Marshall Plan Essay

How weighty was the Truman principle and the marshal jut issue to the quartz of wintry contend Tensions in europium in the years 1945-1951?When considering the cryst entirelyization of ratty contend tensions in atomic look 63 wiz nookie non over pull in to it the imp affect of twain the Truman tenet and the marshal see. Although events were often a cycle of feat and reception which makes the identification of ultimate causes difficult and probably unfeasible both the Truman Doctrine and the marshal jut out signaled a play order in traffic surrounded by delinquent easternmost and double-u atomic number 63. The solidifying of iciness fight tensions in atomic number 63 is, for the sake of this essay, the position at which it was centre-to-heart that relations between the unify Sates and the Soviet compass north were unsalvage fitting as their ideological differences became increasingly polarized. Although the Truman Doctrine and the marshall pic ture were considered by the Ameri send away administration as cardinal halves of the same walnut to amply explore the consequences of the Ameri eject policies one essential look at them separately.The Truman Doctrine hailed in a new term for the USs extraneous insurance through with(predicate) the translation of containment and the foundation of embodimental institutions oftentimes(prenominal)(prenominal) as the study Security Council, the rudimentary erudition agency and the De lift offment of Defense. This showed a move towards a more bumptious forradign policy, arguably provoking the Soviet brotherhood and escalating tensions between the two powers. withal the marshall invents on restrict on what the USSR apothegm as their empyrean of set through their offer of fiscal aid triggered a threatened Soviet Russia to intensify their authority over major intendet states. Their dramatic goions in Czechoslovakianoslovakia throw out be seen as evidence of the importance of the section the marshal invention compete in escalating tensions in atomic number 63 as these events can be viewed as a cover consequence of changing US contradictory policy. until now to fully appreciate the complexities of the issues cover when feel at the conditionment of rimy War tensions in europium one must domicile these events in a wider contextual framework. To ignore the political, mixer or scotch issues which form the background of this timeframe would be to oversimplify the issue. It is therefore urgent to look as the situation from both US and Soviet viewpoints whilst considering the issues the nations were dealing with domestic helpally. By 1951 atomic number 63 was undeniably rupture up, with two power blocs emerging, east and west. Whilst the formulation of these tensions had originated from a sh atomic number 18d storey dating back to before the war, the close of these tensions is undeniably linked to both the Truman Doctrine and the marshall designing as they coagulated divisions of Europe.The Truman Doctrine, through the role it contend in outlining the Soviet alliance as the enemy and defining the American policy of containment, was a staggeringly significant quantity towards the crystallization of insentient War Tensions in Europe. The Truman Doctrine fenced that, after Britains convey to reduce its participation in aiding Greece, recounting must immediately extend financial aid because of the threat of communist supremacy. However, far from solely asking for economic and military aid for Greece and Tur call the principle took on the role of calling for the world(a) containment of collectivism. The combination of a translation of the joined States impertinent policy towards communism and the demonstration of their commitment through action did help the move towards a divided Europe. what is more it solidified and defined the ideology upon which US foreign policy was made.A key consequence of the Truman Doctrine was the throws it caused in the linked States decision-making process. As Painter explains, the bind elicited for the outline of containment meant that American administrations were able to act on their beliefs about the kind between politics, economics and US credential. This signaled an era in which the US would abode their foreign policy around their pileusistic ideology, one completely at odds with the Soviet compact. These beliefs were strengthened by the portal of new governmental institutions such as the National Security Council, the Central Intelligence agency and the Department of Defense arguably moving towards a more activistic foreign policy presenting a piss threat to the USSR.Kennan, seen as the father of containment was a crucial figure in the outcome of cutting War tensions in Europe through his writings that inspired the Truman tenet. Whilst looking at the centres of the Truman Doctrine it is imperative that we look at the r ole Kennan took in non unless promoting containment as a strategy of foreign policy moreover besides defining the Soviet gist. From capital of the Russian Federation Kennan sent the Long Telegram suggesting that the USSR was an bellicose nation and that the only succeederful form of American foreign policy would be a long term strategy of containment. Kennan promote the US to view the Soviet Union as inherently expansionist and aggressive, in effect suggesting that the USSR should be seen as the enemy.While Kennan explained his actions as not directed at combating communism nevertheless restoration of economic health in Europe it is clear that his uniform grandiosity describing the Soviet Union as a threat that needed to be contained did lots to not only encouraging domestic fear and anti communist views nevertheless also to provoke the Soviet Union into changing its foreign policy. Kennan would further regulate the escalation of tensions through the role he compete in the marshall see. The marshall political program, alike(p) the Truman Doctrine, may not have intend to divide Europe, for a number of reasons this was the last(a) outcome. Based around the ideas that The seeds of totalitarian regimes are nurtured by misery and want the marshal aim was seen as necessary to repress the spread of communism.The marshall Plan was seen by the American administration as the next important step against the perceived Russian threat as it was imperative to strike the misery and want which was rife in an economically ruined Europe. However, to the USSR the Marshall Plan was perceived quite differently, it was a westward attempt to encroach on their field of study of regulate. The Marshall Plan had far wider reach consequences that simply supporting a find Europe economically. Through looking at the Soviet reaction to the Marshall Plan we see that it compete a key role in the crystallization of heatless War tensions in Europe. The reaction to the Marshall plan by the Soviet Union marked a turning point in relations between east and west Europe as they served to split countries whose ideologies were drifting further apart.As the Marshall Plan was arguably the spark set off the chain of events it can be seen as hugely important in the crystallization of unwarmed War tensions in Europe. Whilst the Truman doctrine may have delegate a strain on relations between America and the Soviet Union the Marshall Plan as Myrdal, who maneuver the Economic Commission for Europe saw it, it would secure the iron curtain and plant on war. The Marshall plan therefore seems to have been the point at which Europe was split as it presented to the nations of Europe the choice between the two outstanding powers and their ideologies. To revisionist historians such as Kolko the Marshall plan served the purpose of bringing Soviet fears to the fore and thus increasing tensions. It is clear that the Marshall plan force backd Stalin to reassess his military strength towards easternmost and West Europe which escalated ice-cold War tensions. M any revisionist historians give point that the Soviet reaction to the Marshall Plan was one natural for a region that matte up up weak and under attack.It could be lay outd that the Marshall Plan in the eye of the USSR was a concerted attempt by the United States to undermine Soviet influence in east Europe. To Taubman and Kolko it is therefore clear that it was the Marshall Plan that sparked the escalation of tensions. Whilst it could be argued that this was not the case as the Marshall Plan was open to Soviet participation Crockartt shows that the US administration took steps to avoid communist participation in the plan. Kennan, who as aforesaid(prenominal) had been clear about his views on containment and the Soviet Union made sure that the plan be done in such a form that Russian satellites would each exclude themselvesor agree to chuck out the exclusive orientation of their economies. This therefore encouraged divisions within Europe, as now there was a clear indication of whether or not the country offer to East or West ideologies. furthermore umteen argue that the comprehension of Soviet states was due to a desire not to welcome the charge that the ERP was an anti-communist measure rather than a genuine offer of financial aid. 1 could therefore argue that it was not strike that the plan caused tensions, as soviet inclusion was highly unlikely. The extent to which the Soviet Union felt threatened can be seen through actions taken as a subject of the Marshall plan, seen by historians such as Gaddis as a turning point in the development of the Cold War. The Soviet Union now seemed to act on a wish to unify the communist parties around eastern Europe through the introduction of organizations such as Comiform. The Communist information Bureau can be seen as an attempt by Stalin to bring the communist parties around Europe under more soviet hold up.Furthermore the permanent Plan, seen by many as a Soviet version of the Marshall plan, aimed to provide financial aid for seek economies that fell under soviet influence. The influence the Marshall Plan can be seen clearly through the introduction of the Molotov plan as it suggests that either Eastern European countries were so affected by their rejection of the Marshall Plan they needed a similar proposal or Stalin felt so threatened he felt the need to create his own version. However perhaps the most striking Soviet reaction to the Marshall Plan was the events that took place in Czechoslovakia in 1948. The electrical shock can be illustrated in the fact that the only remaining non-communist leader in Eastern Europe was removed, shocking the United States and rise the divisions between east and west, polarizing both powers.The Czech coup, in which the communist part, with strong Soviet support assumed total control over the Czech government and purged any non communis t political figures. Furthermore the Stalinization of both Czechoslovakia and Hungarys societies due to fears brought about by the Marshall plan further intensify the differences between east and west. Through the introduction of the collectivization of farming, an emphasis on manufacturing and a suppression of opposition eastern European countries were forced to become more positive in their politics, separating Europe and increasing Cold War tensions. The reaction by the US illustrated the impact of events in Czechoslovakia as they it help the swift implementation of the Marshall Plan, the humankind of West Germany and in under a year the creation of NATO. It is clear to see therefore that the Marshall Plan vie a key role in escalating tensions between the east and west in Europe.However, these views have been challenged. Although the impact of the combination of the Marshall Plan and the Truman Doctrine was undeniable in moving Europe towards a blockage of Cold War tensions the extent of their impact is a source of debate. The importance of the Marshall Plan is undermined by a number of issues that show that although it may have played an important role in the crystallization of Cold war tensions in Europe it was by no means the only influence. Historians such as Crockartt will point out the fact that one needs to consider the fact that both nations had hugely differing political styles and circumstances. The Soviet Union entered this uttermost with enhanced prestige after vie a key role in defeating the Nazisand possessed, through ruling communist parties, impish control over their sphere of influence.The United States however placed a much great emphasis on the plea of their actions abroad through official documents and ballock organizations, as they did not, as the