The End of the Cold War

A short introduction to the theory of post-Cold War Era.

Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universitt Bonn Institut fr Politische Wissenschaft und Soziologie Seminar : Die Auenpolitik der Vereinigten Staaten.Von Roosvelt bis Obama Dozent : Hendrick Ohnesorge, M.A Semester : Sommersemester 2013 Verfasser: Andreas Tzanavaris mail : andreastzanavaris@yahoo.gr

2

Contents

Contents ................................................................................................................................... 2

1. Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 3

2. The end of an era.............................................................................................................. 3

2.1. The search for a new world ...................................................................................... 4

2.1.1. A liberal Peace? ........................................................................................................ 5

2.1.2. The Realists Aspect ................................................................................................... 5

3. Conclusion ........................................................................................................................ 6

3

1. Introduction

The years of the Bush presidency were the first in many years in which the Foreign Policy of

the USA was faced with such a situation. The period which starts from the End of Afghan

war, in February of 1989 and ends with the Alma Ata protocol of the 25/12/1991 and the

dissolution of the Soviet Union, marks the beginning of a completely new Era, in which

America and the liberal System, was for the first time, after a 40 year war, the absolute

victor.

In this Essay I will outline, the questions, concerns, new facts and the ideological statements

that characterize this period. In terms of the strict of the time I hope to achieve an accurate

analysis and assessment of this transitional period and of the issues that are set. I must

therefore mention that the bibliography contains not only contemporary books but also

books written near to this specific period, always presented and read with a critical view.

The deliberate action has as its aim to locate and to reconstruct the world as it was viewed

at the time by the American think-tanks (in which I include also the American

historiographers) during or shortly after this transitional period and the values or the

questions that arise as a consequence of the base-changing developments, always having as

my basic question the consequences of this changes for the planning of the American

Foreign Policy. This declaration was needed, because many recent researchers tend to

examine this critical period strictly under the light of the 9/11, leaving aside from the special

characteristics that it presents.

Therefore my essay will advance within two different frames. First and foremost, I will try to

describe the structural problems which the American Foreign Policy planning faces, due to

the loss of its great enemy and what this loss means for the political Policies that were

followed until then. In second place I will try to emphasize the strategic planning for the

years to come; how idealists deal with the vision of universal establishment for a liberal

wayy of living, by focusing on the ideas of Fukuyama, and how realists tend to bring up the

problem of lack of Security and stability in the world scene.

2. The end of an era

The Cold war was a conflict taking place on different levels. The geostrategic component of

the war, as well as the battle for the influence on the third world and in general

4

accompanied by a more theoretical conflict. The war between the USA and the USSR was

not only a military confrontation. Far beyond that was an ideological conflict between two

completely different financial and material structured systems, two extremely different

value-based societies contending that the future was theirs (Baylis, Smith: 112). Its easy to

understand that this conflict was crucial not only for international ambitions of the two

competitors but also for the self determination of them. The soviet threat was not only a

functional constitutive of American identity, [but also] a strong concentrator of Americas

foreign policy mind since the Truman presidency (Kennan 1993: 180). i

The main pillar around which American foreign policy was built was the idea of Savior

Nation. Grounded in the wilsonian era and the first presentation of the American

Internationalism, and consolidated in the Dulles years, it would be strongly connected with

the bipolar world struggle. (Pfaff 2010: 82). ii. The deprivation of the Soviet Union, who

personified the idea of evil against which America was fighting, led to a consequential

satisfaction of this victory and for the establishment of the American way of democracy.

But as with the Hegelian Dialectic of Master and slave, the prevalence of the master, as well

as the inexistence of any considerable enemy, occurs with gradual but stable

transformations of its character. The years of 1990s would be the period of the ultimate

American power, but also the beginning of the end of this American Imperium and of the

truth of the American Almighty. The inexistence of an enemy leads to the weakening of

the Master. So, provoked by this fear and underpinned by the inability to create a truly

effective New world Order, the war against terror will prove, that even when USA hasnt

got an enemy, one must be found.

2.1. The search for a new world

Regarding the character of the new era, the year 1989 played a critical role. So on one hand

1989 can be considered as a turnover for the world history, and the founding of a

completely new world. On the other hand, 1989 can be seen less as a catalyst for the world

development and more as a point with advanced interest, following nevertheless, the inner

logic of development the same rules that were characterizing the world system until then.

(Baylis Smith: 112) These two, opposing opinions, and the theories that are advancing

around them, specified in liberal and the realistic theory will be examined in this second

part.

5

2.1.1. A liberal Peace?

The liberal theory of a new world peace was mainly expressed by Francis Fukuyama, an

analyst for State Department. In his article The end of History he states that the major

conflict which characterised human history from the French revolution onwards has come to

an end: the conflict between the liberal, individualistic values and those of the common,

socially equal and just served wealth. . The triumph of the States over the USSR means not

only a temporal and geographical success, but the complete, final and global dominance of

the liberal individualistic social and economic system against its opponent. As such,

borrowing a radically transformed Hegelian framework, History has reached its Ending iii,

because no further major changes can be made. All the conflicts from this time, were

thought to be based strictly on minor issues, and none of them could question or doubt the

major social rule of Financial and Social Individualism (Bertran, Chitty: 1-5.). As a basis was

considered the theory that democracies do not fight against each other- one of the

legitimation factors of the later humanitarian and Political Interventions.

