origins of the cold war essay plan

• Games & Quizzes
• History & Society
• Science & Tech
• Biographies
• Animals & Nature
• Geography & Travel
• Arts & Culture
• On This Day
• One Good Fact
• New Articles
• Lifestyles & Social Issues
• Philosophy & Religion
• Politics, Law & Government
• World History
• Health & Medicine
• Browse Biographies
• Birds, Reptiles & Other Vertebrates
• Bugs, Mollusks & Other Invertebrates
• Environment
• Fossils & Geologic Time
• Entertainment & Pop Culture
• Sports & Recreation
• Visual Arts
• Demystified
• Image Galleries
• Infographics
• Top Questions
• Britannica Kids
• Saving Earth
• Space Next 50
• Student Center
• Introduction & Top Questions

Origins of the Cold War

The struggle between superpowers.

• Toward a new world order

What was the Cold War?

How did the cold war end, why was the cuban missile crisis such an important event in the cold war.

• What was Harry S. Truman's reaction to communist North Korea's attempt to seize noncommunist South Korea in 1950?
• Should the United States maintain the embargo enforced by John F. Kennedy against Cuba?

Our editors will review what you’ve submitted and determine whether to revise the article.

• Chemistry LibreTexts - The Cold War
• The National WWII Museum New Orleans - Cold Conflict
• John F. Kennedy Presidential Library and Museum - The Cold War
• New Zealand History - The Cold War
• The New York Times - The Blacklist and The Cold War
• Alpha History - The Cold War
• The Canadian Encyclopedia - Cold War
• Cold War - Children's Encyclopedia (Ages 8-11)
• Cold War - Student Encyclopedia (Ages 11 and up)
• Table Of Contents

The Cold War was an ongoing political rivalry between the United States and the Soviet Union and their respective allies that developed after World War II . This hostility between the two superpowers was first given its name by George Orwell in an article published in 1945. Orwell understood it as a nuclear stalemate between “super-states”: each possessed weapons of mass destruction and was capable of annihilating the other.

The Cold War began after the surrender of Nazi Germany in 1945, when the uneasy alliance between the United States and Great Britain on the one hand and the Soviet Union on the other started to fall apart. The Soviet Union began to establish left-wing governments in the countries of eastern Europe, determined to safeguard against a possible renewed threat from Germany. The Americans and the British worried that Soviet domination in eastern Europe might be permanent. The Cold War was solidified by 1947–48, when U.S. aid had brought certain Western countries under American influence and the Soviets had established openly communist regimes. Nevertheless, there was very little use of weapons on battlefields during the Cold War. It was waged mainly on political, economic, and propaganda fronts and lasted until 1991.

The Cold War came to a close gradually. The unity in the communist bloc was unraveling throughout the 1960s and ’70s as a split occurred between China and the Soviet Union . Meanwhile, Japan and certain Western countries were becoming more economically independent. Increasingly complex international relationships developed as a result, and smaller countries became more resistant to superpower cajoling.

The Cold War truly began to break down during the administration of Mikhail Gorbachev , who changed the more totalitarian aspects of the Soviet government and tried to democratize its political system. Communist regimes began to collapse in eastern Europe, and democratic governments rose in East Germany , Poland , Hungary , and Czechoslovakia , followed by the reunification of West and East Germany under NATO auspices. Gorbachev’s reforms meanwhile weakened his own communist party and allowed power to shift to the constituent governments of the Soviet bloc. The Soviet Union collapsed in late 1991, giving rise to 15 newly independent nations, including a Russia with an anticommunist leader.

In the late 1950s, both the United States and the Soviet Union were developing intercontinental ballistic missiles . In 1962 the Soviet Union began to secretly install missiles in Cuba to launch attacks on U.S. cities. The confrontation that followed, known as the Cuban missile crisis , brought the two superpowers to the brink of war before an agreement was reached to withdraw the missiles.

The conflict showed that both superpowers were wary of using their nuclear weapons against each other for fear of mutual atomic annihilation. The signing of the Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty followed in 1963, which banned aboveground nuclear weapons testing. Still, after the crisis, the Soviets were determined not to be humiliated by their military inferiority again, and they began a buildup of conventional and strategic forces that the United States was forced to match for the next 25 years.

Recent News

Trusted Britannica articles, summarized using artificial intelligence, to provide a quicker and simpler reading experience. This is a beta feature. Please verify important information in our full article.

This summary was created from our Britannica article using AI. Please verify important information in our full article.

Cold War , the open yet restricted rivalry that developed after World War II between the United States and the Soviet Union and their respective allies. The Cold War was waged on political, economic, and propaganda fronts and had only limited recourse to weapons. The term was first used by the English writer George Orwell in an article published in 1945 to refer to what he predicted would be a nuclear stalemate between “two or three monstrous super-states, each possessed of a weapon by which millions of people can be wiped out in a few seconds.” It was first used in the United States by the American financier and presidential adviser Bernard Baruch in a speech at the State House in Columbia, South Carolina , in 1947.

A brief treatment of the Cold War follows. For full treatment, see international relations .

Following the surrender of Nazi Germany in May 1945 near the close of World War II , the uneasy wartime alliance between the United States and Great Britain on the one hand and the Soviet Union on the other began to unravel. By 1948 the Soviets had installed left-wing governments in the countries of eastern Europe that had been liberated by the Red Army . The Americans and the British feared the permanent Soviet domination of eastern Europe and the threat of Soviet-influenced communist parties coming to power in the democracies of western Europe. The Soviets, on the other hand, were determined to maintain control of eastern Europe in order to safeguard against any possible renewed threat from Germany, and they were intent on spreading communism worldwide, largely for ideological reasons. The Cold War had solidified by 1947–48, when U.S. aid provided under the Marshall Plan to western Europe had brought those countries under American influence and the Soviets had installed openly communist regimes in eastern Europe.

The Cold War reached its peak in 1948–53. In this period the Soviets unsuccessfully blockaded the Western-held sectors of West Berlin (1948–49); the United States and its European allies formed the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), a unified military command to resist the Soviet presence in Europe (1949); the Soviets exploded their first atomic warhead (1949), thus ending the American monopoly on the atomic bomb; the Chinese communists came to power in mainland China (1949); and the Soviet-supported communist government of North Korea invaded U.S.-supported South Korea in 1950, setting off an indecisive Korean War that lasted until 1953.

From 1953 to 1957 Cold War tensions relaxed somewhat, largely owing to the death of the longtime Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin in 1953; nevertheless, the standoff remained. A unified military organization among the Soviet-bloc countries, the Warsaw Pact , was formed in 1955; and West Germany was admitted into NATO that same year. Another intense stage of the Cold War was in 1958–62. The United States and the Soviet Union began developing intercontinental ballistic missiles , and in 1962 the Soviets began secretly installing missiles in Cuba that could be used to launch nuclear attacks on U.S. cities. This sparked the Cuban missile crisis (1962), a confrontation that brought the two superpowers to the brink of war before an agreement was reached to withdraw the missiles.

The Cuban missile crisis showed that neither the United States nor the Soviet Union were ready to use nuclear weapons for fear of the other’s retaliation (and thus of mutual atomic annihilation). The two superpowers soon signed the Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty of 1963 , which banned aboveground nuclear weapons testing. But the crisis also hardened the Soviets’ determination never again to be humiliated by their military inferiority, and they began a buildup of both conventional and strategic forces that the United States was forced to match for the next 25 years.

Throughout the Cold War the United States and the Soviet Union avoided direct military confrontation in Europe and engaged in actual combat operations only to keep allies from defecting to the other side or to overthrow them after they had done so. Thus, the Soviet Union sent troops to preserve communist rule in East Germany (1953), Hungary (1956) , Czechoslovakia (1968) , and Afghanistan (1979) . For its part, the United States helped overthrow a left-wing government in Guatemala (1954) , supported an unsuccessful invasion of Cuba (1961), invaded the Dominican Republic (1965) and Grenada (1983) , and undertook a long (1954–75) and unsuccessful effort to prevent communist North Vietnam from bringing South Vietnam under its rule ( see Vietnam War ).

• History Classics
• Your Profile
• Find History on Facebook (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on Twitter (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on YouTube (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on Instagram (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on TikTok (Opens in a new window)
• This Day In History
• History Podcasts
• History Vault

Cold War History

By: History.com Editors

Updated: June 26, 2023 | Original: October 27, 2009

The Cold War was a period of geopolitical tension marked by competition and confrontation between communist nations led by the Soviet Union and Western democracies including the United States. During World War II , the United States and the Soviets fought together as allies against Nazi Germany . However, U.S./Soviet relations were never truly friendly: Americans had long been wary of Soviet communism and Russian leader Joseph Stalin ’s tyrannical rule. The Soviets resented Americans’ refusal to give them a leading role in the international community, as well as America’s delayed entry into World War II, in which millions of Russians died.

These grievances ripened into an overwhelming sense of mutual distrust and enmity that never developed into open warfare (thus the term “cold war”). Soviet expansionism into Eastern Europe fueled many Americans’ fears of a Russian plan to control the world. Meanwhile, the USSR came to resent what they perceived as U.S. officials’ bellicose rhetoric, arms buildup and strident approach to international relations. In such a hostile atmosphere, no single party was entirely to blame for the Cold War; in fact, some historians believe it was inevitable.

Containment

By the time World War II ended, most American officials agreed that the best defense against the Soviet threat was a strategy called “containment.” In his famous “Long Telegram,” the diplomat George Kennan (1904-2005) explained the policy: The Soviet Union, he wrote, was “a political force committed fanatically to the belief that with the U.S. there can be no permanent modus vivendi [agreement between parties that disagree].” As a result, America’s only choice was the “long-term, patient but firm and vigilant containment of Russian expansive tendencies.”

“It must be the policy of the United States,” he declared before Congress in 1947, “to support free peoples who are resisting attempted subjugation…by outside pressures.” This way of thinking would shape American foreign policy for the next four decades.

Did you know? The term 'cold war' first appeared in a 1945 essay by the English writer George Orwell called 'You and the Atomic Bomb.'

The Cold War: The Atomic Age

The containment strategy also provided the rationale for an unprecedented arms buildup in the United States. In 1950, a National Security Council Report known as NSC–68 had echoed Truman’s recommendation that the country use military force to contain communist expansionism anywhere it seemed to be occurring. To that end, the report called for a four-fold increase in defense spending.

In particular, American officials encouraged the development of atomic weapons like the ones that had ended World War II. Thus began a deadly “ arms race .” In 1949, the Soviets tested an atom bomb of their own. In response, President Truman announced that the United States would build an even more destructive atomic weapon: the hydrogen bomb, or “superbomb.” Stalin followed suit.

As a result, the stakes of the Cold War were perilously high. The first H-bomb test, in the Eniwetok atoll in the Marshall Islands, showed just how fearsome the nuclear age could be. It created a 25-square-mile fireball that vaporized an island, blew a huge hole in the ocean floor and had the power to destroy half of Manhattan. Subsequent American and Soviet tests spewed radioactive waste into the atmosphere.

The ever-present threat of nuclear annihilation had a great impact on American domestic life as well. People built bomb shelters in their backyards. They practiced attack drills in schools and other public places. The 1950s and 1960s saw an epidemic of popular films that horrified moviegoers with depictions of nuclear devastation and mutant creatures. In these and other ways, the Cold War was a constant presence in Americans’ everyday lives.

HISTORY Vault: Nuclear Terror

Now more than ever, terrorist groups are obtaining nuclear weapons. With increasing cases of theft and re-sale at dozens of Russian sites, it's becoming more and more likely for terrorists to succeed.

The Cold War and the Space Race

Space exploration served as another dramatic arena for Cold War competition. On October 4, 1957, a Soviet R-7 intercontinental ballistic missile launched Sputnik (Russian for “traveling companion”), the world’s first artificial satellite and the first man-made object to be placed into the Earth’s orbit. Sputnik’s launch came as a surprise, and not a pleasant one, to most Americans.

In the United States, space was seen as the next frontier, a logical extension of the grand American tradition of exploration, and it was crucial not to lose too much ground to the Soviets. In addition, this demonstration of the overwhelming power of the R-7 missile–seemingly capable of delivering a nuclear warhead into U.S. air space–made gathering intelligence about Soviet military activities particularly urgent.

In 1958, the U.S. launched its own satellite, Explorer I, designed by the U.S. Army under the direction of rocket scientist Wernher von Braun, and what came to be known as the Space Race was underway. That same year, President Dwight Eisenhower signed a public order creating the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), a federal agency dedicated to space exploration, as well as several programs seeking to exploit the military potential of space. Still, the Soviets were one step ahead, launching the first man into space in April 1961.

That May, after Alan Shepard become the first American man in space, President John F. Kennedy (1917-1963) made the bold public claim that the U.S. would land a man on the moon by the end of the decade. His prediction came true on July 20, 1969, when Neil Armstrong of NASA’s Apollo 11 mission , became the first man to set foot on the moon, effectively winning the Space Race for the Americans. 

U.S. astronauts came to be seen as the ultimate American heroes. Soviets, in turn, were pictured as the ultimate villains, with their massive, relentless efforts to surpass America and prove the power of the communist system.

The Cold War and the Red Scare

Meanwhile, beginning in 1947, the House Un-American Activities Committee ( HUAC ) brought the Cold War home in another way. The committee began a series of hearings designed to show that communist subversion in the United States was alive and well.

In Hollywood , HUAC forced hundreds of people who worked in the movie industry to renounce left-wing political beliefs and testify against one another. More than 500 people lost their jobs. Many of these “blacklisted” writers, directors, actors and others were unable to work again for more than a decade. HUAC also accused State Department workers of engaging in subversive activities. Soon, other anticommunist politicians, most notably Senator Joseph McCarthy (1908-1957), expanded this probe to include anyone who worked in the federal government. 

Thousands of federal employees were investigated, fired and even prosecuted. As this anticommunist hysteria spread throughout the 1950s, liberal college professors lost their jobs, people were asked to testify against colleagues and “loyalty oaths” became commonplace.

The Cold War Abroad

The fight against subversion at home mirrored a growing concern with the Soviet threat abroad. In June 1950, the first military action of the Cold War began when the Soviet-backed North Korean People’s Army invaded its pro-Western neighbor to the south. Many American officials feared this was the first step in a communist campaign to take over the world and deemed that nonintervention was not an option. Truman sent the American military into Korea, but the Korean War dragged to a stalemate and ended in 1953.

In 1955, the United States and other members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) made West Germany a member of NATO and permitted it to remilitarize. The Soviets responded with the Warsaw Pact , a mutual defense organization between the Soviet Union, Albania, Poland, Romania, Hungary, East Germany, Czechoslovakia and Bulgaria that set up a unified military command under Marshal Ivan S. Konev of the Soviet Union.

Other international disputes followed. In the early 1960s, President Kennedy faced a number of troubling situations in his own hemisphere. The Bay of Pigs invasion in 1961 and the Cuban missile crisis the following year seemed to prove that the real communist threat now lay in the unstable, postcolonial “Third World.” 

Nowhere was this more apparent than in Vietnam , where the collapse of the French colonial regime had led to a struggle between the American-backed nationalist Ngo Dinh Diem in the south and the communist nationalist Ho Chi Minh in the north. Since the 1950s, the United States had been committed to the survival of an anticommunist government in the region, and by the early 1960s it seemed clear to American leaders that if they were to successfully “contain” communist expansionism there, they would have to intervene more actively on Diem’s behalf. However, what was intended to be a brief military action spiraled into a 10-year conflict .

The End of the Cold War and Effects

Almost as soon as he took office, President Richard Nixon (1913-1994) began to implement a new approach to international relations. Instead of viewing the world as a hostile, “bi-polar” place, he suggested, why not use diplomacy instead of military action to create more poles? To that end, he encouraged the United Nations to recognize the communist Chinese government and, after a trip there in 1972, began to establish diplomatic relations with Beijing.

At the same time, he adopted a policy of “détente”—”relaxation”—toward the Soviet Union. In 1972, he and Soviet premier Leonid Brezhnev (1906-1982) signed the Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty (SALT I), which prohibited the manufacture of nuclear missiles by both sides and took a step toward reducing the decades-old threat of nuclear war.

Despite Nixon’s efforts, the Cold War heated up again under President Ronald Reagan (1911-2004). Like many leaders of his generation, Reagan believed that the spread of communism anywhere threatened freedom everywhere. As a result, he worked to provide financial and military aid to anticommunist governments and insurgencies around the world. This policy, particularly as it was applied in the developing world in places like Grenada and El Salvador, was known as the Reagan Doctrine .

Even as Reagan fought communism in Central America, however, the Soviet Union was disintegrating. In response to severe economic problems and growing political ferment in the USSR, Premier Mikhail Gorbachev (1931-2022) took office in 1985 and introduced two policies that redefined Russia’s relationship to the rest of the world: “glasnost,” or political openness, and “ perestroika ,” or economic reform. 

Soviet influence in Eastern Europe waned. In 1989, every other communist state in the region replaced its government with a noncommunist one. In November of that year, the Berlin Wall –the most visible symbol of the decades-long Cold War–was finally destroyed, just over two years after Reagan had challenged the Soviet premier in a speech at Brandenburg Gate in Berlin: “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall.” By 1991, the Soviet Union itself had fallen apart. The Cold War was over.

Sign up for Inside History

Get HISTORY’s most fascinating stories delivered to your inbox three times a week.

By submitting your information, you agree to receive emails from HISTORY and A+E Networks. You can opt out at any time. You must be 16 years or older and a resident of the United States.

More details : Privacy Notice | Terms of Use | Contact Us

• The Cold War

The aim of a Cold War lesson is to familiarize students with its causes, the importance of nuclear weapons to its duration, and the political and diplomatic implications for the United States, Europe, and the U.S.S.R. of a prolonged period of "cold war." Students should examine the conflicting strategic and political ideas behind the conflict of the U.S. and the U.S.S.R. and consider the effects of that conflict on Europe and the rest of the world. You might also want to include its social effects on American and/or European societies.

Students will be able to define a "cold war" and understand the circumstances of its formation and early development as a conflict driven by competing interests and goals for the postwar world.

Students will understand how the Cold War endured until 1991 by examining issues such as the proliferation of nuclear armaments, mutually assured destruction (MAD), the balance of power, and the role of alliance systems such as NATO and the Warsaw Pact.

Students will study particular Cold War events to apply general ideas and observe the Cold War's effects on Russian, European, and American society.

Note: If the pressure of time is great, concentrating on the origins of the Cold War is an effective strategy for engaging students with the creation of a pattern of mistrust and strategic competition between the two superpowers.

I. The Early Cold War, 1945-53

The purpose of this section is to familiarize students with the major events at the end of World War II that mark the origins of the Cold War.

The early years of the Cold War can be divided chronologically into three distinct periods. Groups of students can explore these periods in more detail by creating timelines, examining biographies of the major leaders, or discussing main events in class:

1945: The Yalta and Potsdam conferences, the division of Europe into East and West, the detonation of the first atomic bomb at Hiroshima, the death of President Roosevelt, the division of Germany.

1946-47: The "Iron Curtain" speech, the overthrow of East European governments, the fall of China, the development of the Marshall Plan for Western Europe.

1948-52: The Berlin Crisis, the formation of NATO, the detonation of the first Soviet atomic bomb, the Korean War, the "Red Scare" in the U.S., and Stalin's purges in the U.S.S.R.

Students might write brief reports or presentations on major historical figures, concentrating on their aims for the postwar world and their views on the other superpower as the wartime alliances faded. There is a wealth of material on Presidents Roosevelt and Truman, Josef Stalin, and British Prime Minister Winston Churchill. There is also considerable material on figures like General George Marshall, Konrad Adenauer (first chancellor of the Federal Republic of Germany), Dean Acheson, or British Prime Minister Clement Attlee.

