3.5) The Cold War 1956-84 (post Khrushchev Era, detente and its collapse)) Flashcards
1
Q
What inspired the coup that deposed Khrushchev?
A
- 1963 failed harvest, bread had to be imported, rationing re-introduced
- Soviet people losing hope in Khrushchev, found him irresponsible
- Over Cuba had threatened nuclear war
- Caused unrest within the party elite, upset everyone
- Introduced constant reforms and then cancelled them
- A lot of people afraid he would undermine the stability of the system
- Oct 1964 deposed by Brezhnev
2
Q
Who replaced Novotny in Czechoslovakia?
A
The hard liner was replaced with liberal, Dubcek
3
Q
What were Dubcek’s reforms in Czechoslovakia?
A
- Seemed a loyal communist who would only alter what was necessary
- Reformers confident they could update communism
- Socialism with a human face: Freedom of speech, market economy, freedom of travel, ended censorship
- Western styles and visitors poured in
- Trust growing between people and leaders
- Uncomfortable freedom- knew it would end soon
4
Q
How did Warsaw pact and USSR respond to Czechoslovakia?
Called Prague Spring
A
- Hated Dubcek’s reforms, thought he would swap sides in the Cold War
- Moscow threatened them they should halt the disintegration of the party and antisocialist propaganda, stop the growing voices that Czech should leave the Warsaw Pact
- Whole Politburo went to Czech and threatened them to change specific members, introduce censorship,
- Used force August 21st Soviet troops seized Prague airport whilst Czechoslovak leaders were meeting in Prague. Paratroopers arrested the Czechoslovak leaders
- Soviet tanks took over centre of Prague by the next morning
- Soldiers thought they were liberating Prague from a bourgeoise reaction, but once they entered the city they realised they were seizing it and became demoralised and uncomfortable
- Russia for years were deemed as friends of Czechoslovakia- felt betrayed
- Brezhnev doctrine 1968- stated it was a right of the Warsaw pact to intervene to uphold the Warsaw pact in members of the pact (excuse to control Czechoslovakia as they tried to develop away from soviet communism)
5
Q
What was detente?
A
- There was a legacy of confrontation even after the thaw and wanted a new era of cooperation
- The 1970s provided a window of opportunity to cement better relations
6
Q
Why was fear of war a reason for detente?
A
- World-wide destruction expected if both sides were to deploy their full nuclear arsenals effectively.
- USSR catching up to USA in 1970s (not least as US missile spending declined as a result of conventional commitments in Vietnam). Would USSR eventually overtake the USA, creating the possibly opportunity for attack?
- The Cuban Missile crisis had sown the dangers of brinkmanship, something acknowledged by both sides.
- After Cuba USSR leadership never wanted to be caught at such a disadvantage- Khrushchev’s bluff had been called and he fell from power as a result in 1964.
- USSR rearmament continued at pace, quadrupling their stock of ICBMs by 1969, catching up the USA so that they could negotiate from strength.
- New technologies: The Anti-Ballistic Missile system (ABM) threatened this precarious balance. If one side was able to shoot down the missiles of the other, then this would give them the opportunity to attack.
- Multiple independent re-entry vehicles (MIRVs) massively increased the ability to do enormous damage
- M.A.D was under threat
7
Q
What were Russian motives for detente?
A
- 1917 promises still not materialised- Rigid state planning and the cost of rearmament caused low standards of living
- Khrushchev had promised a focus on consumer goods, but didn’t happen
- Seemed impossible to deviate from Soviet model of central planning
- Liberalising the economy would have improved economy in Czech but they had to remain under communist policy
- Russia knew communism didn’t work, but they reform it as they couldn’t admit it didn’t work
- Only disarmament could provide money for domestic reform
- Rising scale of dissident opposition to repressive policies, as voiced by individuals such as Sakharov and Solzhenitsyn- voices of dissent would become more isolated.
