Despite the claims of those who promoted détente, its achievements were limited.' To what extent do you agree with this statement?'
Introduction:
According to historians, ‘Détente’ is a relaxing of tension between nations. Between 1968 and 1980, all major parties in the Cold War (USA, USSR, PRC and European nations) were trying to pursue policies aimed a creating steady relations and reducing the threat of nuclear war. Similar to the thaw in tensions in the 1950s, the détente did not alleviate the root of the conflict, instead only delaying the dispute by a decade. Achievements of the détente were limited as it prolonged the feud, allowing time for the USSR to strengthen again leading to the continued conflict after 1980 as well as spreading the Cold War into the Middle East and Africa. However the détente was never an alternative to the Cold War and significant progress was made to temporarily fix international relations, such as improvements in Germany, SALT 1&2 and the Final Act Agreement.
Main Body:
Paragraph 1: Achievements of Détente
Successes of Détente – SALT 2
Kissinger in 1976: ‘transforming ideological conflict into constructive participation in building a better world’
Writers in the mid 70sm stress positive achievements of détente in terms of reducing tensions and threat of nuclear war
Post-Revisionist historians such as Mike Bowker and Phil Williams: détente was a necessary strategy to deal with the international situation and to find methods of managing competition in a way, which prevented them from degenerating into hostilities
Paragraph 2: Achievements Limited since no country had set plans for peace; they were doing what was best for their country at the time
Historiography:
McNeil: Carter failed by linking détente to human rights, which could never work with Soviet ideology
Williams: Carter had alternative motives for détente – wanted to pursue dollar diplomacy and prevent the spread of communism
Foreign Minister Gromyko: No matter what goes into the Final Act, I don’t believe that the Soviet Union will ever do anything it doesn’t want to do
Right wing Historians interpret détente as a weak policy that allowed the Soviet Union to continue to strengthen itself and gain access to Western Technology at the expense of American Interest ß Richard Pipes
Paragraph 3: Tensions between China and Soviet Union, as well as expansion in Middle East
Paragraph 4: Détente was not a scheme, détente failed to do what it never could have done and should never have been expected to
Historiography: John Lewis Gaddis: ‘to call detent a failure is to misunderstand what détente was about in the first place’ it was never intended to end hostilities
‘Turn a dangerous situation into a predictable system’
Arguably less dangerous relations than before
Conclusion:
The achievements of Détente were limited, only because the expectation of what détente was supposed to do didn’t correlate with the underlining meaning of détente. Détente is a relaxation of tensions, and was never a way to stop the cold war. It was a tactical retreat from the countries involved, in order to focus on the personal interest of their own countries. You cannot say that the war ended, the arms race continued, tensions between China and the Soviet Union; involvement in the Middle East and Africa was a definite sign that the Cold War would not be ending any time soon. The public perception of Détente did not correspond with the objective of the Détente, temporary peace, which created the illusion of the limitations of the détente. In fact, in relations and treaties formed during the Détente where extremely important to international relations and the end of the Cold War almost a decade later.
Introduction:
According to historians, ‘Détente’ is a relaxing of tension between nations. Between 1968 and 1980, all major parties in the Cold War (USA, USSR, PRC and European nations) were trying to pursue policies aimed a creating steady relations and reducing the threat of nuclear war. Similar to the thaw in tensions in the 1950s, the détente did not alleviate the root of the conflict, instead only delaying the dispute by a decade. Achievements of the détente were limited as it prolonged the feud, allowing time for the USSR to strengthen again leading to the continued conflict after 1980 as well as spreading the Cold War into the Middle East and Africa. However the détente was never an alternative to the Cold War and significant progress was made to temporarily fix international relations, such as improvements in Germany, SALT 1&2 and the Final Act Agreement.
Main Body:
Paragraph 1: Achievements of Détente
- Stopped other countries from getting arms race, becoming superpowers etc.
- World needed to gain stability, world needed to focus on growth, improving
- SALT 1&2
- The biggest policy success of détente was in the area of nuclear arms reductions. The Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty (SALT1) in 1972 was a landmark treaty. It covered:
- ABM Treaty:
- Anti-ballistic Missiles were allowed at only 2 sites, with no more than 100 missiles
- To ensured the continuation of MAD as a deterrent = both sides felt secure
- Interim Treaty:
- Places limits on numbers of ICBMs and SLBMs
- Basic Principles Agreement:
- Created rules for the conduct of nuclear war
- Committed both sides to promote ‘peaceful co-existence’
- ABM Treaty:
- The spirit of co-operation achieved by SALT 1 was followed up by visits to Moscow by Nixon in 1972 and 1974
- Brezhnev also visited Washington in 1973
- SALT 1 was a landmark agreement because it ‘institutionalised’ arms control and committed both nations to formal rules and goals.
- However some criticised it for not going far enough – it only regulated nuclear war, it didn’t call for disarmament.
- It allowed both nations to maintain MIRVs – highly destructive
Successes of Détente – SALT 2
- SALT 1 was quickly followed up by discussions over another treaty called SALT 2. Negotiations began in 1974 but dragged on until 1979 as relations stalled. It called for:
- A limit on nuclear delivery vehicles like ICBMs, SLBMs and heavy bombers.
- A ban on testing new types of ICBMs and new weapons systems.
- Moscow Treaty 1970
- Was signed by the USSR, West Germany and Poland. It accepted the border between East/West Germany, and the post-1945 re-drawn border between Poland and East Germany.
- Final Quadripartite Protocol 1972
- Confirmed the division of Berlin and legally allowed Western access, thereby ensuring security.
- Basic Treaty 1972
- Signed by East and West Germany, both accepting the existence of each other. Both promised to increase trade links.