You can also divide students into small groups to outline or prepare timelines of the major events for discussion in class. The Yalta and Potsdam conferences, at which the division of Europe was formulated by the victorious Allies, are a particularly good topic, as is the Marshall Plan or the formation of East and West Germany.  

In-Class Essay

Alternatively, or in addition, to the above exercises, students might prepare a short (one-page) written essay on how they define a "cold war" or a "balance of power." Encourage them to be as specific and detailed as possible, using either real events or hypothetical circumstances as examples. Class discussion on the basis of student ideas may be profitable. Group student observations and comments into broad categories, including such examples as "peaceful competition," "alliance building," "preparations for eventual war," and so forth. Or, you can encourage students to think thematically by grouping their observations under such categories as "political aspects," "economic aspects," or "military aspects."

II. The Middle Cold War, 1953-74

Students should begin to grapple with the Cold War as it stabilized, with the aim of analyzing its events and general meanings.

A. Crisis and Competition

Continue a discussion of the later period of the Cold War, possibly periodizing it as follows:

1950-61: Stabilization of the Cold War: the Suez Crisis, Hungarian Revolt of 1956, and nuclear buildups; development of the hydrogen bomb; Sputnik.

1961-74: Repeated crises and competition: Bay of Pigs, Cuban Missile Crisis, Six-Day War, Vietnam, Berlin Wall crisis, the "space race."

B. Why Did the Cold War Continue?

One of the most difficult things for students to grasp about the Cold War is the intractable ideological conflict and the differing interests of the United States and the Soviet Union.

Document Analysis

Have students divide into small groups and examine selected documents that reveal some of the central ideas of the early or later Cold War—the Iron Curtain speech, Stalin's response, debates during Yalta or Potsdam, or Castro's statements during the Cuban Missile Crisis are excellent source material, as are the speeches of Nikita Khrushchev and John Kennedy.  

Statistical Analysis

Have students utilize a world map or available statistical information to illustrate the preponderance of the United States after World War II and the strategic dilemma of the Soviet Union. Students might particularly discuss where the U.S. and U.S.S.R. deployed nuclear weapons.  

Oral Reports

The length of the Cold War gives students an ideal opportunity to present different topics or events individually or in groups. The Berlin Crisis of 1948, that of 1961 (the Berlin Wall), the Cuban Missile Crisis, Vietnam, and several others give students the opportunity to delve into the causes of the Cold War's persistence. Five-to-10-minute presentations with question-and-answer periods are particularly useful.  

The issue of nuclear weaponry is key to engaging students with one of the critical reasons the Cold War endured without a major conflict between the United States and the U.S.S.R. Students might debate the uses of the atomic bomb, or why it was never used after 1945. They might also consider why nuclear weapons were built in such numbers, the concept of "Mutual Assured Destruction," and the destructive power of a nuclear weapon.

Assignments

Critical Book Review

A possible assignment for a Cold War lesson is to have students read one of the several novels written during the Cold War about nuclear war and its effects. Some of these are included in the Additional Resources section below. Students can discuss the author's assessment of nuclear war, its damage, or the causes of a nuclear war. Having one group of students reading a novel written in the 1950s compared to one written in the 1960s or 1970s can be particularly instructive because students can contrast the development of public sentiment about the nuclear problem.  

Critical Film Review

There are numerous excellent and thought-provoking films on nuclear war as well, many accessible on VHS or DVD. Films can spark discussion about both nuclear conflict and the nature of the Cold War itself. Several suggestions are noted in the Additional Resources section below. Whether satirical or serious, films about nuclear war get at the public attitude and the difficult question of using nuclear weapons in a way few other sources can. You will have no problems getting students to engage with a film on a variety of levels, since most films either operate on a certain set of assumptions about nuclear conflict (that it was fundamentally irrational, or suicidal, for nuclear weapons to be used) or question them. Students can also discuss the value of the film as a source.

III. The Cold War's End, 1974-91

Most likely toward the end of the course, students can explore the reasons for the Soviet Union's abandonment of its position as the United States' main rival in 1989 and its disintegration in 1991-93.

Important topics to cover in this section include the SALT talks, the Reykjavik Summit of 1986 (Gorbachev-Reagan), and the East German revolt of 1989.

Discussion Questions

Students should now be able to come to some conclusions about why the Cold War occurred, how leaders perpetuated it, and how it ended.

What were the reasons the United States and Soviet Union could not agree on a workable postwar relationship?

Why did the Soviet Union pursue the domination of Eastern Europe, including constructing the Berlin Wall?

What was the "Domino Theory"? What was "containment"? Why and how did the United States pursue containment as a strategy?

Why did crises like the Cuban Missile Crisis, the Vietnam War, or the Berlin Wall crisis not develop into war?

Additional Resources

Films  .

Dr. Strangelove, or How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb . Directed by Stanley Kubrick. Columbia Pictures, 1964. One of two movies about a nuclear accident released in the same year, the film is a hilarious and thought-provoking satire about accidental nuclear war gone out of control. Students will find it very funny, although they may not identify the real-life figures represented by Peter Sellers, George C. Scott, and Slim Pickens.

Fail-Safe . Directed by Sidney Lumet. Columbia Pictures, 1964. The second film about a nuclear accident released in 1964, the film is a suspenseful look at the possible consequences of an "accidental" missile launch against the Soviet Union, resulting in a tit-for-tat destruction, without warning, of New York City.

From Russia with Love . Directed by Terence Young. United Artists, 1963.

You Only Live Twice . Directed by Lewis Gilbert II. United Artists, 1967. These two James Bond movies are excellent sources for engaging students in the way in which the Cold War affected ideas of manhood, the proper role of government, and espionage. They are also a tremendously entertaining way to explore how a single individual could cope with, or supposedly save the world, in an era of nuclear danger.

The Manchurian Candidate . Directed by John Frankenheimer. United Artists, 1962. Classic film about espionage and a communist conspiracy to gain control of the U.S. government. Invaluable for its accurate (if possibly over-the-top) examination of Cold War paranoia and the difficulty of maintaining individual freedoms in the face of a long-term rivalry with communist powers.

Wargames . Directed by John Badham. MGM, 1983.

Red Dawn . Directed by John Milius. MGM, 1984. These are not films that explore the Cold War in a sophisticated or intellectual way. Rather, they are included as representations or reflections of the Cold War in popular culture. Red Dawn, particularly, with its plot involving the dissolution of NATO and a subsequent invasion of the United States by Nicaragua, Cuba, and the U.S.S.R., is especially interesting as an illustration of the Reagan-era fears of Soviet aggression, an interesting view in light of the economic weakness of the Soviet Union.

Monographs  

Clemens, Diane Shaver. Yalta . New York: Oxford University Press, 1970. An older account of the origins of the Cold War, but continues to be a solid, highly readable analysis of the Yalta Conference and the issues of the early Cold War.

Gaddis, John Lewis. The United States and the Origins of the Cold War, 1941-47 . New York: Columbia University Press, 1972. Perhaps Gaddis's best book. Students will continue to find this account of the Cold War's origins a valuable narrative, written mainly from the American perspective.

Gardner, Lloyd. Spheres of Influence: The Great Powers Partition Europe, from Munich to Yalta . Chicago: Ivan R. Dee, 1993. A cogent account of the end of World War II and the conflicting plans for the postwar period. The centerpiece of Gardner's account is the Yalta conference, but the importance of the book is that it begins with World War II, so the background of the agreements and disagreements that began the Cold War is laid out well. Deals with the European as well as the American and Soviet leadership.

Kennedy-Pipe, Caroline. Russia and the World, 1917-1991 . London: Arnold, 1998. There are an increasing number of books devoted to the formation of Soviet foreign policy in the Cold War that deal confidently with the goals and beliefs of the Soviet leadership from Stalin to Gorbachev. Kennedy-Pipe's recent account is highly readable and stands out as a concise resource for students.

LaFeber, Walter. America, Russia, and the Cold War, 1945-2000 . 9th ed. Boston: McGraw-Hill, 2002. An excellent all-around account of the Cold War, including its ideological foundations and its various crises. It is probably too long to assign to students but is an invaluable reference for individual events. It is also an excellent bibliographic guide.

Novels  

Clancy, Tom. Red Storm Rising . New York: Putnam, 1986. Written before the fall of the U.S.S.R., this Reagan-era potboiler is a retelling of a 1970s fictionalized account of the likely path of World War III—fought in Germany, by NATO and the Warsaw Pact, with no nuclear weapons involved.

Frank, Pat. Alas, Babylon . New York: Bantam Books, 1960. Written before the era of MAD, this late 1950s novel is a "what if?" tale of a small band of Floridians caught in the aftermath of a nuclear conflict between the U.S. and Soviet Union.

Miller, Walter. A Canticle for Leibowitz . New York: Bantam Books, 1959. A post-apocalyptic world is held together by the lingering memories of the past, preserved by an order of monks in the New Mexico desert. This is an intriguing novel that examines the moral, physical, and political consequences of nuclear weapons and nuclear war.

Schute, Nevil. On the Beach . New York: William Morrow, 1957. A tragic story of mankind's last months on Earth. Nuclear fallout has exterminated the remnants of humanity in the northern hemisphere. A small community left at the southern tip of Australia confronts the inevitable progress of the fallout south, leading to the end of life on Earth.

Primary Sources  

Judge, Edward, and John Langdon. The Cold War: A History Through Documents . Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1999. A well-edited source for speeches by American presidents and Soviet premiers; memoranda on national security, nuclear policy, and overseas crises; and a good central source for other primary materials on China and Europe.

Websites  

Students will find the following Web sites entertaining and useful sources of confirmed and factual data.

National Security Archive at George Washington University Through this site, students can also link to specific sites on the Cuban Missile Crisis and Vietnam, and they can download visual sources from the digital National Security Archive. There are also links to the Parallel History Project on NATO and the Warsaw Pact and the Cold War International History Project.