- Brezhnev and the eastern European states aimed for a conference to improve relations with the west and guarantee their status and borders, improving security, justifying the Brezhnev Doctrine and delating the dissidents.
- Moscow was concerned about being isolated by a new China-USA axis. Detente promised to neutralise China, secure disarmament and thus bring about domestic improvements, as well as possibly secure western aid/technology (Mao always considered Russians second class citizens)
8
Q
What were the US motives for detente?
A
- Vietnam changed perceptions of limits of US influence
- Oppurtunity for triangular diplomacy- Nixon understood the split between communist states - China vs Russia
-
1972 Moscow summit, trade deals, arms cuts- happened due to triangular diplomacy (trade deals: Nixon offers Russia discounted grain- means Russia would want another summit to get more grain again once it ran out
· Cost of Vietnam war further delayed US domestic reforms promised by Kennedy.1968 urban riots highlighted the need to address social issues in USA.
· Kissinger- “Detente is a means of controlling the conflict with the USSR” - Nixon and Kissinger hoped to draw USSR into a state of interdependency with the USA, giving them the ability to “manage” Soviet power.
- (Moscow always was to be the “main goal”; thus Nixon’s visit to China resulted in an almost immediate invitation to Moscow for an arms summit (SALT I) with the Soviet negotiators showing more flexibility almost immediately)
9
Q
What were European motives for detente?
A
- Political disorder in Europe- climaxed in 1968 (disillusionment with USA)
- NATO 1967 flexible response- NATO held the right to use nuclear weapons first
- Willy brandt and the German problem- ostpolitik
- Ostpolitik attempted to improve relations between West Germany and everywhere in the East- wanted to start talking about German future- attempt to apologise for previous German wrongdoing
- Stabilise relations between east and west
10
Q
What was Ostpolitik?
A
- Willy Brandt- chancellor of west Germany, first chancellor of west to visit East
- Normalisation of relations between eastern Europe and East Ger with West Ger
- Looked to apologise for previous Ger wrongdoing
- There was a drive for detente in NATO- Hamel report 1967
11
Q
How did Brandt pursue Ostpolitik?
A
- Brandt recognised east Germany as a state- opposes Halstein doctrine (East Germany not recognized as a state)
- Triumphant visit to East Germany- brought hope of change, worried the USA- though East would pose its own desire to officiate its state
- The Usa were worried by Ostpolitik, and about German nationalism- memory of WW2. USA scared Brandt could bring about an independent united Germany
- USA created a back channel of communication White house (Kissinger) to Willy Brandt (via Egon Bahr, Brandt’s advisor)- USA always in the loop about West German policy and advancement
- 1970 Brandt goes to Moscow and Warsaw- signs the Moscow accords, apologetic for WW2, claimed they would not advance into USSR again
- Brandt recognised Polish western border (reassures polish safety), visited Warsaw ghetto sites (kneeled at memorial of Jewish fighters)
- Brandt symbolised hope- in ww2 opposed Nazism (pleased Russians) and opposed communism (pleased USA)
12
Q
What treaties occured as a result of Ostpolitik?
A
- Moscow treaty 1970: pre-liminary concessions: FRG signing the non-proliferation treaty, prepared to make economic links with the USSR. Agreed to abandon hall stein doctrine
- 4 power treaty over Belin: (unimpeded traffic between West Berlin and FRG, recognition of West Berlin’s ties with the FRG, right for West Berliners to visit east Berlin)- Brit, France and USA agreed western sectors of Berlin were legally not apart of FRG- eases and improves relations in Berlin
- The Basic Treaty 1972: opened direct negotiation, FRG recognised GDR as an equal sovereign state, accepted that both states should be recognised at the UN, determination for peaceful German unification- created a unified pan-German postal service, testing if unified German institutions were able to work
13
Q
How successful was Ostpolitik and what were its impacts?
A
- Improved east west relations
- Economic and social benefits
- Positive image for West Germany
- Criticism for West Germany
- In 1973 both Germanys welcomed into the UN
- Criticisms from conservatives
- Long term effects- laid groundwork for the eventual reunification of Germany in 1990
- Helped ease tensions and created a more stable environment for the reunification process. Also increased reliance of east Germany onto west Germany
4.5/5 largely successful in improving relations and reducing Cold war tensions- important European policy. But, faced opposition and not all of its goals were fully realised in the short term. The success of the policy was more apparent in the long term, especially considering the reunification of Germany.
14
Q
Who was Nixon’s National Security Advisor?
A
Henry Kissinger
- temperamental, bright and complemented Nixon
15
Q
What methods did Nixon and Kissinger use in detente?
A
- Both preferred to work in secret- established back channels to Moscow and Beijing
- Would expect foreign policy to come from state department, but instead made private back channels for foreign policy
- Wanted meeting with PRC to get out of Vietnam- restore fluidity to national situation
- Anti soviet negotiations (USA and China) scared Moscow- Only once Nixon returns from China do the Russians want to negotiate with USA
- March 1972 North Vietnam launched another offensive in the South and Nixon responded with air attacks (would talks continue if the USA continued to bomb North Vietnam, a soviet ally)
- Dobrynin (Russian ambassador in Washington) and Kissinger met almost everyday- back channel
- Summit would go ahead as planned
- May 20th 1972 Nixon became the first US Pres. to be received in the Kremlin
Kissinger and Dobrynin drank vodka and betted together- got on well
16
Q
What problems from 1972 - 74 threatened detente?
A
- Watergate scandal 1972
- South Vietnam refused to sign Kissinger’s agreement- didn’t damage Nixon’s profile, dominated re-election
- Nixon ordered more assaults on Hanoi hoping to bludgeon it into agreement- North and South Vietnam now ready to sign agreement
- Détente attempted to continue regardless of Watergate- Brezhnev met with Nixon again
- August 1974 Nixon resigned
- 1973 Peace agreements in Vietnam hadn’t stopped the fighting
- USA lost war- Vietnam becomes communist
Obstructions of détente started once Nixon resigned:
- Russians confused how the most powerful man in USA could be overthrown due to a simple case of bugging
- Russians suspicious of Watergate, thought there was a plot to undermine détente
- Removed Nixon a mastermind of international relations
- Issue of human rights- dissidence (someone opposed from within)- Refuseniks were Jews who wanted to migrate to Israel from Russia but weren’t allowed by the Russian govt. Govt claimed that the Jews were allowed to leave only through a exit visa cost (were charged to leave) as a result no one left as they couldn’t afford it
17
Q
What was the Helsinki accord?
A
- 1975, Ford and Brezhnev
- Soviet leaders wanted to guaranteed post war world in Helsinki treaty
- Russians said human rights clause was against communist ideology- had to recognise rights in Eastern European states
- Confirmed borders of Europe
- Gromyko prepared to concede on human rights issue in order to confirm borders, wasn’t going to actually enforce human rights Russia were ‘masters of our own house’
- Human rights provision was a time bomb- USA believed if the USSR and the Warsaw Pact nations respected the human rights it would be worth agreeing to anything else
- Rockets pointed the way to co-existence- USSR and USA made history and docked together
- In space cooperation replaced years of opposition- symbolic of cooperation of global nations
18
Q
Why were the early years of the Carter presdidency problematic?
A
- Aimed to restore confidence of home, and USA influence aboard
- Wanted to promote for human rights with the USSR and limitations of arms
- Carter an unknown figure
- Soviets rejected USA initiative
- Policy asked for deep cuts, eliminate ICBMs:
- Carter sent Cyrus Vance (secretary of State) to Moscow for deep cuts of ICBMs
- Before hand (in lead up to SALT) back channel used between Kissinger and Dobrynin used almost daily–> now communication breaks down (Russians not given time to digest policies, given proposals day before meetings)
- Deep cuts unfair as Russians relied more on ICBMs
- Z Brzezinski (polish, hated the Russians) new Kissinger
- Sense of the ineptitude of the Carter administration
- Vance and Brzezinski had contrasting beliefs and attitudes- hard to Russians to sus out the Carter administration
- USA gained economic prosperity after the war and were completely ahead of the Russians. But after Russia began to catch up America as their starting point was lower- created fear that USA economy would decline
- Russian propaganda trumpeted their economic growth- real sense that USSR would overtake USA
19
Q
What problems were the USSR facing in the late 1970s?
