Causes/achievements of Détente Flashcards
Nature of Détente
Period in which USA/USSR attempted to reach general agreement on arms reduction/trade relations
Characterised by summit meetings between senior figures and reduction in hostile propaganda
Though détente didn’t include attempts to resolve ideological diff b/w superpowers
Reasons for USA to pursue Détente
Vietnam War:
- US came to terms w/ realisation that there were limits power on real stage
- War weakened moral authority of US as leader of Free World
- Extr. expensive - 1969 cost govt $30 billion
- Nixon hoped w/d could be achieved in part by improving relations w/ USSR, who supported Vietcong since Brezhnev (1964).
Economics:
- By 70s, ‘long post-war boom’ came to end:
- inflation reached 6% in 1970
- unemployment rose to +5%
- 1970s saw end of Bretton Woods currency system - made int’l trade less stable, leading to econ. difficulties in West
- Harsh econ. impact of Vietnam led to decline in support for foreign intervention in wider world
- Détente offer opportunity to uphold interests w/o need for military intervention that may not succeed; more could be gained by negotiation than confrontation
- allowed influence of powerful industrial-military complex to be reduced
- Plans for social reform in US undermined by lack of resources due to military spending
- riots showed social issues needed to be tackled
- Détente allows resources to be released from military budget to improve society
- From purely econ. standpoint, would allow US to invest more resources in own commerce and financial services
Kissinger’s realpolitik:
- Détente was expression of realpolitik - focused on practical issues e.g. arms reduction and down-playing ideological diff/securing national interests
- For US, détente was method of adapting to world where power seemed to be weaker. US interests could be pursued by negotiation w/o reducing its influence int’lly and at same time, addressing serious domestic issues.
Normalisation:
- Kissinger believed process of negotiation could ‘normalise’ US/USSR relationship
- Believed détente could create framework in which superpowers could work, preventing erratic behav. on part of USSR
Nixon/NSA Kissinger had est. credentials as anti-communists - allowed them to carry large degree of US right-wing support w/ them.
Trade/arms agreements presented as methods of restraining USSR.
Rapprochement w/ China allowed policy to be seen as one that weakened Communist Bloc, rather than one that gave in to communism.
Thus, Nixon able to pursue Détente.
Reasons for USSR to pursue Détente
Though ideology pointed towards inevitable communism/capitalist conflict, national security interests were overriding factor determining Soviet FP, so pushed USSR towards Détente
Economics/domestic factors:
-
USSR econ. 1/6 of US
- were inc. demands for consumer goods fr Russian pop that econ. couldn’t fulfil
- Détente allowed leaders to ease econ. probs by reducing defence spending/encouraging loans/trade fr US
-
Politburo faced mounting econ. probs:
- needed to divert efforts of military sector to deal w/ these
- by cont’d arms race, Soviet found hard to transfer prod. capacity in industry to consumer goods
- Détente would provide int’l background necessary to make this possible
- Improved relations allow access to much-needed West tech/grain supplies
- by end 1970s Soviet exceeded US prod. in steel/cement/oil, but successes outdated
- needed access to new tech developing in West e.g. microchips/computers
- by end 1970s Soviet exceeded US prod. in steel/cement/oil, but successes outdated
Nuclear partity:
- Adv. of accommodation w/ US was to stop US forging ahead in nuclear arms race by developing new tech that USSR feared it wasn’t able to keep pace with
- Détente offered possibility of achieving nuclear parity through treaties that limited nuclear stockpiles of both
E. EU:
- Accommodation w/ US would help stabilise Soviet hold over E. EU
- hoped to gain recognition from West for influence/control over E. Bloc, giving it legitimacy that it failed to gain by imposing communism on the region after 1945
- Romania’s development of a more independent FP and Czech Crisis (1968) were signs that Soviet hold of E. EU needed strengthening
China:
- Deterioration of Sino-Soivet relations and US’ inc. willingness to negotiate w/ China caused fear of anti-Soviet alliance
- Sino-Soviet split pushed Soviet towards accommodation — if conflict occurred w/ China, then USSR wanted to ensure that US wouldn’t get involved! Détente could achieve this!
- Détente was attempt to diffuse this by est. working relationship w/ US
Key features of Détente:
Moscow Summit (1972)
Nixon and Brezhnev set out basis of new relationship between their countries
SALT I, culmination of Strategic Arms Limitation Talks was at heart of meeting
Achievements of Détente:
SALT I (1972)
Nixon/Brezhnev signed 2 agreements collectively known as SALT I
Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty:
- Restricted US/USSR to 2 anti-ballistic missile shields each
- Further development of ABM tech restricted
- Oversight Commission est. to enforce aspect of treaty
Interim Agreement on Offensive Missiles:
- Limited no. of missile launchers
- Agreement was due to last 5 years in anticipation of a full agreement to be drawn by 1977
- SALT significant as it changed superpowers’ relationship
- Treaty indicated willingness to work together to limit prod./stockpiling of nuclear weapons, rather than engage in arms race
Acheivements of Détente:
**Basic Principles Agreement **
Designed to underpin superpower relations
Included acceptance that superpowers would:
- co-exist peacefully
- recognise e/o as equals
- exercise restraints at times of crisis
- avoid confrontation
- Meeting agreed on Joint Commercial Commission - negotiated deals b/w superpowers
- Significant - for first time, it intro. series of rules governing most aspects of relationship b/w superpowers
- Made relationship more stable!