Internet Modern History Sourcebook at Fordham University This unique central source for documents on modern history provides a wealth of primary source material for students. It is also excellent for intellectual views culled and presented in their original format (mainly from magazines of the 1950s-60s.) There are documents and articles on Korea, Vietnam, the fall of China, both Berlin crises, Cuba, and détente. On the Soviet Union, in particular, there are sources on Khrushchev, the Warsaw Pact, the Hungarian revolt, and 1989.

• Early Modern Empires
• The French Revolution
• The Structures of Nineteenth-Century Government
• German Unification
• The Russian Revolution
• German Reunification, 1989-90

Origins of the Cold War

The Cold War was the global, ideological rivalry between the Soviet Union-led Eastern bloc and American-dominated “Free World.” It emerged in the aftermath of World War II and was fought on many fronts—political, economic, military, cultural, ideological, and in the Space Race. It led to the creation of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) in 1949, and the Warsaw Pact alliance (1955-1991). Under the threat of Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD), the two nuclear powers—the United States since 1945 and the Soviet Union since 1949—and military alliances avoided direct confrontations, the reason why the term “cold” is used to describe the conflict. However, they eagerly supported their allies and fought proxy wars; for example, the Korean War from 1950-1953, the Vietnam War from 1955-1975, and Afghanistan from 1979-1989.  

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

The Origins of the Cold War - A Review Essay

Following the logic of earlier scholarly debates on which side is to be blamed for the Cold War it appears that in fact both or neither: it was the inevitable consequence of the fact that two superpowers emerged after the conflagration of WWII. The ideology confrontation mattered much less vis-a-vis this immense global power shift.

Related Papers

Jonathan Morales

Bibliography of New Cold War History

Aigul Kazhenova , Tsotne Tchanturia , Marijn Mulder , Ahmet Ömer Yüce , Sergei Zakharov , Mirkamran Huseynli , Pınar Eldemir , Angela Aiello , Rastko Lompar

This bibliography attempts to present the publications on the history of the Cold War published after 1989, the beginning of the „archival revolution” in the former Soviet bloc countries. While this first edition is still far from complete, it collects a huge number of books, articles and book chapters on the topic and it is the most extensive such bibliography so far, almost 600 pages in length. An enlarged and updated edition will be completed in 2018.

Tsotne Tchanturia , Vajda Barnabás , Gökay Çınar , Barnabás Vajda , Lenka Thérová , Simon Szilvási , Irem Osmanoglu , Rastko Lompar , Aigul Kazhenova , Pınar Eldemir , Natalija Dimić Lompar , Sára Büki

This bibliography attemts to present the publications on the history of the Cold War published after 1989, the beginning of the „archival revolution” in the former Soviet bloc countries. While this first edition is still far from complete, it collects a huge number of books, articles and book chapters on the topic and it is the most extensive such bibliography so far, almost 600 pages in length. An enlarged and updated edition will be completed in 2018. So, if you are a Cold War history scholar in any country and would like us to incude all of your publications on the Cold War (published after 1989) in the second edition, we will gladly do that. Please, send us a list of your works in which books and articles/book chapters are separated and follow the format of our bibliography. The titles of non-English language entries should be translated into English in square brackets. Please, send the list to: [email protected] The Cold War History Research Center owes special thanks to the Parallel History Project on Cooperative Security (formerly: on NATO and the Warsaw Pact) in Zurich–Washington D.C. for their permission to use the Selective Bibliography on the Cold War Alliances, compiled by Anna Locher and Cristian Nünlist, available at: http://www.php.isn.ethz.ch/lory1.ethz.ch/publications/bibliography/index.html

The Bibliography of New Cold War History (second enlarged edition)

Tsotne Tchanturia , Aigul Kazhenova , Khatia Kardava

This bibliography attempts to present the publications on the history of the Cold War published after 1989, the beginning of the „archival revolution” in the former Soviet bloc countries.

Soshum: Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities

Adewunmi J Falode , Moses Yakubu

The Cold War that occurred between 1945 and 1991 was both an international political and historical event. As a political event, the Cold War laid bare the fissures, animosities, mistrusts, misconceptions and the high-stake brinksmanship that has been part of the international political system since the birth of the modern nation-state in 1648. As a historical event, the Cold War and its end marked an important epoch in human social, economic and political development. The beginning of the Cold War marked the introduction of a new form of social and political experiment in human relations with the international arena as its laboratory. Its end signaled the end of a potent social and political force that is still shaping the course of political relationship among states in the 21 st century. The historiography of the Cold War has been shrouded in controversy. Different factors have been given for the origins of the conflict. This work is a historical and structural analysis of the historiography of the Cold War. The work analyzes the competing views of the historiography of the Cold War and create an all-encompassing and holistic historiography called the Structuralist School.

Jonathan Murphy

fabio capano

In Rosella Mamoli Zorzi e Simone Francescato (eds.), American Phantasmagoria. Modes of representation in US culture

Duccio Basosi

The first section shows that the presence of ghosts in the foreign policy decision making processes of both the United States and the Soviet Union has been detected mainly in relatively recent works. The second, third and fourth sections are dedicated to distinguishing between three different kinds of apparitions—ghosts of the past, specters of the future, and phantasmagorias, respectively. The concluding section attempts some reflections on the possible meanings of such interest of Cold War historiography for spectral figures, particularly in connection with the ongoing debates about the “very notion of Cold War.”

Eliza Gheorghe

Geoffrey Roberts

Review of Jonathan Haslam's Russia's Cold War, published in International Affairs

Loading Preview

Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.

RELATED PAPERS

Saber and Scroll, 1:3 (Fall 2012), 34-39

Tsotne Tchanturia , Dionysios Dragonas

GTU academic journal “Intellectual”

Michelle Paranzino

Roham Alvandi , Eliza Gheorghe

Diplomatic History

William C. Wohlforth

Tina Machingaidze

Békés, Csaba, Melinda Kamár (Ed.): Students on the Cold War. New Findings and Interpretations. Budapest

Torben Gülstorff

Barbara D Krasner

Akindele Boladale

European History Quarterly

Benjamin Tromly

Helen Roche

Artemy Kalinovsky

Evanthis Hatzivassiliou

henry laycock

Cold War History

Vasil Paraskevov

Cold War International History Project Working Paper #89

Priscilla Roberts

Oxford Handbook in the History of Communism, ed. Stephen Anthony Smith (Oxford: Oxford University Press)

Balazs Szalontai

Martin Grossheim

Journal of Cold War Studies

Silvio Pons

Contemporary European History

Gjert L Dyndal

The Carl Beck Papers in Russian and East …

Jeffrey Burds

Stefano Bottoni

Péter Vámos

Dithekgo Mogadime

[w:] Disintegration and Integration in East-Central Europe 1919 – post-1989, red. W. Loth, N. Păun, Cluj-Napoca 2014, s. 134-146

Jerzy Lazor

Larry L Watts

Roger Voncken

The Soviet and Post-Soviet Review

Jakub Szumski

Cold War International History Project (CWIHP) Working Paper Series

Patryk Babiracki

COLD WAR. GEOPOLITICS

Patrick Kyanda

Petar Žarković

Rachel Alberstadt

gareth dale

Elidor Mehilli

Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

Last updated 20/06/24: Online ordering is currently unavailable due to technical issues. We apologise for any delays responding to customers while we resolve this. For further updates please visit our website: https://www.cambridge.org/news-and-insights/technical-incident

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings .

Login Alert

• > The Cambridge History of the Cold War
• > Ideology and the origins of the Cold War, 1917–1962

Book contents

• Frontmatter
• 1 The Cold War and the international history of the twentieth century
• 2 Ideology and the origins of the Cold War, 1917–1962
• 3 The world economy and the Cold War in the middle of the twentieth century
• 4 The emergence of an American grand strategy, 1945–1952
• 5 The Soviet Union and the world, 1944–1953
• 6 Britain and the Cold War, 1945–1955
• 7 The division of Germany, 1945–1949
• 8 The Marshall Plan and the creation of the West
• 9 The Sovietization of Eastern Europe, 1944–1953
• 10 The Cold War in the Balkans, 1945–1956
• 11 The birth of the People’s Republic of China and the road to the Korean War
• 12 Japan, the United States, and the Cold War, 1945–1960
• 13 The Korean War
• 14 US national security policy from Eisenhower to Kennedy
• 15 Soviet foreign policy, 1953–1962
• 16 East Central Europe, 1953–1956
• 17 The Sino-Soviet alliance and the Cold War in Asia, 1954–1962
• 18 Nuclear weapons and the escalation of the Cold War, 1945–1962
• 19 Culture and the Cold War in Europe
• 20 Cold War mobilization and domestic politics: the United States
• 21 Cold War mobilisation and domestic politics: the Soviet Union
• 22 Decolonization, the global South, and the Cold War, 1919–1962
• 23 Oil, resources, and the Cold War, 1945–1962
• Bibliographical essay

2 - Ideology and the origins of the Cold War, 1917–1962

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 September 2010

Russia’s Great October Socialist Revolution of 1917 triggered a confrontation between the Soviet Union and the United States that would last much of the twentieth century. In its early years, each side aimed to transform the other. American–Soviet conflict became global only in the 1940s, at which point it shaped the international system and every nation in it. In addition to competition over markets or territories, this new form of struggle – the Cold War – was at its root a battle of ideas: American liberalism vs. Soviet Communism.

The ideologies animating the Cold War had centuries-long pedigrees, emerging by the early twentieth century as powerful and compelling visions for social change. These ideologies – explicit ideas and implicit assumptions that provided frameworks for understanding the world and defining action in it – were not antithetical to material interests, but often shaped the way foreign-policy officials understood such interests. Ideologies were lenses that focused, and just as often distorted, understandings of external events and thus the actions taken in response.

