Friend or Foe:
Why Ronald Reagan Was Not Responsible For Ending
the Cold War
IDP4U1
Mr. Cotey
12/18/09
Savoula Stylianou
Ronald Reagan is one of the most respected and well-liked presidents in the history of the United States and one of the most important accomplishments that he is accredited with is ending the Cold War. During this 50-year period in time, two of the world’s greatest superpowers were at odds, both having the power and ability to annihilate the other at any given moment. People at this time were forced to live in fear and terror, not knowing what the next day would bring or if they would even live to see tomorrow. The Cold War began, arguably, with several stands taken by the United States to aid the global community post World-War II, such as the Marshal Plan and the creation of NATO[1]. It can be argued that the Cold War also ended with several platforms originated from the United States. The man at the helm of the operation was Ronald Reagan. History shows that the strides this president took towards seemingly ending the war actually prolonged it. Strategies like brinkmanship and positive nuclear proliferation did not portray the message of a man whose goal was to end a war, but rather a man who had no problem continuing a war until his country won. Thus, Ronald Reagan did not end the Cold War. Reagan escalated the arms race, took a hostile approach to the Soviet Union, and was not as crucial as Gorbachev in ending the war.
At the beginning of Reagan’s presidency, he was a self-proclaimed nuclear abolitionist. He pleaded for peace in his speeches and ordered his subordinates to write studies on its application. Therefore one would assume that this desire would help him to end the war. Yet if that were true, he would not have pushed so hard for the institution of the Strategic Defence Initiative, a project that dealt directly with nuclear weaponry. Past presidents had mostly used détente as a means of dealing not only with the Soviet Union, but with all external countries. This policy had worked quite well until John F. Kennedy’s time in the Cuban Missile Crisis when he was forced to slowly climb up the escalation ladder to brinkmanship in order to ensure the safety of his nation. The next time that this harsh and unnecessary policy would be brought to the United States would be during Reagan’s presidency. “Push it to the edge”[2] was his policy and the only result this brought was a war that went on far longer than necessary. Brinkmanship dictated that the United States continue the arms race and hold nuclear weaponry against the Soviet Union. Meagan’s hope was to put them into a position where they had no choice but to surrender. This was a fruitless dream since the Soviets already knew they could not enter war and were smart enough to try to make peace before it was too late. In trying to end the war, Reagan was purposely sabotaging the stiff relations with the Soviets in order to force them to implode on themselves, crippling the status quo of the nation and thus proving the hegemonic power of the United States. However this president discounted one important element: the Gorbachev factor. Ronald Reagan came to power years earlier than Mikhail Gorbachev did and in that time he managed to cripple his country’s economy, enlarge the already increasing budget deficits and national debt of his country, and completely alienate the Soviet Union, calling them ``the evil empire``[3]. Gorbachev’s political and economic reforms remain unmatched in Soviet history. It is true that the USSR was in turmoil after World War II, but Gorbachev became the new voice of the Soviet Union and brought hope and change into the hearts of the people. Through policies like glasnost and perestroika, this president was doing far more for his country than Reagan was during wartime. He disassembled the previously dominant Communist party in his country and made headway for democracy in the Soviet Union[4]. The changes he made for his country during the Cold War were far more significant. Gorbachev knew the Soviet Union would not be able to last through another war and he took the necessary steps to end it, unlike Ronald Reagan. Some critics suggest that the war would have ended regardless of the steps taken by Reagan. In fact, Mikhail Gorbachev was the only one who realized the imminent danger that a war could bring not only to the Soviet Union but to the rest of the world as well. Gorbachev was willing to end the war as quickly as possible to end the threat of a nuclear holocaust. Therefore Ronald Reagan cannot be recognized as “the man who ended the war”[5] – he was merely in office when it ended.
