I Know That A Hardline Approach Has Been Your Approach

Stalin’s policy priorities were not building a ‘worker’s paradise’ or a classless society, but protecting Russia from war and invasion. In 1928, Stalin launched the first of two ambitious five-year plans to modernize and industrialize the Soviet economy. These programs brought rapid progress – but also significant death and suffering. Stalin’s decision to nationalize agricultural production dispossessed millions of peasants, forcing them from their land to labor on gigantic state-run collective farms. Grain was sold abroad to finance Soviet industrial projects, leading to food shortages and disastrous famines in the mid-1930s. Soviet Russia was dragged into the 20th century, transforming from a backward agrarian empire into a modern industrial superpower – but this came at extraordinary human cost.

Relations between the United States and the Soviet Union have always been complicated. Over the entire 20th century they have been close allies to bitter rivals. The stark differences in each of their political systems prevented the USA and the USSR from maintaining a close political friendship and understanding, and even to the very edge of war.

In a time of political chaos, numerous approaches to contending with the USSR were offered by various politicians, yet “the man who got things right from the start was, at first glance, an unlikely statesman… Through a combination of vision, tenacity, patience, and improvisational skill, he produced what Henry Kissinger terms ‘the most stunning diplomatic feat of the modern era…’ As Margaret Thatcher put it, ‘Ronald Reagan won the Cold War without firing a shot’” (D’Souza). Henry Kissinger was an “old nemesis” of Reagan, yet even he “observed that while it was Bush who presided over the final disintegration of the Soviet empire, ‘it was Ronald Reagan's Presidency which marked the turning point.’ [Additionally,] Cardinal Casaroli, the Vatican secretary of state, remarked publicly that the Reagan military buildup, which he had opposed at the time, had led to the collapse of Communism” (D’Souza). The great quantity of figures who have acknowledged the intelligence Reagan’s actions validates these actions as such. Many democratic opponents argued that “the West should ingratiate itself with the Soviet Union by pursuing ‘the stuffed-goose option—that is, providing them with all the grain and consumer goods they need.’ If Reagan had taken this advice when it was offered in 1982, the Soviet empire

During World War II, the United States and the Soviet Union created an alliance to prevent Nazi Germany from spreading their fascist and radical ideals, but after the war, it quickly became apparent that both countries had intentions to exploit their previously stable relationship. Shortly after World War II, the Soviet Union made it their primary goal to expand their communist policies across Europe (and eventually the world). Their communist policies heavily contradicted the reason why the United States joined World War II, contrasted American ideals, and placed American democracy in jeopardy. Although relations seemed healthy shortly after the war, the relationship between the United States and the Soviet Union dwindled to war due to the United States’

During a time when the relationship between America and the Soviets was extremely tense, Ronald expresses hope, “that they are willing to move forward, that they share [the United States’] desire and love for peace, and that they will give up the ways of conquest.” This gives the Soviet Union and America hope for a better future alongside one another, rather than opposing one another as they have in the past. Reagan tells the Soviets that the United States is willing to put aside all differences for the sake of peace, if they are also willing. He also uses a challenging tone, not only to call for peace with the Soviets, but to assure them that the U.S. is, “prepared to deter aggression,” and, “to negotiate the reduction of arms,” if they refuse this peace offering. This notifies the Soviet Union that America does want peace with their country, but if they reject it, our country is prepared to stand against them and will not back

The conduct of the US in response to the Soviet Union was advised to be very firm in order to keep their power in check. The Soviets were only capable of responding to shear force. Thus American policy was to be tough and consistent in applying pressure against the Soviet Union. Whilst this wouldn't alter the stance of the USSR overnight, consistent US policy would eventually wear down the Soviet mindset to that of the Americans. However, this was more a test of US determination and beliefs than anything.

In the year 1981, the American, anti-communist Ronald Reagan became president of the United States (Doc 70, pg.426). During the first term of his presidency, Reagan expressed a great sense of danger and threat that was deeply embedded in his general convictions regarding the nature of communism, particularly, in the Soviet Union (Renshon and Larson, pg.15). However, Reagan eventually began to express alternative views in his second term of presidency. He significantly altered his perception of the Soviet threat and accepted the idea of possibly working together with the Soviet Union towards achieving peace (Doc 70, pg.427). This transformation is reflected though Reagan’s initial hatred towards the USSR, to his cooperation with Gorbachev at the Geneva Summit, their great attempts to negotiate at the Reykjavik Summit and finally their signing of the INF treaty. Ronald Reagan transformed from an essentialist who viewed the Soviet Union as “evil” and ruled by an ideology seeking world communism and absolute power, to an interactionist who viewed the tension between the United States and the Soviet Union in terms of mutual misinterpretation (Renshon and Larson, pg. 20). This change ultimately caused Soviet-American relations to significantly strengthen throughout the 1980’s as U.S President Reagan cooperatively worked together with USSR General Gorbachev, a leader who shared in the same goal of achieving a peaceful, non-nuclear world.