A
- Major problems- even though appeared prosperous
- Had geriatric leaders who were past their time in power
- By 1977 Brezhnev was no longer in full control- Doctors limited his working hours
- Politburo no a cohesive body- Brezhnev couldn’t fully manage
- Living conditions poor
- 1975 Brezhnev, Ford and other leaders signed the Helsinki accord- gave USA power in Russia. Attention of world media interested in Russian goings on
- Dobrynin wouldn’t let USA put pressure about human rights
- USSR system based on oppression
Dissidence:
- Sharansky- Russian Jew who wanted to leave the USSR- opposed the system
- Havel- Czech playwright- Charter 77: human rights doc-
20
Q
What were arms talks like up until SALT 1 in 1972?
1963-72
A
- 1952 the United Nations (UN) passed Resolution 502 which set the objective of the prohibition of all nuclear weapons- little immediate impact as the race to perfect H-bomb technology from 1950 to 1954 prevented any meaningful dialogue between the nuclear weapons states.
- The destructive force of the H-bomb horrified the world, and after the Berlin Crisis of
August 1961 the United Nations established an 18 Nation Disarmament
Committee (ENDC) to pursue disarmament. - The Test Ban Treaty of 1963 and the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty in 1968 were the most significant achievements in the early period of détente- Welcomed in Western Europe, but essentially they divided into two blocs
- By 1968 the Vietnam War was causing a rising wave of anti-Americanism
- Its European allies rejected President Johnson’s argument that the war was a vital part of the global confrontation with
communism - Brezhnev, who rapidly emerged as the key figure in the USSR, was less erratic than Khrushchev and appeared to be more of a conciliator and consensus seeker, with whom the Western European leaders thought they could negotiate.
21
Q
What treaties had been signed to prevent nuclear weapons gorwing, pre- SALT 1?
A
- The Test Ban Treaty of 1963, signed by Britain, the USSR and the USA, banning nuclear tests in the atmosphere, under water and in outer space- rejected by both France and China, who developed their own nuclear weapons.
- In July 1968 Britain, the USA and the USSR signed the Non-proliferation Treaty, in which they pledged themselves not to transfer nuclear weapons to other countries or to assist other states to manufacture them- Nov 1969 West Ger joined
- In 1970 US and Soviet experts began the Strategic Arms Limitation Talk (SALT) in Vienna
22
Q
What did SALT 1 agree?
A
In May 1972 Nixon and Brezhnev signed the
SALT 1 agreement at the Moscow summit. It consisted oftwo parts:
- A five-year freeze on the construction of missile launchers and a freeze on intercontinental and submarine-launched
ballistic missiles and long-range bombers.
- President Nixon accepted that Soviets should have a greater number of missiles than the USA as the Americans had a superiority in multiple independently targetable re-entry
vehicles (MIRV’s), which were capable of hitting more than one target at a
time.
- And a defence against missiles. Both sides were allowed only two anti-ballistic screens, one for their capital cities, Washington and Moscow, and one for their main missile sites. Both sides were left almost defenceless against attack. It was hoped that this ‘mutually assured destruction’, would guarentee peace
- 1972 Basic principles agreement- code of conduct. Either side wouldn’t capitalise on the failings of the other
- A trade/ grain deal for the USSR- promoting dialogue and future deals
23
Q
What were the limitations of SALT 1?
A
No actual reduction of arms
although very successful for usa, helped nixon get re-elected
24
Q
What were the aims of the Helsinki accords 1975?