Ideologies in conflict and in common

Though American leaders typically proclaimed their immunity from ideological temptations, this self-perception ignored a rich tradition of American thought and policy that developed, defined, and acted upon a clear set of ideological premises. The foreign policy of the United States, like so much else in that country, drew on a long tradition of liberalism originating in the ideas of John Locke. As the etymology suggests, Lockean liberalism was, its core, a theory of liberty, one that viewed liberty as defined for the individual, based in law, and rooted in property. The Declaration Independence paraphrased Locke in proclaiming human beings “endowed by their Creator” with rights to “life, liberty and [where Locke had emphasized property] the pursuit of happiness.” Liberty could be protected only by a system of laws in a polity guaranteeing popular sovereignty. A government, furthermore, should provide only formal freedoms (protecting the rights of property and participation), not substantive ones (equality of condition).

Access options

Save book to kindle.

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle .

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service .

• Ideology and the origins of the Cold War, 1917–1962
• By David Engerman
• Edited by Melvyn P. Leffler , University of Virginia , Odd Arne Westad , London School of Economics and Political Science
• Book: The Cambridge History of the Cold War
• Online publication: 28 September 2010
• Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CHOL9780521837194.003

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox .

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive .

The Cold War

Cold war historiography.

As an event spanning almost 50 years and touching all corners of the globe, the Cold War has been closely studied by hundreds of historians. Histories of the period have reached different conclusions and formed different interpretations about the Cold War, why it occurred and how it developed and evolved. This page provides a brief survey of Cold War historiography and its three main schools of thought.

The role of historians

Our understanding of the Cold War has been shaped by the work of historians. Since the outbreak of global tensions in 1945, the events, ideas and complexities of the Cold War have been researched, studied and interpreted by thousands of historians.

These historians have explored and hypothesised about the causes and effects of the Cold War. They have examined the ideas, motives and actions of significant Cold War leaders. They have weighed the numerous political, social, economic and cultural factors of the period. They have evaluated the outcomes and effects of the Cold War, both globally and in particular countries and regions.

Like most historians studying a long and complex period, they formed different interpretations and reached different conclusions. As a consequence, the historiography of the Cold War, like the Cold War itself, contains a range of views, perspectives and arguments.

Why differing perspectives?

Why have Cold War historians formed different and often competing arguments? Fundamentally, there are two main reasons for this.

The first pertains to historians and their unique perspectives. Historians come from different backgrounds, learn history from different people and embrace different values and methodologies. Their views and priorities are shaped by their places of origin, the times in which they live and the company they keep.

Secondly, the recency of the Cold War and its political divisiveness are complicating factors. The Cold War ended a little over 30 years ago and its political tensions and competing viewpoints still reverberate through modern societies. Unlike historians who focus on the Middle Ages or the French Revolution , for example, most Cold War historians actually lived through the event they are studying.

There are three main movements or schools of thought in Cold War historiography. These are broadly known as the Orthodox, Revisionist and Post-Revisionist schools. Historians in these schools do not think alike on every or any issue, nor do they always advance similar arguments – but their general approach to or position on the Cold War tends to be similar.

The Orthodox school

Orthodox views of the Cold War emerged among historians in the United States and other Western nations in the early 1950s. Though less used today, this perspective has also been known as the ‘Traditional view’.

Broadly speaking, Orthodox historians attribute the outbreak of the Cold War to Joseph Stalin and the Soviet Union. They argue that the Soviet regime initiated the Cold War by seeking to expand and exert control over Europe and Asia. They attribute this to Russia’s inherent expansionism, the doctrine of Marxist-Leninism which preached international revolution and world communism, as well as Stalin’s anti-Western paranoia.

Orthodox historians argue that Stalin broke agreements forged at Yalta and Potsdam in order to expand Soviet communism into eastern Europe and throughout the world. The Soviet leader’s duplicitous actions led to the collapse of the Grand Alliance and the beginnings of the Cold War.

“According to the influential Orthodox account, the conflict was unavoidable owing to the nature of Soviet objectives and Stalin’s character. It was an illusion to believe that the ‘Uncle Joe’ of pro-Soviet wartime propaganda corresponded to reality. Stalin was no horse-trading statesman or American-style political boss, but a ruthless dictator determined to extend his totalitarian system far beyond the strict requirements of Soviet security. Nothing the United States or Britain might have done would have persuaded him to moderate his designs.” John Lamberton Harper, historian

American passivity

In the Orthodox mind, the United States had only a passive or reactive role in these events. American leaders entered the negotiations in 1945 with benign objectives: they sought no territory and were guided by principles rather than self-interest. Roosevelt and Truman both sought conciliation with Stalin and a post-war working relationship with the Soviet Union.

When Stalin violated the agreements of 1945, however, American leaders, particularly Truman, acted in defence of self-determination and democracy. Many Orthodox histories also offer scathing criticisms of economic policy and political repression within the Soviet system, while ignoring the shortcomings of American capitalism.

The Orthodox view became the accepted historical position of the United States during the 1950s – not surprisingly, since it aligned with American interests and justified US policies like the Truman Doctrine and the Domino Theory . It remained the prevailing explanation of the Cold War until the emergence of Revisionist historians in the 1960s.

Notable advocates of the Orthodox school included Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr , Herbert Feis , Thomas A. Bailey and Louis J. Halle. It may come as no surprise that many of these historians held official positions with the US State Department or other government bodies.

Revisionist historians

Revisionist historians attribute greater responsibility for the Cold War to the United States. According to Revisionists, US policy after World War II was neither passive nor benign. It was driven more by economic considerations and national self-interest than the principles of democracy and self-determination.

American policymakers pushed to contain Soviet communism in Europe for selfish reasons: they wanted a European continent populated with capitalist nations open to trade and American exports. Policies such as lend-lease, post-war loans and the Marshall Plan all worked toward this objective.

Some Revisionist historians also point to America’s “atomic diplomacy” in 1945. Gar Alperovitz , for example, argues that Truman used nuclear weapons against Japan, not for military reasons but to flex America’s diplomatic muscle when negotiating with Stalin. Justifiably or not, the Soviet Union felt threatened by America’s policies and diplomatic approaches of the mid to late 1940s, which contributed to the collapse of their alliance and a lost opportunity for post-war conciliation.

“The Revisionists disagree among themselves on a wide range of specific issues [but] tend to divide into two recognisable groups. The ‘soft’ Revisionists place far more emphasis upon individuals than they do on the nature of institutions or systems. They see a sharp break between the foreign policies of Roosevelt and Truman and the men around him. Truman, according to this view, broke apart a functioning coalition soon after he took office… The ‘hard’ Revisionists raise more fundamental issues [about] the American system as it developed over the years.” Robert James Maddox, historian

The spread of Revisionism

The first significant Revisionist work was William Appleman Williams ‘ The Tragedy of American Diplomacy , published in 1959. In this thorough but controversial book, Williams concluded that since the 1890s, the overriding function of US foreign policy has been to secure foreign markets for American-made goods and services. He calls this the ‘open door policy’ because it seeks to open up other nations for American capitalists by removing tariffs and other trade barriers.

Williams’ analysis shattered two popular illusions: first, that the United States was an isolationist, anti-imperialist neutral power, and second, that US foreign policy during the Cold War was reactive, peace-seeking and not agenda-driven.

Revisionist perspectives gained traction and popularity in the United States during the 1960s, a period when the failures of Vietnam led many to question America’s foreign policy. Aside from Williams and Alperovitz, other notable historians of the Revisionist school include Denna Fleming , Christopher Lasch , Walter LaFeber and Lloyd Gardner. During the 1960s and 1970s these historians were often referred to as the ‘New Left’, though this label oversimplified their perspectives.

The Post-Revisionists

Orthodox and Revisionist accounts of the Cold War had many advocates – but some historians were dissatisfied with the extremities of both perspectives. A new approach, pioneered by John Lewis Gaddis and dubbed Post-Revisionism, began to emerge during the 1970s.

Post-Revisionist historians looked for a middle ground between Orthodox and Revisionist histories of the Cold War. These academics synthesised ideas and conclusions from both schools of thought – but they also had the advantages of time, hindsight, the cooling passions of Détente and, later, access to newly-declassified documents from both sides of the struggle.

The Post-Revisionist movement was sometimes referred to as ‘Eclecticism’ because it borrowed heavily from existing research. Revisionists called it ‘New Orthodoxy’ because they believed it pushed responsibility for the Cold War back onto the Soviet Union.

The work of Gaddis

The first significant Post-Revisionist account was Gaddis’ 1972 book The United States and the Origins of the Cold War, 1941-1947 . In this text, Gaddis considered existing explanations for the Cold War but also widened his focus, examining “external and internal influences, as perceived by officials responsible for [policy] formulation” in Washington.

Gaddis also acknowledged the limitations faced by previous Cold War historians of not having access to official Soviet archives, meaning they had to assess Soviet policy “from without”.

Gaddis identified several factors that contributed to the emergence of a US-Soviet cold war. There was entrenched political attitudes and rivalry before 1941, including a lack of communication and formal recognition. The Allies’ delay in opening up a second front in Europe left the Soviets three years to battle the Nazis unaided. Washington’s refusal to recognise a Soviet sphere of influence in eastern Europe was another source of tension, as was Truman’s ‘atomic diplomacy’ and refusal to share nuclear technology with the Soviets.

Other Post-Revisionists

Gaddis’ account gave birth to numerous Post-Revisionist histories of the Cold War. Among the historians to embrace this new approach were Ernest May , Melvyn Leffler and Marc Trachtenberg.

Like the Revisionist school, the Post-Revisionist movement contains a diversity of perspectives and arguments, though there are identifiable trends. Most Post-Revisionists suggest that Stalin was an opportunist and a pragmatist, rather than an international revolutionary hell-bent on exporting communism around the world. They also accept that American foreign policy often involved overreach and was driven, at least in part, by economic imperatives.

Post-Revisionists also tend to focus on internal systems and factors that may shape or determine Cold War policies. They may include domestic political conditions, economic pressures and cultural influences.

“Starting in the 1970s, the study of the Cold War began to move beyond the simple application of blame and responsibility. While still focusing mainly on the diplomatic and military aspects of the Cold War, scholars started to view the conflict as a result of a complex interaction between all the parties involved… As befits a general international atmosphere of détente, most Post-Revisionists deemphasised the role of ideas and ideologies and instead explained the Cold War increasingly in a realist manner: decision-makers on all sides became, in effect, rational geopolitical calculators, advancing their respective national interests in the unique context of the post-war world.” Jussi M. Hanhimäki, historian

Post-Cold War perspectives

The end of the Cold War has also caused a shift in perspectives. The dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991 allowed the opening of Soviet archives once denied to historians. This access has led to new research and shifting perspectives.

As a consequence, some Revisionist and Post-Revisionist historians have modified their positions, particularly with regard to Joseph Stalin and Soviet policy. Gaddis, for example, published a new text in 1997 after “slogging dutifully through archives in Moscow, Prague, Berlin, Budapest, Beijing, Hanoi and Havana”. He took a much firmer line on Stalin, who “partly driven by ideological and geostrategic ambitions, partly responding to the opportunities that lay before him, built a post-war European empire”.

Other historians have also returned to claiming the Cold War as an ideological struggle, rather than a conflict driven by geopolitical rivalry and economic factors.

Huntington and Fukuyama

Some writers and academics have pondered what the Cold War means for the future. Two of the best-known theories were developed by political scientists Samuel P. Huntington and Francis Fukuyama .

Writing in 1992, Fukuyama claimed that the end of the Cold War was the final victory for democracy and capitalism. Liberal democracy had emerged as mankind’s highest-evolved and best form of government, surpassing all other systems. According to Fukuyama, this marked the “end of history” – not the end of historical events or change but of the great historical struggle between ideologies.

Huntington’s view of the future was more pessimistic. A former advisor to the US government during the Vietnam War , Huntington suggested that the collapse of the Soviet Union would produce significant changes in the world order. Future tensions and conflicts, he argued, would be driven not by ideology or competing economic interests but by fundamental differences in social structure, culture and religious values. Huntington’s thesis became known as the ‘clash of civilisations’ theory.

1. Historians have reached different conclusions and formed different arguments about the Cold War, including how it began, who was responsible and what conditions and factors perpetuated it.

2. Orthodox historians attribute the origins of the Cold War to Joseph Stalin and Soviet aggression. Stalin’s violation of post-war agreements led to a defensive policy response from the US and the West.

3. In contrast, Revisionist historians argue that US foreign policy was unnecessarily belligerent, seeking to contain Soviet communism to create a Europe that was more amenable to American trade and exports.

4. Post-Revisionists draw on the Orthodox and Revisionist schools and seek a middle ground. They suggest that neither superpower was wholly or mostly responsible but that complex factors were at play.

5. Post-Cold War historians, some of them with access to previously unavailable Soviet archives, have returned to describing the Cold War as an ideological conflict. Some, like Huntington and Fukuyama, have attempted to understand the implications for the future.

Citation information Title: ‘Cold War historiography’ Authors: Jennifer Llewellyn , Steve Thompson Publisher: Alpha History URL: https://alphahistory.com/coldwar/historiography/ Date published: October 14, 2019 Date updated: November 18, 2023 Date accessed: June 25, 2024 Copyright: The content on this page is © Alpha History. It may not be republished without our express permission. For more information on usage, please refer to our Terms of Use .

Essay on the Cold War: it’s Origin, Causes and Phases

After the Second World War, the USA and USSR became two Super Powers. One nation tried to reduce the power of other. Indirectly the competition between the Super Powers led to the Cold War.

Then America took the leadership of all the Capitalist Countries.

Soviet Russia took the leadership of all the Communist Countries. As a result of which both stood as rivals to each other.

Definition of the Cold War:

ADVERTISEMENTS:

In the graphic language of Hartman, “Cold War is a state of tension between countries in which each side adopts policies designed to strengthen it and weaken the other by falling short by actual war”.

Image Source: i.ytimg.com/vi/y9HjvHZfCUI/maxresdefault.jpg

Infact, Cold War is a kind of verbal war which is fought through newspapers, magazines, radio and other propaganda methods. It is a propaganda to which a great power resorts against the other power. It is a sort of diplomatic war.

Origin of Cold War:

There is no unanimity amongst scholars regarding the origin of the Cold War In 1941 when Hitler invaded Russia, Roosevelt the President of USA sent armaments to Russia. It is only because the relationship between Roosevelt and Stalin was very good. But after the defeat of Germany, when Stalin wanted to implement Communist ideology in Poland, Hungery, Bulgaria and Rumania, at that time England and America suspected Stalin.

Winston Churchill, the Prime Minister of England in his ‘Fulton Speech’ on 5 March 1946 said that Soviet Russia was covered by an Iron Curtain. It led Stalin to think deeply. As a result of which suspicion became wider between Soviet Russia and western countries and thus the Cold War took birth.

Causes of the Cold War:

Various causes are responsible for the outbreak of the Cold War. At first, the difference between Soviet Russia and USA led to the Cold War. The United States of America could not tolerate the Communist ideology of Soviet Russia. On the other hand, Russia could not accept the dominance of United States of America upon the other European Countries.

Secondly, the Race of Armament between the two super powers served another cause for the Cold War. After the Second World War, Soviet Russia had increased its military strength which was a threat to the Western Countries. So America started to manufacture the Atom bomb, Hydrogen bomb and other deadly weapons. The other European Countries also participated in this race. So, the whole world was divided into two power blocs and paved the way for the Cold War.

Thirdly, the Ideological Difference was another cause for the Cold War. When Soviet Russia spread Communism, at that time America propagated Capitalism. This propaganda ultimately accelerated the Cold War.

Fourthly, Russian Declaration made another cause for the Cold War. Soviet Russia highlighted Communism in mass-media and encouraged the labour revolution. On the other hand, America helped the Capitalists against the Communism. So it helped to the growth of Cold War.

Fifthly, the Nuclear Programme of America was responsible for another cause for the Cold War. After the bombardment of America on Hiroshima and Nagasaki Soviet Russia got afraid for her existence. So, it also followed the same path to combat America. This led to the growth of Cold War.

Lastly, the Enforcement of Veto by Soviet Russia against the western countries made them to hate Russia. When the western countries put forth any view in the Security Council of the UNO, Soviet Russia immediately opposed it through veto. So western countries became annoyed in Soviet Russia which gave birth to the Cold War.

Various Phases of the Cold War:

The Cold War did not occur in a day. It passed through several phases.

First Phase (1946-1949 ):

In this phase America and Soviet Russia disbelieved each other. America always tried to control the Red Regime in Russia. Without any hesitation Soviet Russia established Communism by destroying democracy in the Poland, Bulgaria, Rumania, Hungery, Yugoslavia and other Eastern European Countries.

In order to reduce Russia’s hegemony, America helped Greece and Turkey by following Truman Doctrine which came into force on 12 March 1947. According to Marshall Plan which was declared on 5 June, 1947 America gave financial assistance to Western European Countries.

In this phase, non withdrawal of army from Iran by Soviet Russia, Berlin blaockade etc. made the cold was more furious. After the formation of NATO in 1949, the Cold War took a halt.

Second Phase (1949-1953 ):

In this phase a treaty was signed between Australia, New Zeland and America in September, 1957 which was known as ANZUS. America also signed a treaty with Japan on 8 September, 1951. At that time by taking armaments from Russia and army from China, North Korea declared war against South Korea.

Then with the help of UNO, America sent military aid to South Korea. However, both North Korea and South Korea signed peace treaty in 1953 and ended the war. In order to reduce the impact of Soviet Communism, America spent a huge amount of dollar in propaganda against Communism. On the other hand, Soviet Russia tried to be equal with America by testing atom bomb.

Third Phase (1953-1957):

Now United States of America formed SEATO in 1954 in order to reduce Soviet Russia’s influence. In 1955 America formed MEDO in Middle East. Within a short span of time, America gave military assistance to 43 countries and formed 3300 military bases around Soviet Russia. At that time, the Vietnamese War started on 1955.

To reduce the American Power, Russia signed WARSAW PACT in 1955. Russia also signed a defence pact with 12 Countries. Germany was divided into Federal Republic of Germany which was under the American control where as German Democratic Republic was under Soviet Russia. In 1957 Soviet Russia included Sphutnick in her defence programme.

In 1953 Stalin died and Khrushchev became the President of Russia. In 1956 an agreement was signed between America and Russia regarding the Suez Crisis. America agreed not to help her allies like England and France. In fact West Asia was saved from a great danger.

Fourth Phase (1957-1962):

In 1959 the Russian President Khrushchev went on a historical tour to America. Both the countries were annoyed for U-2 accident and for Berlin Crisis. In 13 August 1961, Soviet Russia made a Berlin Wall of 25 Kilometres in order to check the immigration from eastern Berlin to Western Berlin. In 1962, Cuba’s Missile Crisis contributed a lot to the cold war.

This incident created an atmosphere of conversation between American President Kenedy and Russian President Khrushchev. America assured Russia that she would not attack Cuba and Russia also withdrew missile station from Cuba.

Fifth Phase (1962-1969 ):

The Fifth Phase which began from 1962 also marked a mutual suspicion between USA and USSR. There was a worldwide concern demanding ban on nuclear weapons. In this period Hot Line was established between the White House and Kremlin. This compelled both the parties to refrain from nuclear war. Inspite of that the Vietnam problem and the Problem in Germany kept Cold War between USA and USSR in fact.

Sixth Phase (1969-1978 ):

This phase commencing from 1969 was marked by DETENTE between USA and USSR- the American President Nixon and Russian President Brezhnev played a vital role for putting an end to the Cold War. The SALT of 1972, the summit Conference on Security’ of 1975 in Helsinki and Belgrade Conference of 1978 brought America and Russia closer.