The United States and Communist Russia endured a complicated relationship in the first half of the 20th century. In the early 1940’s the U.S. had encouraged an alliance with the Soviets against their common enemy, Nazi Germany. This short-lived accord began to deteriorate as WW II ended. By 1947 U.S. policy toward the Soviet Union had shifted from one of cooperation to a policy of containment. In 1949, when the Soviets tested their first atomic bomb, it was a widely-held belief in the U.S. that the Russians were an untrustworthy enemy with plans to invade the United States. America’s mood turned on American Communists, labeling them traitors and Russian spies. Underlying a domestic sense of well-being in the United States in the 1950’s

The United States should not get involved in foreign affairs unless it directly affects us.. For example, if a country is in a civil war, we should not strive to help fix the side we want to win. At the same time, the United States will help the country subsequent to being asked. The United States will remain a superpower in the world but will remain neutral as to not cause what could potentially lead to another world war. Another important policy in this option is to assist the Soviets in rebuilding from World War II. This may seem like a stretch because most Americans are biased towards the topic of the Soviet Union in general, but it can be assured that with a strong relationship with such a large nation will help avert their eyes away from Communism and they will be looking towards the future. By combining common interests and coexisting with the Soviets, the United States and the Soviet Union have a promising future with multiple benefits towards both sides.

As president Reagan said, “General Secretary Gorbachev, if you seek peace, if you seek prosperity for the Soviet Union and eastern Europe, if you seek liberalization...open this gate... tear down this wall.” (3, Reagan)

The American-Soviet relation marked a great degree of cooperation and symbolizes the defeat of Nazi Germany. However communism, McCarthyism, and the clashes between the countries perished the alliance between America and the Soviet Union. Therefore, despite the two countries trying to work together: their agreements would fail.

The Truman administration was more influenced by balance of power considerations than any other considerations, including domestic politics. Because of the external threats to the United States between 1947-1953, it was inevitable that these policies would have been pursued. Most significantly, Stalin at this point was perceived by the Western powers as having expansionist tendencies. Truman saw the Soviets as highly motivated to dominate the world, and committed to aggressively exploiting all opportunities to enlarge their sphere of influence. Considering the context of Truman’s post-W.W.II

The traditional, orthodox interpretation places the responsibility of the Cold War on Stalin’s personality and on communist ideology. It claims that as long as Stalin and the authoritarian government were in power, a cold war was unavoidable. It argues that Stalin violated agreements that he had made at Yalta, imposed Soviet policy on Eastern European countries aiming at political domination and conspired to advocate communism throughout the world. As a result, United States officials were forced to respond to Soviet aggression with foreign policies such as the Truman Doctrine and the Marshall Plan. Yet revisionists argue that there was “no proof of Stalin promoting communism outside Russia” and that Stalin’s decisions were first and foremost, pro-Soviet and not of communist intentions. Up until 1947, it is evident through Marshall Plan as well as statements and interviews made by Stalin that he was still thinking of cooperation with the United States, Britain and France. Despite post-war conflicts and instability of Soviet-American relations, the USSR’s initial embrace of the Marshall Plan at its announcement expressed

In The Sources of Soviet Conduct, George F. Kennan explained “Containment was the central post-war concept of the United States and its allies in dealing with the Soviet Union”. To contain communism, the United Stated strategy was to have a strong

The Third Five Year Plan lasted for only three years, as it was interrupted by Germany’s declaration of war on the Soviet Union during World War II. As war seemed imminent, this plan focused on the production of weapons and other wartime materials (Trueman). The Soviet Union mainly contributed resources to the development of weapons, and constructed additional military factories as needed. Stalin continued to use additional Five Year Plans in the years following WWII, in an attempt keep his promise in 1945 to make the Soviet Union the leading industrial power by 1960. By 1952, industrial production was nearly double the 1941 level. Stalin’s Five Year Plans helped transform the Soviet Union from an untrained society of peasants to an advanced industrial economy. So through out this plan of hopefully saving Russia that Stalin has created products that could not be used and unintelligent citizens who were only trained to only do only one skill.