A
USSR:
- wanted to persuade west to recognise political and economic divisions made at Yalta as permanent
- Wanted to exploit western intelligence on how to modernise the economy and facilitate development
USA:
- wanted accords in return for a soviet agreement on Berlin and the opening of negotiations at Vienna of reduction of arms in Europe
- Concessions on human rights
25
Q
What were the details of the Helsinki accords?
A
- Basket 1- ‘inviolability’ of frontiers, non-intervention in into affairs peaceful resoltion of disputes
- Basket 2- economic, scientific and technological cooperation. Facilitating
business contacts and industrial cooperation and linking transport networks - Basket 3- cooperation on humanitarian matters and agreement of HRS such as freedom of immigration and the reunification of families
26
Q
How did the west critique Helsinki?
A
- Resulted in formal **acceptance of the Soviet annexation of Estonia, Latvia
and Lithuania ** - Denounced Ford and Kissinger for having abandoned the cause of human rights- Argued Brezhnev’s motives were clear; pursuing détente not worth supporting unjust actions of USSR
- Kissinger advised Ford not to receive Solzhenitsyn which was viewed as excessive deference by Moscow.
- Reagan sees Helsinki as giving up on EE who are now legitimately living under Soviets.
27
Q
How did Helsinki effect the eastern bloc?
A
- Became a manifesto of the dissident and liberal movement published in Pravda
- Increased demonstrations of opposition to human rights neglect- ‘helsinki groups’
28
Q
How did the Helsinki accord on human rights 1975 create problems for the USSR?
A
- Watch committees set up to document breeches of human rights
-
Dissidence: Jews wanted to exit the USSR and were refused- became known as refuseniks
- Yakov Rasnik- refusenik member
- Those who campaigned for their rights were sent to labour camps
- Dissidences were sent to psychiatric hospitals and drugged so their body wouldn’t be able to make proper thoughts
- KGB members surrounded cities- recorded dissidents
- Evidence of anti-human rights in Russia fuelled hatred in USA
- Despite disagreements on human rights, SALT II went ahead
29
Q
What were the aims of arms talks 1973- SALT II 1979?
A
- Washington summit- Brezhnev and Nixon- Nixon proposed agreement in the prevention of Nuclear war improving relations, relations good, symbolic unity
- Valdivostok accords- Ford and Brezhnev met, entered an interim agreement that extended SALT I by limiting MIRV tech to maximum of 1320 launchers, USA focus swapped to defence- develops salt 1
- Deep Cut- deteriorates relationship, rejected by Brezhnev
- 1979 SALT II signed
30
Q
What happened at SALT II?
A
- Under Nixon: ABM restriction
- Only real success under Nixon was the ABM restriction (anti-ballistic missile (ABM) (missile defense))
- The SALT Il Treaty signed, June 18th 1979 Signed in Vienna
- Restricted to 2,250 launch vehicles, MIRV restricted to 1,320
-
Soviet invasion of Afghanistan Dec 1979
- Soviets created need for weapons, USA felt threatened
- Seemed to justify Reagan’s view that détente was a façade for USSR to further nuclear development
- 1980 USA boycott the Moscow Olympics (alone), they also do not ratify SALT II- withdraws from Congress
-
Mutual balance force reduction (MBFR) talks in Vienna Oct 1973
- Planned to discuss European rearmament- too focused on details on sizes of forces and so very little achieved
- Rise of political dissent meant disarmament even more unlikely
- Suspicion between NATO and USSR
- Nuclear arms race in Europe:
- Neutron bomb- bad reaction CND and so cancelled by Carter in 1977
- USSR replaced SS4/SS5 IRBMs with SS20 IRBMs- NATO annoyed
- Public hostility in Britain- greater fear of WW3 and apocalypse
31
Q
Why was the deployment of SS20s in Europe by the Soviets significant?
