Paradigms Of The Cuban Missile Crisis

1674 Words 7 Pages
Introduction The paradigms of post-World War II (WWII) global politics bred one of the most complex conflicts in history. The Soviet Union and the United State fought side-by-side as members of the Allied forces in WWII, but not intended to maintain the connection once the war had concluded. While both nations emerged victorious over the Axis Powers, the war left the Soviet economy crippled and much of the Soviet Union in ruins. Conversely, on the opposite side of the Atlantic, the United States thrived. With a new sense of pride and confidence, the United States experienced an economic boom and unprecedented global prestige. The vastly different outcomes experienced by WWII’s principle victors, the Soviet Union and the United States, caused them to experience near-immediate tensions at the wars end. No one theory of international politics can completely explain the exact causes of the Cold War. Rather, a collection of theoretical interpretations applied at once allows one to grasp the roots of the conflict. John Lewis Gaddis …show more content…
The intentions of Soviet missiles could have been either offensive or defensive; even modern historians remain unsure of Khrushchev’s intentions with the missiles. By positioning missiles in Cuba, the Soviets could plausibly argue that they were merely a defensive measure to balance the placement of American missiles in Eastern Europe (declared defensive by the Americans). America, however, perceived Soviet missiles in Cuba as an offensive maneuver. For the Americans to trust the Soviets’ defensive explanation required the US to accept tremendous risk. Additionally, both nations had reversed promises, leaving pervading attitude of mistrust between the two superpowers. Since neither side trusted the other’s “defensive” intentions by missiles near the other, the crisis necessitated negation and concessions to resolve and reduce

Related Documents