Ideological differences of the cold war

Ideological differences of the cold war

This is an assignment that discusses the importance of ideological differences of the cold war. This is in terms of emergence and development aspects.

The importance of ideological differences of the cold war

Learning outcomes (LOs) – on successful completion of this unit students will be able to:
Demonstrate an in-depth knowledge of the major events and key issues of the period.
Critically assess the limitations and advantages of a range of primary sources and an ability to use those sources to build and support their own arguments.
Evaluate the differing arguments of historians on key themes and also an awareness of the current nature of debates.
Assess the validity of competing explanations of events and actions.
Synthesise, organise and present complex knowledge and analysis in written forms, using appropriate historical apparatus and presentational techniques.

Questions

Choose ONE of the following essay questions:­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­

1.     Firstly, evaluate the importance of ideological difference to the emergence and development of the cold war after WWII.

2.     Secondly, analyse the causes and consequences of the Sino-Soviet rift in the late 1950s.

3.     Thirdly, explain why and how the USSR sought to create a block of allied countries in East-Central Europe after WWII and during the 1950s. Illustrate your answer with reference to developments in at least one East-Central European country.

4.     Do you agree that the USA and the USSR both sought détente in the 1970s due to domestic difficulties that required then both to rethink their approach to international relations? How else might détente be explained?

5.     Then, did the Helsinki Act (Accords) in 1975 mark a profound change in cold war relations? Give reasons for your answer.

6.     Orthodox historiography of the Vietnam War claims that it was immoral and unwinnable whereas the Revisionist historiography claims that with greater resolved the USA could have won. Also, which interpretation do you find the most convincing and why?

7.     How useful do you find Fred Halliday’s 5 causal determinants of the new (second) cold war in explaining the deterioration in IS-Soviet relations by the late 1970s?

8.     Lastly, was the end of the cold war a US victory and a vindication of the policies adopted by President Ronald Reagan? Give reasons for your answer.