A
- SS20s targeted in western Europe- decision made in secrecy
- alarmed NATO allies with range of 3000 miles
- Soviet intelligence didn’t know about it- found out by USA news feeds- Disjointed nature of Politburo
- USA felt USSR were being dishonest- wanted SALT II but didn’t want to actually disarm- USA fear that détente was a bluff
- Could hit capital cities in Europe
- Not discussed at SALT II
- SS20s posed a risk of decoupling Europe’s security from USA- Europe threatened by nuclear devastation, caused USA to question whether they should intervene
- USA would develop new missiles, and gave 3 years for the USSR to come up with policies about medium range bombers
- Scared that Ger would become the nuclear battlefield
32
Q
What were the limitations of salt II?
A
- Battle to get signed- Loss of Nixon (clever negotiator)
- problem with differing technologies (especially MIRVS, Russians didn’t have them initially)
- In atmosphere of distrust after Helsinki
- Due to soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979 not actually ratified, and Carter shift to harsh outlook on communism
33
Q
Why were there further problems for the Carter presidencey after 1979?
A
- Increasingly charged with being soft on the communists- feared USA’s vital interests were under threat
- SALT II majorly criticised- Carter seen as weak
- Angola and Horn of Africa (Ethiopia and Somalia) communism on the rise
- 1978 Iranian revolution- a USA client state fell to Islamic fundamentalism (worry about control over oil)
- Siege in the US embassy in Iran, kept hostage- Carter team organised a disaster rescue attempt (helicopter exploded
- Iran major exporter of oil to USA- USA described as ‘the great Satan’
- USA economy slowed down due to lack of oil from Iran- Carter blamed
34
Q
What were the aims of the MBFR talks 1973-79?
A
- To reduce the number of conventional weapons in Europe and create a more stable military balance
- Planned to discuss European disarmament
- Between NATO and Warsaw pact members
35
Q
How successful were the MBFR talks?
A
- Very little achieved if anything at all
- European Securtity Council accepted in Helsinki conference 1973 alongside MBFR talks in Vienna 1973
- Not productive conversations, little progress due to differing army methods, hard to apply same policy to different armies. E.g Warsaw pact had 3:1 advantage of tanks, but NATO had tank busting aircrafts
36
Q
Why was there growing discontent in Poland?
A
- (Catholicism in Poland entrenched in movement for national liberty) New Pope John Paul II called on Poland to recapture control of their destiny, against communism
- Thought polish solidarity would mean less power to the authorities
- Shortages everywhere- burdened by foreign debt, loans had been squandered
- Summer 1980 govt rose food prices by up to 10%, workers at Gdansk shipyard staged an illegal strike- drew up 21 demands and refused to leave the shipyard- tried to use truth to conquer govt untruth
- Govt claimed there would be no reprises- gave concessions to workers key demands- now allowed to strike
- Workers joined by intellectuals to form Solidarity- support spread around Europe
- Moscow watched with growing alarm- by dec 1980 soviet pressure was intense- wanted to curb solidarity
37
Q
How did Brezhnev and Jaruzelski resolve the Solidarity crisis?
A
- Dec 1980 USSR didn’t want to mobilise troops and create a second Afghanistan, and last time USSR forces were involved in Europe was Prague Spring- Russian generals didn’t know how reliable their troops were
- Heavy pressure on polish forces to act by soviets (Jaruzelski leader of Poland)
- Influenced the US elections
- Reagan won and promised tough policies against the USSR- détente wouldn’t work, wanted to re-engage in the cold war
- US message was that it would be unacceptable for Warsaw pact members to interfere (wouldn’t be unacceptable for polish forces to intervene)
- Solidarity had 9 million members by 1981
- Brezhnev wanted Jaruzelski to push more harsh measures, wanted it to stay communism- threatened military force
- Dec 2nd 1981 a fireman strike was crushed and was a warning to solidarity that force would be used if they continued
- Night of a planned strike Solidarity was banned and its leaders arrested- martial law declared
- Martial law fractured east west relations- mocked Helsinki as human rights abandoned
38
Q
What were the consequences of the Solidarity crisis in Poland?