- Agreement on the Prevention of Nuclear War 1973
- Both promised to enter consultations in the event of future crises
- The agreements between the two Germany’s led to a huge reduction in tensions
- Both sides began to normalise relations.
- In 1973 the UN recognised both West and East Germany as sovereign states and East Germany was recognised by the USA
- West Germany even stopped calling for reunification.
- The USSR was happy as the West had accepted it control over Eastern Europe
- However many in the West criticised the agreements as they gave legal recognition to Soviet control
- Helsinki Agreement
- The Final Act
- Security Basket
- East/West Germany recognized
- Co-operation Basket
- Closer ties and collaboration in economic, scientific, and cultural fields
- Human Rights Basket
- Respect human rights and individual freedoms
- Freedom of thought, conscience, religion and travel
- Respect human rights and individual freedoms
- Security Basket
- The Final Act
Kissinger in 1976: ‘transforming ideological conflict into constructive participation in building a better world’
Writers in the mid 70sm stress positive achievements of détente in terms of reducing tensions and threat of nuclear war
Post-Revisionist historians such as Mike Bowker and Phil Williams: détente was a necessary strategy to deal with the international situation and to find methods of managing competition in a way, which prevented them from degenerating into hostilities
Paragraph 2: Achievements Limited since no country had set plans for peace; they were doing what was best for their country at the time
- Superpowers never came to any agreement on the fundamental meaning of détente
- Each country had its own agendas
- Soviets
- Need to recover economy,
- Isolate China by getting better relations with the west
- National security interests
- USSR had achieved nuclear parity which allowed it to contemplate arms limitations
- Accommodation with the USA would help stabilize the Soviet hold over Eastern Europe
- Romania’s development of a more independent foreign policy
- Czechoslovakian Crisis of 1968
- Strikes in Gdansk 1970
- Need of western tech and grain supplies
- Need for development
- Like the Americans, Soviets had an interest in minimizing the risks of nuclear war
- Had little interest in joining the US in defense of the international status quo
- Soviets believed that the conflict between capitalism and socialism would inevitably continue
- In the developing world, through national liberation struggles aided by the Soviet Union and its allies
- America
- Need to recover economy,
- Find a way to end the war in Vietnam
- High inflation
- Large budget deficit
- Social spending needed to be increased and détente would allow this to happen
- Would allow US to invest more resources in its own commerce and financial services
- Offer USA an opportunity to uphold its interests without military intervention
- USA viewed as the means of reconciling the Soviet Union to the existing international order
- Sought to manage Soviet behavior through he selective use of rewards and punishments, giving Moscow a stake in the existing international system and discouraging it from further expansion
- Kissinger hoped that Moscow would eventually come to see itself as an established, or status quo, power with an interest in international stability
- China
- Better relations with US to deter and gain leverage over the USSR
- Better relations would help its long-term aim of regaining Taiwan
- Gain access to Western tech like oil extraction
- Greater trade relations
- Europe
- worries of front-line nations for potential nuclear war
- Social stability
- Germany split
- Student demonstrations/general strike in France
- Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia
- Germany needed better economic and political relations
- Soviets
- Détente was reducing the dangers of confrontation and building on those elements of the adversaries common interest that were never completely absent
Historiography:
McNeil: Carter failed by linking détente to human rights, which could never work with Soviet ideology
Williams: Carter had alternative motives for détente – wanted to pursue dollar diplomacy and prevent the spread of communism
Foreign Minister Gromyko: No matter what goes into the Final Act, I don’t believe that the Soviet Union will ever do anything it doesn’t want to do
Right wing Historians interpret détente as a weak policy that allowed the Soviet Union to continue to strengthen itself and gain access to Western Technology at the expense of American Interest ß Richard Pipes
Paragraph 3: Tensions between China and Soviet Union, as well as expansion in Middle East
- To say the cold war tensions relaxed would mean the main forces: America and Soviet Union
- Unlike what America suggested, there was still a lot of tension during the time of détente
- Sino-soviet relations decreased
- Chinese support for Cambodia
- Vietnam War
- Sino-Soviet border war
- In fact, the Sino-Soviet Détente did not begin until after the cold war a started again in 1985
- Proxy Wars
- Yom Kippur War
- Oct 1973
- Egypt’s surprise attack ß USA thought USSR knew something about it
- Civil War in Angola
- Supplying with military aid
- Soviets and Cubans involved in supporting Ethiopia against Somalia
- Grand Scheme of Expansion
- Yom Kippur War
Paragraph 4: Détente was not a scheme, détente failed to do what it never could have done and should never have been expected to
- Détente set out to achieve a de-escalation of the war, not to stop it
- Public perceptions of it has not always corresponded to the objective
- Discrepancy between the reality of continuing competition and the Nixon administration’s overblown image of détente as ‘building a structure of peace’
- So the people who promoted détente
- Used détente to gain advantage in the global competition
Historiography: John Lewis Gaddis: ‘to call detent a failure is to misunderstand what détente was about in the first place’ it was never intended to end hostilities
‘Turn a dangerous situation into a predictable system’
Arguably less dangerous relations than before
Conclusion:
The achievements of Détente were limited, only because the expectation of what détente was supposed to do didn’t correlate with the underlining meaning of détente. Détente is a relaxation of tensions, and was never a way to stop the cold war. It was a tactical retreat from the countries involved, in order to focus on the personal interest of their own countries. You cannot say that the war ended, the arms race continued, tensions between China and the Soviet Union; involvement in the Middle East and Africa was a definite sign that the Cold War would not be ending any time soon. The public perception of Détente did not correspond with the objective of the Détente, temporary peace, which created the illusion of the limitations of the détente. In fact, in relations and treaties formed during the Détente where extremely important to international relations and the end of the Cold War almost a decade later.