fired on an independence rally in Setif
- By 1962, when the French left, almost half a million Algerians had been killed.
- Did the West allow the Third World to go or was it forced on them?

1954, after the July 1954 Geneva Agreement which got the French out of Vietnam.

Middle East.
Arab – Israeli War 1948.
- May 1948, The British were supposed to withdraw from Palestine
- Violence escalating.
- April 9, about 200 Palestians were killed and later 77 Jews
- Arab States invaded Israel (Jorda, Syria, Egypt, Lebanon) but they were uncoordianted
- Israeli victory allowed them even more land than the UN partition had given them.
- Refugees problem. No one wanted them (other Arab states and it led to a minority Arab in Israel)
- Israel and USSR broke relations
- There would be a second war for revenge…just needed a spark

Gamal Abdel Nasser took over power in Egypt.
1956 – Nationalised Suez Canal.
British and France prepared for war, joined by Israel who were angerred by Nasser’s anti Jew rhetoric.
Egypt armed by Soviets but it was defeated

1967 – Six Day War
Nasser had demanded UN forces leave the region and he joined with Jordan.
Israel attacked.
Israel claimed it was a preventive war.
Included in the spoils were the West Bank (from Jordan) and Golan Heights.
Therefore took over Jerusalem, which became the new capital.
The US and USSR which had backed the participants wanted some kind of resolution, so UN Resolution 242 which called for the withdrawal of Israel. (rare show of unity) and a recognition by the Arabs of Israel and deal for Palestine refugees. But could not strike a deal..
Maybe the big nations did not always get their way. Israel would rather have land then peace.

Nb.. West Bank has Hebron city which has the tomb of Abraham (forefather of Jews and Muslims (Isaac and Ishmael). Both religions go there seperated by a rope

Other crises
Yom Kippur War 1973
Camp David Talks 1978

Latin America
- America believed it was their mission to lead Latin Central America towards democracy and Capitalism (it was their backyard)
- From Monroe Doctrine
- First direct action Guatemala 1954. Jacobo Arbenz increasing cooperation with The Guatemalan Communist Party was seen as dangerous
- US trained troops (in Honduras) launched an attack on Guatemala
- Led to a coup where Arbenz replaced by military dictator Castillo Armas on 27 June 1954
- Similar events would follow, e.g in the Dominican Republic
- The USA would sponsor military dictators who were anti-communist even if it meant that social freedoms were put on the “backburner”