![]() ![]() ![]() The aim of the book is to explain why the Cold War remained central to international relations for so long. ![]() No-one would deny that the Soviet-American relationship was of key importance, and historians have a well-justified reluctance to concentrate on areas where there is a dearth of evidence to support their conclusions. Although these tendencies have been criticized, there are, actually, good reasons why they arose. Second, even within this bilateral context, the emphasis is on American motivations and policy. First, it assumes that the Cold War was merely a name for a Soviet-American conflict played out on a global scale. The typology of Cold War historiography is necessarily simplified, but it does accurately portray two features of much of this work. Thesis At no time was the Cold War regarded as the sole component of the international system: Gaddis portrays that in each state, there were leaders who favored other views, championing, amongst others things, internal reform, national renewal, imperial consolidation or intra-capitalist competition. Nevertheless, it would seem that nuclear weapons made nuclear powers tactically cautious whilst increasing the sense of strategic threat. The caution of political leaders did not obviate the risk of reckless subordinates. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |