Containment strategy research.

Attributes of containment
(Author's name)
(Institutional Affiliation)

















In this literature, I will generally focus on the attributes of
containment with reference to the sources provided. I will paragraph each
point and clarify certain phrases from authors of the literatures.
Containment was brought forth by a number of reasons shown in this essay.
The policy helped the US and its allies to date, in a way that no threat
could be posed again against them and no more fear did they have (Chase,
1998 p. 56). The essay offers clarification of why the policy of
containment came into action just after the Second World War. Up-to-date,
the features of containment are still felt by the concerned parties due to
the effect it brought fourth (Gaddis, 2005 p. 478).
Containment was a strategy of foreign policy that was followed by the
US during cold war. It was first laid out in 1947 by George F. Kennan. It
stated that there's need to contain and isolate communism or it would
extent to other neighboring countries (Gaddis, 2005 p. 478). The Domino
Theory would be allowed to take hold in case the spread occurred which
meant that if a country fell to communism then each of the adjacent
countries would fall like a row of dominoes. The US intervention in Central
America, Grenada as well as Vietnam was ultimately due to adherence of
Domino Theory and containment (Crockatt, 1995 p.120).
The policy arose the time when East Europe was controlled by the
military, control of the Soviet Union, and when Western European countries
appeared to be waving from their democracies for the reason that of
collapsing economies and socialist agitation. The policy was extended to
cover the world, effecting to US involvement in Vietnam, Korea and
elsewhere (Leffler, 1994 p. 567)
Containment acted as a verdict policy. Throughout the Second World
War, the USSR and the United States were very reluctant allies. Germany
posed a threat to these two countries and they were required to cooperate
militarily. Germany had propelled a brutal invasion into the Soviet Union
in the end caused twenty million deaths of the soviets. The USSR went ahead
and asked the allies from the western side to attack Germany on its western
front (Zakaria, 1997 p. 234). The under-resourced England and the US were
unwilling to launch this attack on the Germans, and instead, on other
fronts they engaged the Germans. This allowed the soviets to push the Nazis
back and regain lost territory. Due to the vastly differing political
philosophies between the US and the Soviet Union, their relationship became
strained and finally broke apart during the war's later part (Iriye, 1974
p. 345).
Churchill, Stalin and Roosevelt met at the Yalta Conference in
February 1945, when a triumphant conclusion to their war with Germany
seemed inevitable. They began discussing crucial issues of postwar and they
made plans to defeat the Germans. Stalin considered that the Soviet Union
would allow Bulgaria, Poland, and Romania to have free election after the
war, of which would be democratic (Crockatt, 1995 p.120). Upon the end of
the war, Stalin broke his promise quickly going ahead to install communist
governments in these countries without even election pretense. Stalin's
betrayal stunned the US as well as its allies who feared that they would be
an attempt to increase communism throughout Europe by the Soviets.
According to Stalin, he was doing nothing wrong (Zakaria, 1997 p. 234). He
claimed that this would help cover the Soviet Union against future
hostilities. He claimed that he was doing this by securing the loyalty of
the western neighbors of the Soviet Union. The US and the USSR regarded the
other as dangerous and treacherous hence resentment continued to grow
(Iriye, 1974 p. 345).
Stalin also broke the promise he pledged to remove troops from Iran
after the Second World War. The Soviet Union and the US were both important
allies to Iran, which was rich in oil. In Iran, troops were stationed
during the war top prevent attacks from the Germans. All the major allies
agreed to remove their troops from Iran during the 1943 Tehran Conference
(Zakaria, 1997 p. 234). However, a full whole year after the war the
soviets still had their troops stationed there. Stalin even went ahead and
used the military to aid a rebellion in 1946 in Iran. Stalin's betrayal
made Truman very furious. Americans became distrustful of the soviets and
hence began worrying that communism will spread to the Middle East (Iriye,
1974 p. 345). Despite Winston Churchill's defeat on recent elections he
remained popular within the United States.
The containment provided a solution to the Soviet threat. When
delivering a controversial speech at Fulton Missouri in March 1946, he
condemned the Soviet Union and Stalin as being dangerous and opportunistic
to the western nations (Iriye, 1974 p. 345). He went ahead to phrase "the
Iron Curtain" in referring the division between the west and the Soviets.
The opinion of Americans was sharply at odds over his speech since many
leaders desired cooperation with the Soviet Union. This made them so upset
with Churchill's remarks. A major population of the Americans feared the
USSR expansion and Churchill's explanations increased the weightiness of
the threat by soviets in many minds of these Americans (Iriye, 1974 p.
345). The US was put in a very unfamiliar role by the Second World War.
Having chosen to stay isolated, America was now cast to be as a leader of
the world. The leaders of America realized faster, that they had to make a
plan to address the Soviet Union. A brilliant US leader as well as an
expert on the Soviet Union, George F. Kennan who was stationed in Moscow,
was asked by the state department to clarify the Soviet conduct recently
(Kennan, 1947 p. 457).
A threat like communism was never seen by the whole world which made
the West very confused about hoe these issues would be addressed. Kennan
was given the task to create a policy that would be used in dealing with
this threat at hand. He was one of the few western Soviet Union experts. In
