Class Notes (836,148)
Canada (509,657)
History (3,264)
HIS344Y1 (120)
Ebba Kurt (12)
Lecture

Lec 5

5 Pages
122 Views
Unlock Document

Department
History
Course
HIS344Y1
Professor
Ebba Kurt
Semester
Fall

Description
– division of Germany/Europe/the world – militarization of the Cold War – NATO was founded April 1949 – from Soviet point of view this is a challenge, Eastern bloc creates Warsaw Pact to counter – consequences of Korean War were tremendous – challenged US foreign policy and strategic thinking – national security council 68 (NSC-68) – set US FPfor the foreseeable future – immediately dismissed idea that peaceful co-existence can go on between USSR and USA – no more differentiation between Stalin, Mao and Kim – all seen as originating in Moscow, Soviet Communist attempt to takeover the world – was prompted well before Korean events, brought to government's attention inApril (28 months before Korean War) – what prompted NSC-68 – Czech coup-d'etat, wake-up call for Western governments – Berlin blockade from 48-9, Stalinist challenge – August 1949 – USSR develops nuclear bomb, breaks US nuclear monopoly – up until this point they didn't fear conflict from USSR, thought that they had the upper hand due to nuclear monopoly – any future conflict might include nuclear weapons, had to change their entire strategy – October 1949 – China turns Communist; too many coincidences and events – better be prepared for war with the USSR – essence of NSC-68 – had a number of premises – Soviet Union hell-bent on world ideological domination and control the world – since it tested first atomic bomb USSR reached parity with the US – main idea was that co-existence was unacceptable, had to confront USSR – deemed it necessary to overthrow the communist system, not through a hot war by undermining it from within – entire Eastern bloc had to go – a number of individuals challenged the NSC-68 – Charles questioned validity of both of the premises – how can the Soviets dominate if they haven't managed to recuperate after the devastation of the war, impossible to launch an attack on the US – only advantage USSR had was manpower, still didn't have true nuclear weapons, still had nuclear monopoly/advantage – in terms of army, navy and air-power, much better equipped and trained with bases all over the world – but it was impossible to change the minds of those in Washington, passed and accepted and set US foreign policy for the next two decades – how to approach future showdown with the USSR – had to increase conventional army, had to match soldier for soldier the USSR army – increase US forces in Europe – build more airbases around the Soviet Union and base nuclear bombers; build up deterrent to the Soviet Union, immediate nuclear attack on USSR from bases close to the Soviets – to integrate Western armies and have one unified military structure – joint military planning, coordinate plans of Western European states as well as US – Soviet Union found out very quickly about it and new approach of US, Stalin wanted to counter it by a counter-offensive (peace-offensive) – USSR warned through journals and diplomatic channels – “unmask NATO” – following Marshall Plan and NATO, full control of Western Europe, binding WE to US in terms of economics and military – if there was a confrontation between USSR and US, WE would be the first targets, any state that accepts NATO partnership puts itself at risk and WE should be aware – through NATO, Europe's fate becomes questionable – in event of nuclear war WE would be the first target of USSR, should think twice before joining US – in France and Italy there was sizable Communist Parties, there was a chance that the peace- offensive would work – the Korean War terminated the peace-offensive – NSC-68 changed NATO's policy – before this NATO had shield and sword strategy – 14 divisions had to retain the USSR for 5-8 days – shield – after 5-8 days the sword would come – all 68 nuclear bombs would be dropped on USSR – September 1950 - “forward looking strategy” – no longer would member states of NATO be allowed to run their forces independently – Korean example showed advantages of Communist force over nationalist force – had to have a unified command – in military confrontation separate bases would be the undoing of the western powers – military high command would have to be run by anAmerican general – these were the first steps to ensure the survival of WE – increase in US forces, double the US forces (have 4 divisions stationed in Central Europe and hope that they would be able to hold off Russian invasion) – cost of creating a new NATO both at home and in Europe demanded huge financial sacrifices – Truman administration demanded 50 billion dollars in defence budget – 400% increase from the previous year of 12 billion – as a third step they had to increase the number of NATO itself – 14 divisions was not enough to secure and defend WE, proposed at least 50 divisions – only then would WE be defended, present a deterrent for USSR to launch attack – problem with the 50 division NATO (would have solved disparity in manpower, viable military solution) BUT: not enough people by the members of NATO itself – impossible for Belgium, Luxembourg etc to provide a 50 division NATO – only one state that could theoretically provide enough soldiers, which was West Germany which is not in NATO – proposal to bring in West Germany brought immediate outrage – unacceptable, Britain, France and USSR would never allow it – dividing point between the Western powers – would they be allowed to be a full member, would they be in on the nuclear secrets – Western Germany was eventually incorporated into NATO – Britain, still smarting over their lost of power and prestige, decides to capitalize on the opportunity and recreate Britain as a great power – gave Britain opportunity to step up and create a third power equal to USSR and US, no longer have to follow steps of US – wanted to create a totally independent force particularly toAfrica andAsia, giving British experience, offering technical and economic aid toAfrica andAsia – WE would offer aid and support in return for necessary resources to create a third power – would have enough manpower and diplomatic prestige – problems: – but, full integration with WE was required, opening up the border was calculated by the British itself as annihilating Briti
More Less

Related notes for HIS344Y1

Log In


OR

Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


OR

By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.


Submit