|
(Left to right) British Prime Minister Winston Churchill, President Harry Truman, and Russian leader Joseph Stalin converse at the 1945 Potsdam conference, a year before the Cold War began.
AFP/GETTY IMAGES
|
A telegram and a college speech defined the tone of the Cold War
The defining moments of the Cold War: George Kennan's Long Telegram and Churchill's Iron Curtain speech
Date published: 3/16/2006
T HE COLD WAR, the 45-year-long standoff between the Soviet Union and the United States, didn't really have a beginning. There was no Pearl Harbor and certainly no declaration that history can point to that says the Cold War began on a specific day. But the question remains. Even without such historical niceties, when did it really begin? The answer, it seems, is not so much in finding a specific date or set of circumstances that establish its beginning, but rather in identifying the point when the Western nations, the United States in particular, began to realize the true nature of their adversary. This didn't happen all at once. But two events in 1946 were critical in helping the West develop a new appreciation about the real intentions of their onetime World War II ally.
The first is not that well-known, but it was a critical step in helping us understand just who we were dealing with. It was called the "Long Telegram." In February 1946, George Kennan-- the chief of mission at the American Embassy in Moscow--felt it was time that his superiors at the State Department understood just what made the Soviet Union tick. Kennan, a longtime observer of Russia and the rise of communism, believed that America was unaware of how dangerous an adversary they were facing. Kennan's telegram from Russia was a brilliant analysis of the history of the Soviet Union, the communist philosophy, and most importantly, their commitment to a prolonged struggle against the West.
He said that unlike the dictators the Allies had just defeated in World War II, the Soviet Union--motivated by its philosophy of world revolution--was ready for a long process of give-and-take, one where they would take advantage of weakness wherever they found it and retreat when faced with a determined resistance. This was a very different opponent than the grab-and-take philosophy of the Germans and Japanese during World War II.
Date published: 3/16/2006
|