Who is to Blame for the Cold War?

The two major adversaries of the Cold War entered that period of a global political stalemate as allies in the fight against fascism and German expansionism under Hitler. In 1945, the United States and Soviet Union, along with fading power Britain, met in Yalta to draw up a postwar plan for the division and reconstitution of Europe. The Soviets would be in charge of the East, while the Americans and British would be in charge of Western Europe and the Balkans. This division and reconstitution was both symbolized and concretized by the division of the city of Berlin. Ultimately, the divergent and oppositional political and economic ideologies of these countries proved irreconcilable and presented an impossible obstacle toward rebuilding Europe in any way that mirrored its pre-war state. Although the Cold War is most often presented in terms of a military and political debate, it is just as much, unsurprisingly, an economic event.

The old world order of powerful European countries had been all but demolished by the ravages of World War II. With the collapse of the economies of the former European power structure and the resulting division of Europe into separate reconstructive zones, the communist Soviets and capitalist Americans each sought to rebuild the continent in a way that reflected their own political and economic ideologies. For the United States, this required that the emerging countries adopt strategies of free trade and an increased dependence on America as it positioned itself as the premier power on the world stage. The Soviet Union, on the other hand, encouraged economic development that was centrally planned and was formed with the concept of satellite communist countries. This concept of Soviet expansionism as they began to turn their eye to include not just Europe but also Greece, Turkey and Iran has for decades been turned into dogma that they are entirely to blame for the Cold War. A revised look at history suggests a much more ambiguous explanation, however.

The truth is that America was just as committed to expansionism of its capitalist economic system as the Soviets were of its communist system. Pres. Harry Truman’s response to concerns about Soviet aggression had as much to do with how the successful completion of their plans would hinder the adoption and fostering of capitalism and democracy as with any real intention to halt the spread of communism on humanitarian grounds. Truman’s foreign policy was thoroughly shaped by the idea that the Soviets were just as afraid of America’s plans for world domination as the Americans were afraid of the Soviet plans. Rather than risk either conventional or nuclear war by means of a direct confrontation, Truman and subsequent American administrations chose the path of containment and capitalist propaganda through the Marshall Plan.

If the Cold War could have been avoided, the institution of the Marshall Plan was probably the tipping point. Because the Cold War came about through a complex combination of events and causes, it may be a futile exercise to single out any one specific action that made its progression inevitable, but clearly the handling of the Marshall Plan represents a major point at which the seriousness of the problem accelerated. The Marshall Plan was essentially an economic stimulus package that, though ostensibly created in order to rebuild the ruined economies of Europe. It was at the point that the benefits were extended to those economies under the influence of the Soviets that the Cold War heated up.

The decision to extend the Marshall Plan to Eastern Europe was rationalized as attempt to avoid needlessly antagonizing the Soviets by not helping out the countries under their domain. The Soviets, however, saw this decision for what it probably really was, which was an attempt to undermine their influence in their zone. The result was that Western Europe became ever more cemented under American control, forcing the Soviets to tighten control in their sphere of influence. This bifurcation of the continent into two separate areas under the control of growing superpowers with distinctly oppositional worldviews inevitably led to growing suspicion. In turn, this paranoia naturally led military alliances. The Americans formed the NATO alliance and in response the Soviets formed the Warsaw Pact. The era of counterbalancing the economic and political aggression of both sides short of all-out conflict was firmly in place.

The Cold War is remembered as a struggle for world political and economic dominance between two burgeoning superpowers and would-be empires. Although hot wars would break out in Korea and Vietnam that brought the struggle between communism and capitalism directly to the battlefield, it is the lack of face to face fighting between the US and the Soviet Union that is the definition of the Cold War. In retrospect, the Cold War probably was inevitable and, ultimately, preferable. Two countries built on such oppositional political and economic and who each shared visions of global influence, if not outright domination, are destined to eventually clash. Once the wildcard of nuclear proliferation is added into the equation, a Cold War is definitely seen as more desirable. The Cold War resulted in excess spending on military preparedness at the expense of social programs for both countries, and neither side can claim the moral high ground. Indeed, both America and the Soviet Union should share the blame for the Cold War equally as both were far more concerned with competition than cooperation.