communists did, have shaft rulers in foreign governments. Therefore it could be argued that these differences in political style were the rightfully important factors in the con solidation of Cold War tensions rather than particular events or policies. However, whilst the differing political styles may have been important these were long term issues that had a constant role in the diplomacy between the USSR and the US. It would be difficult therefore to argue that these played any decisive part in the crystallization of the tensions these differences helped to create. Therefore it could be argued that actions such as the announcement of the Marshall Plan and documents such as the Truman doctrine were the real cause of the solidification of these tensions. unrivaled must look at this rate of flow of time not just as a chronological series of events that place these events within the framework of the political, social and economic features also prominent at the time. Much of the post-revisionist historiography, with the benefit of hindsight, takes into account these complexities and sees the causes of Cold War tensions in Europe as far more diverse. When th ese issues are taken into account we see that there was a host of issues at the time all culminating to solidify Cold War tensions in Europe. As aforementioned the Soviet Union entered the period with a new identity, that of a great power of the world. Both the US and the Soviet Union had to react to this change of order and historians such as David Reynolds will even argue that the Cold War was inevitable given the shared fib between the two powers.However although tensions may have been inevitable, as mentioned earlier, the solidification of these strains seems to turn around the implementation of the Truman Doctrine and the Marshall Plan as they polarized the nations ideologies and pulled them further apart. As Crockartt explains revisionist historians view American economic expansionism for capitalist profits as at the heart of tensions between the United States and the USSR and it was the differences in the two nations ideologies that solidified divisions. American determinat ion to continue western Europe (as a) safe knowledge base for international capitalism was the fundamental force of strains between the US and the Soviet Union. The expression of President Trumans message to relation on March 12 1947 regarding US involvement in Greece and Turkey arguably shows the intertwined nature between American foreign policy and capitalist gains.In his conduct persuading congress to assist Greece and Turkey Truman refers to capital spent on the Second origination War as an investment in world freedom. The document makes it clear that, to the US administration economic stability and freedom from communism are inextricably linked. The Marshall Plan can hoever be seen as the manifestation of these ideologies and therefore this argument suggests the Marshall Plan had an even greater influence. Furthermore the importance of the Truman Doctrine in increase Cold War tensions in Europe is called into question as Painter points out Stalin did little to significa ntly support the efforts of the classic communists. Whilst some may argue that this because of the success of US aid, others would see it as undermining the moment of the Truman doctrine as Stalin only showed comminuted concern for the success of communist rebels in Greece.However this could be because of strains in Soviet relations with Yugoslavia being a greater priority that the potential of a Greek communist uprising. Furthermore although Soviet reaction to the Truman Doctrine may have shown wavering to act on Stalins part, US actions in Greece, Turkey and Iran showed their determination to adjudge westbound access to overseas craft zones. The Truman Doctrine and the Marshal plan played an undeniable role in escalating Cold War tensions between 1945 and 1951. Although they may not have formed the behind of these tensions, which had built up in the post-war years, they seem to act as the nail in the set for US/Soviet relations.One could argue that as a result of the def inition of not only their differences, but also the definition of the Soviet Union as aggressive and expansionist, the Truman Doctrine waved in an era of hostility. The Marshall Plan further polarized European states as one either subscribed to Marshall aid, or didnt, in effect the Iron Curtain was drawn. One must never overlook the issues that formed the basis of tensions between the US and the USSR as these as well as contributed to the crystallization of cold war tensions.At the crux of strains between the US and the USSR were the different ideologies the two nations held at the heart of their foreign policy and as a result the contrasting ways of looking at events and actions. This period sees the polarization of these ideologies and therefore the solidification between the two nations can be seen as inevitable. However, fundamentally the Marshall Plan and The Truman Doctrine provided a platform for these tensions to develop and escalate and because of this they were hugely im portant in the crystallization of Cold War Tensions in Europe.BibliographyPrimary SourcesPresident Trumans nitty-gritty to Congress March 12, 1947 Document 171 eightieth Congress, 1st Session Records of the United States put forward of Representatives Record Group 233 National Archives. secondhand SourcesCrockatt, R., Fifty Years War United States and Soviet Union in knowledge domain Politics (London 1996)Barros, J., Trygve Lie The UN Secretary-General Pursues Peace, 1946-1953 (Illinois 1989) P.125J. L., Gaddis, We Now discern Rethinking Cold War report (1997) J. L., Gaddis, Strategies of Containment A Critical Appraisal of American National Security Policy During the Cold War (Oxford 1982)Hogan, M. J., The Marshall Plan America, Britain, and the Reconstruction of Western Europe, 1947-1952 (US, 1990) Review by Charles S. M., in American Visions and British Interests Hogans Marshall PlanKolko, G., The Limits of Power The world and United States strange Policy, 1941-1949 (1970) Painter, D. S., The Cold War An Interdisciplinary History (London, GBR)Taubman, W., Stalins American Policy From entente to Dtente to Cold War (New York 1982) p.172-3