Origins of the Cold War, 1945 - 48

1. Young & Kent: International Relations since 1945 Origins of the Cold War, 1945 - 48 An explanation of how the 1945 tensions in the Grand Alliance developed and led to the Cold War

2. The Soviet Approach to the Post War International Order • Security through spheres of influence • Each of the Big Three to be responsible for security in areas of vital interests • Soviet vital interests - in Eastern and Central Europe particularly Poland and Romania because friendly governments there could only be obtained through Soviet imposed regimes

3. The American Approach to the Post War International Order • Replacing spheres of influence and Roosevelt’s ‘4 policemen’ idea by principles deemed important for the new world order and American economic and political interests • Security to be achieved through the new United Nations • Vital interests - Latin America and the Pacific

4. The British approach to the Post War International Order • The needs of the British Empire required spheres of influence and close co-operation with the United States to establish principles which would be applied outside the British Empire while it was transformed into the new Commonwealth. • Vital interests - the Middle East and the Mediterranean

5. The impact of the differences at the summit conference of Yalta 1945 • Yalta Feb 1945: - the postponement of decisions on Germany - rhetoric and Declarations - not the application of principles - nor the translation of power politics and vital interests into practical arrangements for particular areas - agreement on the Eastern frontier of Poland - the dominance of discussions on Europe • The consequences of Yalta in the spring of 1945: - Western resentment at Soviet failure to comply with the Declarations on Poland and Liberated Europe - success of the May Hopkins Mission to Moscow to get Stalin to broaden the Polish government in line with the Declaration on Poland

6. The impact of the differences at the summit conference of Potsdam1945 • Potsdam July/August 1945: - increased disagreements as areas outside Europe were discussed - the Mediterranean and the Middle East (the Italian colonies and the Black Sea Straits) were FIRST added to the disagreements over Eastern Europe (the nature of the governments in Romania and Bulgaria) - German reparations agreement • The consequences of Potsdam: - final decision on Poland’s Western frontier postponed but territory up to the W Neisse to be administered in the meantime as part of Poland with important economic implications for Germany and Europe - agreement on many specifics postponed to the treaty negotiations - storing up of suspicions

7. The London Council of Foreign Ministers Sept 1945 • Other factors producing tension between Yalta and the London Council: - the dropping of the atomic bomb and the future controls over atomic energy. - the Soviet requests for a trusteeship in Tripolitania (now part of Libya) - the occupation arrangements for Japan - the future of Kars, Ardahan and Trieste • The reasons for the Council’s failure: -the apparent reason: - Molotov’s initial acceptance and subsequent rejection of the procedural arrangements for the participation of the lesser powers in drawing up the peace treaties with Germany’s allies - the real reason underlying the failure: - the preference of all powers for confrontation in the pursuit of their own priorities rather than for co-operation through compromise

8. The developing confrontation September 1945 –March 1946 • The failure of the Moscow Council of Big 3 Foreign Ministers December 1945 as the last US attempt at compromises. • Stalin’s speech on the incompatibility of the ideologies, February 1946 • Churchill’s Iron Curtain speech, March 1946 • Soviet pressure on Turkey • US public opinion turning against the Soviets • Kennan’s idea of containment by which the United States secured the industrial areas of Western Europe, February 1946 • The Soviet refusal to carry out their treaty obligations and withdraw troops from Iran, March 1946

9. The general causes of the increasing power political confrontation • The importance of vital power political interests in Eastern Europe, the Pacific and the Mediterranean • The difficulty of reconciling principles with the practical pursuit of vital interests • The problems of each ally accepting the vital interests or principles of all the other Allies

10. The specific causes of the growing British confrontational stance • If the British denied the importance of political principles and accepted spheres of influence on a reciprocal basis it would “detract from their standing as a great world power with interests in all areas of Europe” • If the British accepted political principles and concessions to preserve co-operation they feared that they would be denied their exclusive influence in the Mediterranean and Middle East which was deemed vital to their position as a world power

11. The specific causes of the growing Soviet confrontational stance • If the Soviets accepted political freedoms in Eastern Europe they would end up in some countries with governments traditionally hostile to Russia • If the Soviets accepted the economic administration of Germany on a co-operative basis they would lose the ability to exploit the German resources in the Eastern zone so effectively • If the Soviets renounced spheres of influence and control it was now unlikely that the Americans and the British would accept any role for them in Western areas of influence (Japan and the Pacific, the Mediterranean and Middle East)

12. The specific reasons for the growing American confrontational stance • If the Americans accepted spheres of influence they feared the impact on US public opinion which had been cajoled into accepting a war for freedom • If the Americans were excluded from other areas of vital interest they feared that their vastly expanded economy would suffer • The growing importance of ideology and the challenge of the communist and non-communist left in Europe - the link between communist ideology, domestic forces in Europe and the Soviet Union - the threat this presented to the international economic order dominated by the US

13. American securing of vital interests in Western Europe and Japan 1946-1947 • The merging of the western zones in Germany and the increase in German economic production to help European recovery • The Truman Doctrine of March 1947 promising US support for “free people who are resisting attempted subjugation by armed minorities or by outside pressures” • The Marshall Plan June 1947 to provide aid for European economic recovery • The American occupation regime in Japan

14. Soviet securing of vital interests in Eastern Europe 1946-1947 • The imposition of Soviet puppet governments through communist coups or rigged elections: - Romania, November 1946 - Poland, January 1947 - Hungary, August 1947 - Czechoslovakia, February 1948 - The Bulgarian elections of late 1946 were suspect but not so blatantly rigged

15. Cold War replaces tension and confrontation 1948 • The power political attempts at agreement on the new world order superseded by ideological confrontation from 1946 onwards • Rhetoric replaced by more concerted propaganda campaigns, 1948 • US Containment ends as a purely defensive strategy, 1948 • The ideological confrontation between communism and capitalism taking place around rival socio-economic orders and their political systems is now crucial

16. Analytical Summary and Key Points • 1945-46: the Cold War developed from different approaches to the nature of the post-war world • Preventing aggression and ensuring stability by economic recovery through co-operation in a new international order leads to the confrontation that defines the Cold War - combination of power and status (international and foreign policy dominated) and ideology (domestic and socio-economic policy dominated) • This priority that the Big 3 gave to co-operation was replaced by confrontation and securing vital interests 1946-49 • The power political priorities in defining the new international order gave way to ideological concerns that the international order should not disrupt the domestic status quo as defined in socio-economic terms