most. In this mix of continuity and change, the bargain has constantly evolved. More dramatic change came after the Cold War ended, but even in the 35 years between 1954 and 1989, a number of things changed. The allies, acting unilaterally in some cases and in concert in others, made conscious changes in and amendments to the bargain. Some of these changes were inspired by developments over which the allies had little control (such as the Soviet Union’s drive toward nuclear parity with the United States, calling into question NATO’s nuclear strategy), while
Dean Acheson entitled his memoirs Present at the Creation. Acheson argued that a new world order was created during the few, eventful years when he was US Secretary of State, between 1949 and 1953. His memoirs describe the consolidation of the bipolar, Cold War world – the world which is also presented in this chapter. The chapter aims to show how the Western Bloc, presided over by the USA, became pitted against the Eastern Bloc, dominated by the USSR. It records the formation and consolidation of the bipolar rivalry that dominated world affairs for
This chapter will center on the experience of the Eastern European states in the period preceding the fall of communist rule during the four decades of the Cold War (1948–89). Because communism, especially “late” communism, represents the immediate background to the countries’ current military and defense policies, it is important to discuss this period in some detail. As
When, in sudden historical succession, the Berlin Wall was breached, communist regimes were swept from office throughout Eastern Europe, the Warsaw Pact was dissolved, and the Soviet Union disintegrated, the NATO allies could not believe their good fortune. These events raised concerns in Washington and in West European capitals about potential instability growing out of so much change in such a short time. But a 40-year struggle had been resolved in their favor without a shot fired in anger. The Cold War had never turned hot, deterrence had worked, and the
the history of the Cold War. They began under a shadow of growing tension and hostility, and concluded with a transformation of superpower relations. During this critical period, Suzanne Massie – an American writer and expert on Russian culture and history – developed contacts with officials in Washington and Moscow, and worked to promote dialogue and improve relations between the countries. This chapter examines the activity and influence of Massie as a PPE during the years 1983–1988. It explores her relations with both sides, which included
The rapprochement between Germany and Israel in the aftermath of the Holocaust is one of the most striking political developments of the twentieth century. German Chancellor Angela Merkel recently referred to it as a ‘miracle’. But how did this ‘miracle’ come about? Drawing upon sources from both sides of the Iron Curtain and of the Arab–Israeli conflict, Lorena De Vita traces the contradictions and dilemmas that shaped the making of German–Israeli relations at the outset of the global Cold War. Israelpolitik offers new insights not only into the history of German–Israeli relations, but also into the Cold War competition between the two German states, as each attempted to strengthen its position in the Middle East and the international arena while struggling with the legacy of the Nazi past.
Can private citizens serve as self-appointed peacemakers and influence diplomatic relations between parties to a conflict? The book analyzes the international phenomenon of private peace entrepreneurs (PPEs) – private citizens with no official authority who initiate channels of communication with official representatives from the other side of a conflict in order to promote a conflict resolution process. It combines theoretical discussion with historical analysis, examining four cases from different conflicts: Norman Cousins and Suzanne Massie in the Cold War, Brendan Duddy in the Northern Ireland conflict, and Uri Avnery in the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. The book defines the phenomenon, examines the resources and activities of private peace entrepreneurs and their impact on the official diplomacy, and explores the conditions under which they can play an effective role in peacemaking processes.
The book highlights the ability of private individual citizens – who are not politicians, diplomats, or military leaders – to operate as influential actors in international politics in general, and in peace processes in particular. Although the history of internal and international conflicts reveals many cases of private peace entrepreneurs, some of whom played a critical role in conflict resolution efforts, the literature has yet to give this important phenomenon the attention it deserves. The book aims to fill this gap, contributing to the scholarship on conflict and peace, diplomacy, and civil society. It also makes a historiographical contribution by shedding light on figures excluded from the history textbooks, and it offers an alternative perspective to traditional narratives concerning the diplomatic history of the conflicts.
Freedoms, set out in 1941, provided particularly American inspiration for the post-war development of liberal global governance. 1 But the principles of great-power trusteeship and balancing, reflected in the Dumbarton Oaks proposals in 1944, were decisive in the creation of the United Nations. 2 Despite the early proliferation of liberal institutions under the aegis of the UN, Cold War prerogatives undermined cosmopolitan aspirations for world government. Cancelling each other out in the Security Council, the US and the Soviet Union
collectively from a long battle within the American establishment, in which the military has, for the time being, gained the upper hand over civil servants and career politicians, with their cosmopolitan project of liberal order and rules-based global governance, initiated after the Second World War and expanded after the Cold War. If this victory is consolidated, it will bring an end to the American messianism of the twentieth century, with its division of the world between ‘good’ and ‘evil’, its globalising imperative to reorganise the world through the
Cold War, which is endangering both humanitarian teams and the operations they conduct. References to ‘before’ have been heard since the mid-1990s, in the wake of the Bosnian War and the Tutsi genocide. The mass killings in Bosnia and Rwanda – coming on the heels of the Somali and Liberian civil wars – created a landscape of widespread violence, ‘anarchic conflicts’ in which not even humanitarian workers or journalists were safe. People stressed the contrast with earlier