In 1971, American Foreign Secretary Henry Kissinger paid a secret visit to China to explore the possibilities of reapproachment with China. The American move to convert Diego Garcia into a military base was primarily designed to check the Soviet presence in the Indian Ocean. During the Bangladesh crisis of 1971 and the Egypt-Israel War of 1973 the two super powers extended support to the opposite sides.

Last Phase (1979-1987 ):

In this phase certain changes were noticed in the Cold War. That is why historians call this phase as New Cold War. In 1979, the American President Carter and Russian President Brezhnev signed SALT II. But in 1979 the prospects of mitigating Cold War were marred by sudden development in Afghanistan.

Vietnam (1975), Angola (1976), Ethiopia (1972) and Afghanistan (1979) issues brought success to Russia which was unbearable for America. American President Carter’s Human Rights and Open Diplomacy were criticised by Russia. The SALT II was not ratified by the US Senate. In 1980 America boycotted the Olympic held at Moscow.

In 1983, Russia withdrew from a talk on missile with America. In 1984 Russia boycotted the Olympic game held at Los-Angeles. The Star War of the American President Ronald Regan annoyed Russia. In this way the ‘New Cold War’ between America and Russia continued till 1987.

Result of the Cold War:

The Cold War had far-reaching implications in the international affairs. At first, it gave rise to a fear psychosis which resulted in a mad race for the manufacture of more sophisticated armaments. Various alliances like NATO, SEATO, WARSAW PACT, CENTO, ANZUS etc. were formed only to increase world tension.

Secondly, Cold War rendered the UNO ineffective because both super powers tried to oppose the actions proposed by the opponent. The Korean Crisis, Cuban Missile Crisis, Vietnam War etc. were the bright examples in this direction.

Thirdly, due to the Cold War, a Third World was created. A large number of nations of Africa, Asia and Latin America decided to keep away from the military alliances of the two super powers. They liked to remain neutral. So, Non-Alignments Movement became the direct outcome of the Cold War.

Fourthly, Cold War was designed against mankind. The unnecessary expenditure in the armament production created a barrier against the progress of the world and adversely affected a country and prevented improvement in the living standards of the people.

Fifthly, the principle ‘Whole World as a Family’, was shattered on the rock of frustration due to the Cold War. It divided the world into two groups which was not a healthy sign for mankind.

Sixthly, The Cold War created an atmosphere of disbelief among the countries. They questioned among themselves how unsafe were they under Russia or America.

Finally, The Cold War disturbed the World Peace. The alliances and counter-alliances created a disturbing atmosphere. It was a curse for the world. Though Russia and America, being super powers, came forward to solve the international crisis, yet they could not be able to establish a perpetual peace in the world.

Related Articles:

• Essay on the Cold War, 1945
• Central Treaty Organisation (CENTO): Structure, Principles and Other Details
• History of The Cold War: Origin, Reasons and Other Details
• Truman Doctrine: A Policy Statement Made by US during the Cold War

You are using an outdated browser. Please upgrade your browser or activate Google Chrome Frame to improve your experience.

HISTORY Gr.12 T1 W1: The Origin of the Cold War

The origins of the Cold war and spehers of influence in Europe.

Do you have an educational app, video, ebook, course or eResource?

Contribute to the Western Cape Education Department's ePortal to make a difference.

Home Contact us Terms of Use Privacy Policy Western Cape Government © 2024. All rights reserved.

• Society and Politics
• Art and Culture
• Biographies
• Publications

Grade 12 - The Cold War

How did the Cold War period shape international relations after the Second World War?

After the Second World War, there was a struggle between two world powers, the US and Russia. Why was it called the ‘Cold War’ ? The reason lay in the threat of new and even deadlier weapons of nuclear technology that prevented outright open warfare. The Cold War was characterised by conflict through proxy wars, the manipulation of more vulnerable states through extensive military and financial aid, espionage, propaganda, rivalry over technology, space and nuclear races, and sport. Besides periods of tense crisis in this bi-polar world, the Cold War deeply affected the newly independent countries in Africa and the liberation struggles in southern Africa from the 1960s until the 1990s, when the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR)  was dismantled.

Did you know?  The term “Cold War” was first used by George Orwell, author of the book satirizing Stalinism, “Animal Farm”.

The detente (friendship) that existed between the Allied powers (The US, France and Russia) after 1945 was no more. That military aid would be offered to each other when faced with Nazism fell away, and increased hostility was the order of the day. Some historians argue that it was the formulation and implementation of common policy documents by the USSR for its East European territories that heralded the beginning of different spheres of influence.  Quickly, two distinct blocs emerged.

Also see: National Senior Certificate Grd 12, History Paper 1, November 2014 and National Senior Certificate Grd 12, History Paper 2, November 2014 .

Most learners will understand that a ‘war’ involves conflict between warring parties; that a ‘war’ involves the use of weaponry amongst ‘warring parties’ BUT what is meant by a ‘COLD’ war as opposed to a ‘HOT’ one? Common reference to any war usually involves the type of war that involves weaponry, personnel, devastation, explosions, and most of the images of war. A “COLD” war would refer to a battle of ideologies where the protagonists do not face each other, or fight, each other DIRECTLY.

The Cold War was characteristics by different ideologies being imposed or sold to other countries.

It dissected the world into spheres of influence, with the United States of America (USA) as a champion of democracy (and incidentally, Capitalism, as well) pitted against the USSR (Russia), which stood as a beacon of Communism. These divisions played themselves out in the exporting of influence...and then arms and money....to countries sympathetic to either cause.

The Cold War, which occurred from 1945 until 1989/1990 had far-reaching consequences for the world in general. Much of the literature during this period focussed on the bi-polar nature of the globe. Nation-states across the world, whatever explicit or not, empathised with either Russia or the USA. These countries became the battlefields for the competing influences of Democracy/Capitalism against Communism/Centrally-planned economies.

So, learners might ask as to why this Cold War did not escalate into a ‘Hot’ war, where conventional means of warfare were employed. The reason lies in the proliferation (increase) of nuclear weapons so that if these weapons were ever used, the destruction that would follow would result in a global destruction. So, this Cold War was fought behind the threat of a nuclear war.  The Cuban Missile Crisis (1962) was probably the closest that the world got to a full-blown conventional war.

The Cold War was a period of increased hostility between two blocs of power, the USA and its allies on the one hand; and the USSR and China, on the other. From the end of the Cold War until the early 1990s, world politics and events were primarily viewed through this lens the battle to exert control and influence globally. The Cold War spread outside Europe to every region of the world, and drew to a close by end of the late 1980s / early 1990s. Towards the end of the 1980s, Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev held conferences with USA President Ronald Reagan. The USSR introduced reform policies aimed at restructuring (perestroika) and opening the Russian economy (glasnost).

In December 1989, after more than four decades, Russian President Gorbachev and American President G. H.W Bush declared the Cold War officially over.

Timeline (Source:  “ Timeline of events in the Cold War ” [ Accesssed: 23 January 2015])

• 1945:  Cold War begins
• 1946:  Winston Churchill delivers his ‘ Iron Curtain’ speech
• 1947:  Marshall Plan is announced
• 1948 :  February, Communists take over Czechoslovakia
• 1948 :  June, The ‘Berlin Blockade’ begins
• 1949 :  July, NATO is ratified
• 1950 :  February, McCarthy begins communist witchunt
• 1954 :  KGB established.  CIA assists in overthrowing ‘unfriendly’ regimes in Iran and Guatemala
• 1961 :  Bay of Pigs invasion.  Construction of Berlin Wall begins.  US involvement in Vietnam increases ( troops were dispatched in 1965)
• 1962 :  Cuban Missile Crisis
• 1965 :  150000 troops dispatched to Vietnam
• 1970 :  US President Nixon extends the war to Cambodia.
• 1973 :  Ceasefire between the US and Vietnam.
• 1975 :  North Vietnam defeats South Vietnam.
• 1979 :  USSR invades Afghanistan
• 1983 :  Ronald Reagan proposes Star Wars
• 1989 :  Soviet troops withdraw from Afghanistan.  Communist governments collapse in Poland, East Germany, Hungary, Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia and Romania.  The Soviet Empire ( USSR ) ends.

http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/what%20was%20the%20cold%20war.htm

http://www.amazon.com/The-Cold-War-New-History/dp/0143038273

USSR and USA and the creation of spheres of interest :

- installation of Soviet-friendly governments in satellite states;

- USA’s policy of containment: Truman Doctrine and Marshall Plan;

- Berlin Crises from 1949 to 1961 (broad understanding of the crises); and

- opposing military alliances: NATO and Warsaw Pact (broadly)

Containment and brinkmanship: the Cuban crisis (as an example of containment and brinkmanship)

Collections in the Archives

Know something about this topic.

Towards a people's history

• International
• Education Jobs
• Schools directory
• Resources Education Jobs Schools directory News Search

Three Cold War History Essay Plans A Level

Subject: History

Age range: 16+

Resource type: Assessment and revision

Last updated

27 June 2020

• Share through email
• Share through twitter
• Share through linkedin
• Share through facebook
• Share through pinterest

Three essay plans for Cold War A level History exam. 25 mark essay plans each with agree and disagree bullet points. Useful for basis of revision, lesson discussions, essay planning and essay writing.

These essay plans were created using the Oxford AQA History - The Cold War 1945-1991 textbook to make all of these notes for revision purposes.

Three questions included are:

• ‘US policies in response to the rise of Communism in Asia in the years 1949 to 1960 consistently failed.’
• ‘The relations between Khrushchev and Kennedy were marked more by cooperation than by confrontation.’
• ‘The outcome of the Cuban Missile Crisis marked a victory for the United States and Kennedy.’

NOTE - these essay plans are the basis for an essay and can be added to so don’t expect full detail on everything.

Tes paid licence How can I reuse this?

Your rating is required to reflect your happiness.

It's good to leave some feedback.

Something went wrong, please try again later.

