Vietnam And The Korean War Essay

1297 Words 5 Pages
Vietnam, which had a similar storyline as Korea. To fend off communist expansion, the US fought in Vietnam while the Soviet Union provided arms for the North Vietnamese. Once again, in the big picture, the fight was not between North and South Vietnam but rather between the US and Soviet Union. Afghanistan was also a strategic location in which the two major powers fought for the influence. While the US did not see value in expanding their influence to Afghanistan, they saw value in thwarting Soviet attempts at spreading communism to that region. Similar to the way the Soviets provided arms to North Korea and North Vietnam, the US provided arms to the Mujahideen and other rebel groups in Afghanistan to sabotage the Soviets. Even without a direct …show more content…
Struggling states feel as though they must attain nuclear weapons in order to gain power and notoriety. As shown with the US and China in the Korean War, states with nuclear arms will always have leverage in negotiations causing these non-nuclear states to feel harassed, leading them to seek to even the playing field. Most often these states neglect economics and the well-being of their people in order to gain nuclear weapons. Attaining nuclear weapons appear to be the shortcut to power, considering the fact that even if a state can still deliver a devastating blow to another even if they are outnumbered with nuclear weapons. The proliferation of nuclear weapons concerns the entire international community, considering the interconnectedness of today‚Äôs world. This has led to the Non-Nuclear Proliferation which has been adopted by 189 states, but more notably it has been rejected by Israel, India, Pakistan, and North Korea, all of whom have attained or attempted to attain nuclear …show more content…
To date, there have been no major direct military conflicts between nuclear armed states with the exception of India and Pakistan. Although India and Pakistan were engaged in a conflict while they had nuclear capabilities, the conflict was closely monitored by the international community in an attempt to discourage nuclear attacks. A stark contrast between the way the Cold War and WWI were fought was presence of nuclear weapons. Keir Leiber claimed in The New History of World War I and What It Means for International Relations Theory that Germany only preemptively attacked in WWI because they felt a continental war was inevitable so they justified being the first to strike. The reverse was true in the Cold War where both sides did not believe the other would launch a nuclear strike first, due to the principle of Mutually Assured Destruction. This was evident in the strategy of both major powers. The US sought to enact their doctrine of Communist Containment while the Soviet Union attempted to spread their influence without antagonizing the

Related Documents