EU Ostopolitik and Berlin Agreement (1972)
- EU on both sides of Iron Curtain involved in own form of détente - Ostopolitik
- Involved EU govts working together to address problems created by divided EU
- 1970-71 E/W German govts negotiated Berlin Agreement - guaranteed borders of W. Germany
- E. Bloc could not invade!
- Was significant - prior to agreement, E. Bloc refused to formally recognise W. Germany
- Ostopolitik was imp. for détente as if further stabilised relations
Helsinki Accords (1975)
Set out comprehensive framework governing relations b/w E/W EU
Agreement tackled aspects of EU politics:
Basket 1: Security issues
- Pledged to respect one another’s sovereignity
- EU states couldn’t interfere in other’s internal affairs
- Accepted possibility that borders may change by peaceful neogtiation
Basket 2: Economic, cultural, scientific and environmental issues:
- Pledged to co-op on matters of mutual interest and foster good trading relations across EU
- Agreed to shared W technology w/ E
Basket 3: Human rights
- Pledged to respect human rights of their citizens
- Pledged to relax travel restrictions across EU
BUT baskets were pledges - couldn’t be legally enforced!
Economic realities of détente in West
Following OPEC Crisis (four-fold inc. in oil prices 1973), West economies rebounded quickly
Countries responded to oil crisis w/ innovation/reform:
- Created efficient engines
- Creation of G7 group - finance ministers from West (incl. US) brought renewed econ. stability at an int’l level, compensating for fail of Bretton Woods
- 1974-78 - return to oil price stability; formed foundation for further econ. growth
Renewed econ. strength of West cut need for Détente in eyes of US govt
Economic realities of détente in East
1945-70 Soviet econ. performed relatively well, reducing wealth gap b/w USSR/USA
But from 1970, econ. began marked decline
1980 USSR GDP only 37% of USA, caused by:
- Brezhnev ordered end of econ. liberalisation in Soviet and return to central planning - were insufficient/failed to promote/sustain econ. growth
-
Borrowed money from West in early 70s
- rise in interest hit USSR hard
- Critics of détente tried to limit trade agreement b/w powers:
- Congress intro. Jackson-Vanik amendment (1974) on protection of human rights in USSR
- USSR pulled out on trade deal - denied access to US technology
- Congress intro. Jackson-Vanik amendment (1974) on protection of human rights in USSR
Significance of economic balance
Econ. decline in East made détente more desirable for Soviet leaders:
- Détente slowed arms race, which stuggling Soviet econ. could no longer afford
- Détente facilitated trade w/ West - allowed access to cheap Western goods
At same time as USSR decline, growing strength of US econ. led to imbalance of power
Made US less committed to détente as econ. imbalance moved in favour of US
Extent of success:
Normalisation
-
Basic Principles Agreement (1972) est. framework whereby superpowers could work together and resolve biggest differences
-
BUT, some agreements reached came to nothing!
- Jackson-Vanik agreement (1974) curtailed US-Soviet trade
-
BUT, some agreements reached came to nothing!
-
Helsinki Accords (1975) set out comprehensive framework through which E/W relations could be managed
- BUT legitimacy of communism subtly undermined by inc. contact w/ West
- Accords only pledges, couldn’t be enforced!
Extent of success:
Avoidance of nuclear war
- Talks that culminated in SALT Treaties (1972) est. dialogue b/w superpowers, thus dec threat of nuclear war
- SALT I Treaties est. degree of nuclear parity by reducing no. of weapons on both
- Achievement of parity further stabilised relationship - reduced competitive element of arms race
Extent of success:
Economic prosperity
-
Initially facilitated trade:
- 1974-75 USSR inc. imports from West by 96%
- But US congress undermined new relationship w/ Jackson-Vanik amendment (1974)
-
US defence spending was reduced signif. as result of w/d from Vietnam
- 1970 total defence spending $406 billion –>$284 billion (1976)
- USSR econ. growth declined consistently 1970-76
- Détente did nothing to halt decline/growing imbalance of econ. power b/w superpowers
Critics of détente in US (1970-75)
Some argued was an amoral policy - ignored USSR’s violations of human rights
Criticisms began in 1970, following intervention of Moscow Human Rights Committee, headed by Sakharov:
- Embarrassed US govt - h. lighted continuing human rights violations on part of USSR at time of seeking to improve relations
Russian novelist Solzhenitsyn argued there was still political repression on part of USSR:
- his criticisms were taken up by 24 senators from both parties