This resource hasn't been reviewed yet

To ensure quality for our reviews, only customers who have purchased this resource can review it

Report this resource to let us know if it violates our terms and conditions. Our customer service team will review your report and will be in touch.

Not quite what you were looking for? Search by keyword to find the right resource:

By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies and similar tracking technologies described in our privacy policy .

Voice of the Discipline

News and publications.

Access AHA news and publications supporting the work of historians.

Stay up-to-date with the AHA

June 25, 2024

AHA Members Co-author Article on SCOTUS and Gun Control

AHA members Holly Brewer (Univ. of Maryland) and Laura F. Edwards (Princeton Univ.) have co-authored an article for Washington Monthly…

June 24, 2024

Action Alert Opposing Ohio SB 83

June 21, 2024

AHA Signs On to CIE Letter Urging HEA-Title VI Funding for FY 2025

June 18, 2024

Welcome to the AHA’s New Website

The American Historical Review is the flagship journal of the AHA and the journal of record for the historical discipline in the United States, bringing together scholarship from every major field of historical study.

Perspectives on History is the newsmagazine of the AHA and is the principal source for news and information about the discipline of history. Since 1962, Perspectives has promoted our work by publishing articles and commentary on all aspects of the historical discipline.

History in Focus Podcast

Environmental Crisis and Recovery

Collaborative history + revisiting marion thompson wright, teaching historiography + chilling affects, aha booklets.

The AHA publishes booklets that address a diversity of topics to serve the needs of history students and historians in all professions. Our publications include career advice for history graduates, overviews and syntheses of current historical topics and fields, and guides to teaching and learning in history.

For the Press

The AHA is pleased to provide resources for journalists and press. If you are a member of the media and would like to submit a request for a referral or interview, please email [email protected] . Please provide any pertinent deadlines and we will do our best to accommodate your request. The AHA can find you a historian for any topic, and assists with dozens of inquiries each year.

The AHA encourages the reading of history with periodic reading challenges.

Permission to Use AHA Copyrighted Material

All material published by the American Historical Association in any medium is protected by copyright.

Join the AHA

The AHA brings together historians from all specializations and all work contexts, embracing the breadth and variety of activity in history today.

Election latest: Another Tory under investigation over election bets - as Labour to return £100,000 in donations

A former Tory candidate who was dropped for betting on the date of the election has vowed to clear his name, as the Labour Party and more police officers also become embroiled in the escalating scandal.

Wednesday 26 June 2024 00:16, UK

• General Election 2024

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Election betting scandal

• Labour candidate suspended | Party to return donations
• Welsh Conservative under investigation
• Dropped Tory candidate vows to 'clear name'
• More police officers accused of betting on election date
• Jon Craig: This has exposed quite a sleazy side of politics
• Live reporting by Faith Ridler and (earlier)  Tim Baker
• Car crash outside PM's country house
• Four arrested in grounds of Sunak's constituency home
• Reform drops in new poll after Farage's Putin comments
• Starmer says children 'worried' about possible move into No 10

Election essentials

• Manifesto pledges: Alliance | Conservatives | DUP | Greens | Labour | Lib Dems | Plaid | Reform | SNP | Sinn Fein | Workers
• Trackers:  Who's leading polls? | Is PM keeping promises?
• Campaign Heritage: Memorable moments from elections gone by
• Follow Sky's politics podcasts: Electoral Dysfunction | Politics At Jack And Sam's
• Read more:  Who is standing down? | Key seats to watch | What counts as voter ID? | Check if your constituency is changing | Guide to election lingo | How to watch election on Sky News

We'll be back at 6am with all the latest from the general election campaign.

There are just eight days of campaigning left until the polls open on 4 July, and political parties from across the House of Commons are busy trying to win your votes.

Join us from the morning for more live updates.

After days of furore directed at Rishi Sunak for the election betting scandal, now a Labour candidate is under investigation by the Gambling Commission for his own betting activity - and is immediately suspended.

Is this an equaliser in one of the grubbiest electoral sagas of recent elections? Quite possibly not.

There is no doubting the utter dismay in Labour HQ at the revelation that they too have a candidate caught up in the betting scandal.

It lends itself to the easy narrative that there's a plague on all politicians' houses - everyone as bad as each other.

However, if the facts are as presented, the scale of the challenge for the Tories is of a different order of magnitude to that now facing Labour.

Labour's Kevin Craig was  suspended immediately  after the party was informed by the Gambling Commission of the probe.

You can read more from our deputy political editor Sam Coates below:

It's 10pm - here's your late night general election bulletin.

Today has had a heavy focus on the Conservative betting scandal - but there's been plenty more for us to sink our teeth into.

• The Conservatives have announced they will no longer be supporting the two candidates being investigated over placing bets on the election date;
• Laura Saunders and Craig Williams will still appear in on their respective ballots - but won't be supported by the party; 
• Mr Williams has since shared a video statement, claiming he "committed an error of judgement, not an offence" and insisting: "I intend to clear my name" ; 
• And Russell George , a Conservative member of the Senedd, has stepped back from the Welsh shadow cabinet as he faces an investigation over alleged bets;
• In other news, four men have been arrested on suspicion of aggravated trespass in the grounds of the prime minister's home , police have confirmed;
• The arrests are connected to a protest by the Youth Demand campaign group, which has staged a number of actions against both the Conservative government's performance and Labour's proposed policies.
• Labour has suspended a candidate today for betting that he would not win in his seat on 4 July .  Kevin Craig has apologised for the "huge mistake" he made in betting against himself;
• The party, meanwhile, has announced plans to tackle knife crime ;
• Sir Keir appeared at an event with actor Idris Elba as they discussed introducing a long-term strategy to tackle the issue;
• Shadow home secretary Yvette Cooper has taken part in an hour-long debate with Conservative Home Secretary James Cleverly , taking in both legal and illegal migration;
• The minister said he does not "envisage" a Tory government leaving the European Court of Human Rights, despite the PM's threats to do so;
• And Liberal Democrat leader Sir Ed Davey has opened up about looking after his disabled son in an interview with Beth Rigby .

Don't forget, Politics Hub With Sophy Ridge is back tonight at 7pm.

And if you're heading home from work, you might also be interested in today's Electoral Dysfunction , all about that photo of Sir Keir and his wife enjoying a Taylor Swift concert at Wembley.

The latest episode of the Electoral Dysfunction podcast is out, with Sky political editor Beth Rigby chatting to former Scottish Conservative leader Baroness Ruth Davidson, and ex-Labour adviser Baroness Ayesha Hazarika.

You can listen to the podcast in full below:

👉  Click here to follow Electoral Dysfunction wherever you get your podcasts  👈

Scotland Secretary Alister Jack has tonight denied breaking any Gambling Commission rules "on any occasion".

It comes after the BBC reported he had told the broadcaster he placed wagers on June and July polling dates.

However, in a statement he said: "I am very clear that I have never, on any occasion, broken any Gambling Commission rules.

"Specifically, I did not place any bets on the date of the general election during May (the period under investigation by the Gambling Commission).

"Furthermore, I am not aware of any family or friends placing bets."

"And for the avoidance of doubt that based on my comment above the Gambling Commission have obviously not contacted me."

Our live poll tracker collates the results of opinion surveys carried out by all the main polling organisations - and allows you to see how the political parties are performing in the run-up to the general election.

It shows a drop in support in recent days for Labour and the Tories - with a jump for Reform and the Liberal Democrats.

Read more about the tracker here .

There are seemingly three things on the minds of British people at the moment - the Euros, the election, and Taylor Swift.

But while the Royal Family have been quick to send their backing to England's footballers and catch the pop star's Eras shows at Wembley, they'll be keeping their distance from the politics.

That's despite the fact that, apart from the monarch, the royals are technically allowed to vote in UK general elections.

Sky News explains why they don't.

Rhun ap Iorwerth, the leader of Plaid Cymru, was also asked about a manifesto commitment to make it a criminal offence for elected politicians to knowingly mislead the public.

Former prime minister Boris Johnson was suspended from parliament for misleading the Commons - does Mr Iorwerth think he should go to prison?

He says legislation to "make it clear there are consequences if you are found to be purposefully deceptive" could be "part of the world of building trust in politicians and politics".

It's noted how difficult it would be to prove someone had purposefully deceived parliament.

Building that trust is a key focus for his party, he says.

"We believe this is important because one of the questions that I've been asked a lot during the course of this election campaign and MPs over the past year, is how do we build trust in politicians?"

That brings our coverage of tonight's Politics Hub With Sophy Ridge to an end, but the show returns tomorrow at 7pm. Stick with us for more news and analysis throughout the evening.

Sophy Ridge  asks about a report into Plaid Cymru, published before Rhun ap Iorwerth became leader, which found "a culture of harassment, bullying, and misogyny".

Has he cleaned up the party's act?

"It was a difficult time for us," Mr Iorwerth admits. "We commissioned this report on ourselves. 

"And, you know, there's a suggestion that other political parties may well benefit from doing the same themselves.

"But this was our moment."

Mr Iorwerth adds that Plaid Cymru has been "through a wake-up" and have "ticked off" all 82 recommendations the report made.

Russell George, a Conservative member of the Senedd, has stepped back from the Welsh shadow cabinet as he faces an investigation by the gambling watchdog over alleged bets on the timing of the general election.

Mr George represents Montgomeryshire in the Welsh parliament - the same area that Craig Williams, the Tory candidate who has had party support withdrawn as he faces similar allegations, represented at Westminster.

Welsh Conservative leader Andrew RT Davies said: "Russell George has informed me that he has received a letter from the Gambling Commission regarding bets on the timing of the general election.

"Russell George has stepped back from the Welsh Conservative shadow cabinet while these investigations are ongoing.

"All other members of the Welsh Conservative Group have confirmed that they have not placed any bets.

"I will not issue further comment on this ongoing process, recognising the Gambling Commission's instruction for confidentiality to protect the integrity of the process."

Be the first to get Breaking News

Install the Sky News app for free