2.1.2. The Realists Aspect

The main point of the realist theories was always the search for power and safety during the

competitive and anarchy-based world system. As such the Cold war, although it was a tense

situation, offered the analysts the merit of a merely stabilized situation, as a consequence of

the existence of two strong-united, under the fear of nuclear holocaust, opposition blocs, on

which the leadership of the USA and the USSR was unquestioned. The end of this era means

that this system loses its basic statement. The safety occurring by the balance of fear.

(Bierling: 205)

A common point to all of the realistic theories for the further evolvement of the world

scene is that the ideological conflicts will start to decline. In this point I can locate a common

statement for both theories, the point that the victory over USSR means the triumph of the

theoretical atomocentric Liberalism.

Three are the major scripts that are introducing the Realism and its aspects in this new Era.

Back to the Future; Instability in Europe after Cold war, from J. Mearsheimer, The coming

Anarchy from Robert Kaplan and The clash of the civilizations from R. Huntington. The

scope of this essay is not large enough to fully analyze these three different theories. The

general common idea in these models is that the end of Soviet Union will lead to new modes

of conflict, with new character and claims. So in the new era we may face the eruption of

6

ethnic conflicts that were previously held behind, conflicts that have a special weight

because of the wide spread of nuclear arsenals, or of conflicts mainly located in the third

world countries and grounded in more basic need for access to resources and survival, and

as a consequence less easy to control. At last the case that Huntington supports is that the

world will have to face a new series of conflicts, that will not be between systems with

related valuesiv, but between completely different civilizations, the Western and the Asian,

On Asian he includes countries such as Middle East, China but even the post-communist

Russia and Greece. The identity and the civilization will be therefore in the center of this

new war (Baylis Smith: 114-116). Based on that USA should regain a leader position on this

war for maintenance of the West identity,

3. Conclusion

As history will prove, although many analysts succeeded to prognosticate parts of the later

1990s, their attempt to maintain their supporting theory and gain the confirmation of the

possession of absolute truth about their way to analyze 1989 and the period after, lead to

hurried conclusions, and at uncompromising aspects, something which could be proved fatal

in this, strongly characterized by liquidity and essential transformation of the rules of the

game, new world scenario. The evolution of new, radical theories, such as those of Noam

Chomsky, of Robert Cox and of Naomi Klein, which tend to concentrate on specific topics

rather than a big theory, may indicate a new phase for the International Relations theories.

Either way, the 1990s was the beginning of a new Era, and must be examined as such. An era

of transformations concerning the nature of the state. And this research must be done

without any attempt to seek legitimization for the later American Foreign Policy decisions

and acts.

i Due to this problem of determination of their national interest, caused by the total eclipse of a common threat, Chollet and Goldgeiger assimilate the years until 9.11 with the Interwar period, assimilation not only helpful for the understanding but also quite accurate (Dumbrell 84) ii The ideas of two Systems fighting against each other makes the determination of the differences and the creation of an axes of good and evil much easier in contrast with the complex environment of the multipolar world iii Although Fukuyama has lent a lot of schemes from Hegel he does seem to have some serious misinterpretations of the Hegelian dialectic. iv It is quite impressive that Huntington, to establish his statement recognizes Communism as a western based theory, something that is contradict with the hegemonic American aspect fort the communism during the cold war.

7

Bibliography

Baylis, J., Smith, S. ( 2005) The globalisation of World Politics. An Introduction to

International Relationships. Oxford University Press

Bertram, C. , Chitty A.,( edit)( 1994) Has History Ended? Fukuyama, Marx, Modernity

Avebury, England,

Bierling, S., (2007) Geschichte der amerikanischen Auenpolitik. Von 1917 bis zur

Gegenwart., C. H. Beck Ohg, Mnchen

Dumbrell, J. (2012). America in the 1990s: searching for purpose. In M. Cox, & D. Stokes

(Hrsg.), US Foreign Policy (2nd Edition., P. 82-96). Oxford University Press.

Fraser, C. (2005). US Foreign Policy after the Cold War: Global Hegemon or reluctant

Sheriff (2nd Edit.). Routledge.

Hastedt, G. P ,(2006) American Foreign Policy- Past, Present, Future, Pearson,

Oye, K.A, Lieber, R.j, Rothchild, D. (1992) Eagle in a New World: American Grand Strategy

in the Post-Cold War Era Donelley and sons Company

Pfaff, W. (2010) The Irony of manifest Destiny. The tragedy of Americas Foreign Policy ,

Walker and Co, New York,

Smith, T.( 1994) Americas Mission Princeton University Press, Princeton,