February 1946, Kennan in a telegram to the state department drafted a
response. In an 8,000-word reply, he covered the issue significantly.
This earned it the name "long telegram" (Kennan, 1947 p. 457). It
thoroughly covered how the USSR had shaped current policies. The
information he provided helped American leaders get a greater insight into
the mentality and background of Soviets like Stalin. According to his
advice, the USSR was ruthlessly expansionary but cautious too. He stated
that if the Soviets were left unchecked, wherever and whenever possible,
they would expand their regime (Kennan, 1947 p. 457).
The plan
The containment aided in covering the effects of the Second World War
at fast rate. The west became desperate to cease communism spread, as the
apparent Soviet Union threat continued to grow. In many parts of the war-
atrophied Europe, the communist community grew faster after Second World
War (Herring, 2008 p.456). Countries like Greece which were European key
were being prevented from spread of communism by England. The British and
the US both feared that in case Greece became communist, so would Turkey,
hence the Eastern Mediterranean would be under control of the soviets
(Herring, 2008 p.456). The prevention of the spread of communism to Greece
was a difficult task for the British because their economy had not yet
recovered from the effect of the Second World War. Therefore, they asked
for assistance from the US. Truman asked the congress for support on March
12, 1947, on a new policy later referred to as the Truman doctrine. He
requested $400 million allocation in preventing the fall of Turkey and
Greece to communism, as he detailed. It was the philosophy of the US to
support free people who tend to resist attempts of subjugation by outside
pressures or armed minorities, he stated (Herring, 2008 p.456).
Containment policy expanded the influence of the US abroad. The U.S
foreign policy was greatly impacted by this controversial statement.
Critically it was argued that the policy would make other nations exploit
the US in terms of "fighting communism." They feared that money would be
elicited from the US, which would be allowable due to this doctrine. Some
others argued that Truman was using this policy to earn his support
domestically as well as expanding Americas influence abroad (Herring, 2008
p.456). They termed this as an exaggeration of the soviet threat. Despite
the critics the Truman Doctrine still went on and was the United States
official policy. The wedge between the USSR and the US got deeper hence
polarizing the whole world. Other nations were placed in a position to
either choose supporting the Soviet Union or the US (Herring, 2008 p.456).
Contained aided fast recovery of economies. The Marshall Plan and the
Soviet Threat were both to be contained, an attempt by the Truman
Administration. There was little hope of recovery of the western countries
from their crippled economy brought forth by the Second World War (the war
had decimated the infrastructure of nations like Italy, France and Belgium)
(Hogan, 2007 p. 342). Communist influences got a ripe environment due to
the soaring unemployment and the widespread poverty. This environment had
limited improvement potential. A program of joint economic recovery was
proposed by George C. Marshall, the secretary of state, between the US and
its allies from the west (Hogan, 2007 p. 342). In case the Europeans agreed
to this plan, then the US would offer financial support significantly.
Leaders from key democracies from the west met Marshall in Paris to discuss
the plan in details. Due to their despair of most of these nations, 16
countries immediately agreed to the Marshall proposal. He also offered his
plan, which was immediately rejected, to the cash-poor Soviets (Hogan, 2007
p. 342).
Containment brought peace, both socially and politically, among
concerned members. When Marshall returned home, the plan was immediately
presented to the congress by Truman. The plan required distribution of
$12.5 billion among 16 countries (Hogan, 2007 p. 342). The US had spent
over $2 billion already in rebuilding Europe; hence the congress became
skeptical of the huge amount needed and the Marshall plan. Then in 1978
February, a Communist Government was installed by a Soviet-backed coup in
Czechoslovakia. This fast-spreading communism prompted the congress to pass
the plan in April 1948. For both America and Britain, the Marshall plan was
incredibly successful (Hogan, 2007 p. 342). The introduction of funding
large amounts to affected countries helped strengthen the local economies
greatly. Most of these countries, in a few years, were even exceeding
prewar economic levels. The westward spread of communism was halted by
these flourishing western European economies. The industry in America also
benefited through exports of goods and equipment to Western Europe. This
cooperation economic wise would aid the formation of Eventually Community
(EC) - a collective treaty between these Western European nations and still
exists to date (Herring, 2008 p.456).
Containment allowed sustainable economic status. Germany on the other
hand, 20 years from First World War, had managed rebuilding its economic
status and military hence posed a threat to the weaker neighboring nations
(Hogan, 2007 p. 342). After Second World War, with the blessings from their
allies Britain and France, America was very determined to stop the Germany
from regaining their power. This way was intended to keep Germany
economically weak, impoverished and unable to pose a threat. By the month
of March, 1948, the allies had already realized that their approach was
self-beating (Hogan, 2007 p. 342). Oppressed citizens and widespread
poverty allowed communism to grow in Germany. Great Britain, Belgium,
France, Luxembourg and Netherlands agreed to help improve Germany's
economic status through an alliance to work together. This was to create a
Germany that was stable economically and would be autonomous despite still
remaining demilitarized. The Soviet Union saw this as being contrary to
the treaty signed at Potsdam conference (Hogan, 2007 p. 342). They also
were skeptical of this motivation by the allies and they believed that this
was an intention to undermine the ruling of the Soviets in Berlin and East
Germany. This made the Soviets to blockade all access to Berlin from the
west through surface in June 1948. This was a retaliatory move that was
intended to convey a message to the US as well as its allies that they did
not tolerate meddling of the western in its territories (Logevall, 2004
p.480).
Contained brought forth trust. The policy allowed free supply of
necessity to the beleaguered countries thus the trust. This bold move
shocked the US and its allies. Over two million German citizens at the west
were cut off from necessary supplies including food, by this blockade. The
impoverished Berlin would very soon fall in a crisis without these
supplies. America as well as its allies was not sure of the reaction to
take (Saull, 2007 p.234). It seemed that there would only be two outcomes,
either abandon Berlin completely, or to engage the soviets troops in a
fight (Casey, 2005 p.123). The USSR had the largest army throughout the
world and so engaging them in combat was obviously unthinkable. Also no one
was even willing to engage them in a fight. Berlin was the key city in
Germany and therefore abandoning it too was also impossible. A decision was
made by President Truman to provide the necessary supplies to the German
people who were beleaguered, without engaging the fight with the Soviets
(Saull, 2007 p.234). He called for the airlifting of the supplies to West
Berlin through a proposal. It was accepted immediately and thousands of
tons of food and other supplies were airlifted into Germany daily- Berlin
airlift. Over the blockade period which took 11 months, over 1.5 million
tons of supplies were airlifted into Germany (Casey, 2005 p.123).
Containment added up to the public relations among the US and its
allies. Since the Soviet Union was not expecting such actions from Truman,
they faced a difficult time in trying to make a decision. It was either
they lift the blockader or start a war with the west (Casey, 2005 p.123).
They finally decided to lift the blockade in May 1949 hence allowing free
flow of the food and other supplies into West Berlin. Due to that, the
Soviet Union lost face in what essential became a public relations war.
This row polarized and heightened further, the tensions and pressures
between the US and the USSR (Casey, 2005 p.123). This victory in overcoming
the blockade benefited the US greatly, since their respect grew with the
Germans for the supply they got. Hundreds of thousands of the West Germans
benefited from the food and supplies and were grateful in return. This also
made greater, the fear and distrust of the soviets within the Germans
conversely. Other western European countries looked on America's action
favorably and saw them as a sign of their commitment to Europe (Casey, 2005
p.123).
There was straining in the relations among nations of the Western
Europe. The effects of the world wars clearly showed that there was great
need for security and defense. The western Europeans were brought together
with the help of greatly increasing Soviet threat as well as the aftermath
of the wars. Some several nations even started discussing a possibility of
a mutual defense organization. Some European leaders met to discuss these
ideas in a series of meetings. In 1948 a mutual defense pact was signed in
Brussels, Belgium, by several representatives from France, the Great
Britain, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, and Belgium (Casey, 2005 p.123).
Containment strengthened or advanced the US foreign policy. It was
considered historic since this was the first ever large-scale pact of
defense among the western European nations. The United States was also
invited by the alliance to join the pact. This raised some difficult
questions in America. Traditionally, the US had viewed such peacetime
alliances as being cumbersome and ineffective (Casey, 2005 p.123). Many
Americans argued that due to their location it was excluded from enjoying
the advantages unlike the nations with closer geographical proximity which
gained benefits. The pact supporters claimed that if America got involved
then they would benefit in terms of strengthening the defenses in north
America and Europe against the soviet union and also the extend the united
states containment policy (Casey, 2005 p.123). Some also thought that in
joining the alliance the western Germany would be brought into the US camp
eventually, and also reassure the Europeans that they won't get back to
their isolationism. This issue divided the congress deeply. In urging them
to join this alliance, Truman appeared before congress personally and
eventually they agreed to join. This led to signing of the North Atlantic
Treaty Organization (NATO) on April 4 1949 (Casey, 2005 p.123).
The first who signed included France, Great Britain, Belgium, Italy,
the Netherlands, Denmark, Iceland, Norway, Luxembourg and Portugal, while
the US and Canada represented North America. Turkey and Greece were later
added to the pact in 1952. In 1955, the West Germany was also admitted to
this alliance. Since then the organization has moved on to expand and
include 19 nations (Hogan, 2007 p. 342). The world politics and its defense
were greatly impacted by the formation of NATO. NATO had helped Europe
emerge to being a collective power, improved European unity dramatically
and brought peace and security to the world. . NATO has encouraged other
nations to think outside their borders by helping grow internationalism. It
had also minimized or prevented a number of conflicts in the world through
intervention, either diplomatically or militarily (Hogan, 2007 p. 342).
The decision by the congress to join NATO changed the United States
foreign policy significantly. The US emerged to be the leader of NATO,
therefore was required in international disputes intervention. In the same
way NATO strengthened US security. The US and other members now spoke with
a voice that the Soviets had to take notice, as part of NATO (Hogan, 2007
p. 342).