A
- Union was now an unstoppable force and went underground
- Jaruzelski spent the next 8 yrs trying to repress the union, but it would survive and Walesa would be elected as Polish president in 1990 as communism collapsed
- This was the last serious threat to soviet control in E. Europe until the late 1980s
39
Q
Why was there a crisis in Afghanistan 1979?
A
- April 1978 a coup occurred to overthrow Muhammad Daoud, in power since 1973 with the support of the leftists People Democratic Party of Afghanistan (PDPA)- the same group that had overthrown Daoud primarily due to his failure to implement the socialist principles which he promised
- This coup led to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in Dec 1979
- The PDPA was an ally of the USSR but began to rapidly breakdown and ultimately a faction in it led by Hafizullah Amin gained control
- Faction started a programme of radical and disruptive land reform. They campaigned against the influence of Islam, rejecting to wear the Islamic veil and use of the Islamic green from the flag
- Soviets became concerned the regime was rapidly alienating many Afghans which could lead to instability- also believing that Amin might realign Afghanistan with the US, Pakistan and China- becoming a direct threat to soviet borders
- Amin was an unreliable ally and unable to control the growing Islamic opposition he was facing
40
Q
What did the soviets want in Afghanistan?
A
- They shared a 2,500km border adjoining the Muslim central Asian republics of the USSR
- Afghanistan was a socialist state and a regional ally, if it aligned with the USA this would lead to capitalist encirclement
- Appeared the USSR was aiding a threatened socialist state but in reality the USSR needed to protect its own security
- Afghanistan posed serious potential threat to the USSR’s buffer zone
- Intervention was viewed as a security necessity
41
Q
How did the USA react to the Afghanistan crisis?
A
- USA hardly considered the possibility of soviet invasion prior. Events in Afghanistan assumed somewhat greater significance for the USA when the Shah’s pro-American regime was overthrown in Iran and Islamic fundamentalists
- USA feared the Ayatollah Khomeini’s regime would collapse and leave Iran vulnerable to leftist and communist influences- further reinforcing the Soviet’s regional influence
- At their summit Carter highlighted to Brezhnev growing concerns where he stated the USA didn’t intend to intervene and he hoped the USSR felt the same way respectively
- Dec 27th 1979 the soviets killed Amin and increased the no. of troops they had sent on the 24th- For the USA the line of supporting and intervening had been crossed creating a crisis for détente
- Carter: ‘Blatant violation of accepted international rules of behaviour’
42
Q
What was the impact of the Afghanistan crisis?
A
Détente was dead
- On Jan 3rd 1980 Carter asked the US senate to postpone any consideration of the SALT II treaty due to the invasion
- The USA did not consider the Soviet POV
In an address on Jan 4th Carter set out a series of measures aimed at the USSR:
* A deferral of action on cultural and economic exchanges
* Major restrictions on soviet fishing privileges in USA waters
* A ban on the sale of high technology and strategic items to the soviets
* An embargo on sales of grain to the USSR
* US military and economic assistance to Pakistan to enhance their security
Carter Doctrine 1980
- USA’s actions were not seen by the soviets as a response to the invasion, but a piece of international opportunism
- This was the final blow in détentes existence embodied by the Carter doctrine
43
Q
What did the Carter doctrine entail?
A
- 8th Jan Carter said to congressmen- the invasion was the greatest threat to peace since the second world war
- Translated an American commitment to prevent any further Soviet advance- emphasising the prospect of a military solution. Finally reinforcing its intention to expand relations with China
- Carter also persuaded NATO allies and the west to suspend east-west détente- However European détente was working well and continued to communicate trade with the USSR
- Carter then announced an increase to the defence budget in 1981
- This doctrine represented an ultimatum to the soviets and shut down any possibility of economic solution