Bibliography

A, Iriye. The Cold War in Asia: A Historical Introduction. Englewood:
Prentice-Hall, 1974.

F, Zakaria. " The Sources of Soviet Conduct, Foreign Affairs, July 1947."
The American Encounter (1997).

G, Herring. "Truman, The Cold War, and The Revolutiuon in U.S. Foreign
Policy." From Colony to Superpower, 1945-1953. 2008.

J, Chace. The Secretary of State who Created the American World. New York :
Simon and Schuster, 1998.

J, Gaddis. George F. Kennan and the Strategy of Containment. New York:
Oxford Uiversity Press, 2005.

—. We Now Know, Rethink Cold War History. New York: Oxford University
Press, 1997.

Kennan, George F. "The Sources of the Soviet Conduct." Foreign Affairs
1947.

Logevall, Frederik. "A Critique of Containment." Diplomatic History. 2004.
473-499.

M, Hogan. The Marshall Plan: America, Britain and the Reconstruction of
Western Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987.

M, Leffler. Preponderance of Power: National Security , the Truman
Administration and the Cold War. Palo Alto: Stanford University Press,
1994.

R, Crockatt. The Fifty Year War: The United States and the Soviet Union in
World politics. London: Routledge, 1995.

S, Casey. Selling NSC-68: The Truman Administration, Public Opinion, and
the Politics of Mobilization. 2005.

Saull, R. "The Cold War and After. Capitalism, Revolution and Superpower
Politics." Introduction: History and Theory in the Cold War (2007).

The United States and the Making of the Modern World. New York: Basic
Books, 1997.