Cold War historians and Reagan supporters alike give the credit for ending the Cold War to Ronald Reagan. According to Washington Post writer David E. Hoffman, by switching from détente to brinkmanship, Reagan left no room for relations between the US and the USSR to remain at a standstill as they had been for years before. The war ended because Reagan was willing to take relations a step further, something past presidents were too afraid to do[6]. This is why CBS reporter Jamie Holguin believes the war did not end with presidents such as Franklin D. Roosevelt or even John F. Kennedy. Reagan managed to fight for his Strategic Defence Initiative dream which he believed would be able to protect his beloved United States in the case of a nuclear attack.[7] An article published in The Los Angeles Times stated that:
“though this strategy would come under attack by critics on several occasions, it was the best idea that the Reagan administration could come up with to ensure the maximum security of the country in a time where the world could have been blown up at any given moment.”[8]
His creative and ingenious idea for this project showed just how devoted he was to ending the war. Within his near decade of presidency, Reagan managed to create new legislations for his country to increase employment and decrease inflation. He also mended international relations and promoted peace and the abolition of nuclear weaponry, says occasional Cold War historian Fred Kaplan. “In fact, his hard line tactics in dealing with nuclear proliferation were what saved his country from MAD”.[9] His absolutist views led the country to success because he was unwilling to give up on winning the Cold War and allowing the US to once again be on top in the global community. Reagan refused to settle for anything less than the full surrender of all nuclear weapons from the Soviet Union and in the end he achieved his goal.[10] Published author James Mann notes that through the INF (Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces) treaty of 1987, Reagan managed to stop the production of all nuclear artilleries, which was a large accomplishment considering the global arms race that had been brewing since the end of the second World War in 1945.[11] It is commonly believed and generally accepted that Ronald Reagan ended the Cold War because he was able to complete a task that no other president could: ending a war while remaining on good terms with the opposition. Of Ronald Reagan, Mikhail Gorbachev said this: “You know, you can’t really explain it. I felt something and he felt something – that we could talk to each other.”[12] After Reagan’s presidency ended and George H.W. Bush took over, relations between the Soviet Union and the United States took two large steps back[13], onlookers such as John Lewis Gaddis report. For these reasons, it can be said that Ronald Reagan was mostly responsible for the conclusion of the Cold War. However, there are several arguments to be made for the opposite opinion.
Reagan critics believe that the past president had a spell of good luck when the war ended. After all, it was Mikhail Gorbachev who received a Nobel Peace Prize for his work in restoring his country through political and economic reforms, not Reagan. The president hid behind his nuclear abolitionist attitude when in reality he was willing to use as many nuclear weapons as possible to beat the Soviet Union in this war. “There is no other way to explain why he would receive letters from little children who wanted to know why he was trying to blow the world up,”[14] author Allan M. Winkler suggests. Furthermore, it is believed that Reagan was the hero of the signing of the INF treaty when truthfully, CBS news reporter Dan Rather acknowledges, he determined the timing of that document by using his wife’s astrologer to read USSR General Secretary Mikhail Gorbachev’s horoscope first[15]. It was no secret that Reagan disliked the USSR and this was made blatantly transparent in his speech on June 12th, 1987 regarding the Berlin Wall, where he pleaded with the General Secretary to “Come here to this gate! Mr. Gorbachev, open this gate! Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!”.[16] William Blum notes that Reagan criticized the Soviet Union for using the Berlin Wall as a defence tactic and refusing to tear it down when he was doing the same thing with the SDI when he refused to give it up. He held on to this “Star Wars” dream so ardently that when the time came for peace to be made and all signs of nuclear weaponry to be set aside, he was averse to doing so.[17] Cold War onlookers, such as citizen Jack Mackdaniel, believed that Reagan’s strong dislike for the Soviet Union and more importantly its communist regime led him to put his own country in jeopardy in favour of trying to stop the spread of communism to the rest of the world.[18] Even though approaches like the iron curtain and containment had failed, Reagan was not going to give up until he had completely destroyed the USSR and communism. “This can be seen by looking at his switch from détente to brinkmanship early on in his presidency,” describes writer Laura Miller. “Reagan believed that the only way to bring the war to a stop was to push the buttons of the Soviets until they gave in to the United States”[19]. Some critics will say that the USSR folded like a house of cards, but this is untrue. The state of the Soviet Union was poor at the time and that is why Gorbachev was willing to compromise with Reagan – he was looking out for his country and what was in their best interests. The General Secretary himself said: “[We] cannot hope to win if war breaks out.”[20] Therefore it cannot be said that Reagan took the initiative and ended the war on his own. The Soviet leader outsmarted President Reagan and knew that his country was economically unstable and would not be able to last through another war. Lastly, author James Mann had this to say on Reagan’s abilities to end the war: “… it is quite odd that this president supported brinkmanship so strongly at the beginning of his presidency when in his second term he strayed far away from this policy in dealing with the Iran-Contra Affair. A man who could not stick to one political policy during his eight-year reign could surely not have been the sole contributor to the end of a war that could have been disastrous.”[21]
This is a hotly debated issue because some see Reagan’s actions during this time period as necessary and cleverly executed while others see them as superfluous and precarious. It was not necessary to switch from détente to brinkmanship in order to attain peace when brinkmanship was, in fact, a violent and hostile approach, notes Reagan hawk Whittaker Chambers[22]. Writer Stephen Kotkin believes that holding on to the SDI so fervently was a hindrance in the long road to peace during the war.[23] Finally, promoting the use of nuclear weaponry in an attempt to tear down the Soviet Union and its communist regime were all strategies that did not help to end the Cold War[24], says historian and author Michael A. McFaul. Thus Ronald Reagan did not end the war. Historians have argued this issue since the end of the war nearly twenty years ago and there is still no consensus on who was primarily responsible for the cessation of this era of panic and fear. This time period was highlighted by the new involvement of nuclear artillery in the global community and inclusively the escalation of the arms race.
"I call upon the scientific community in our country, those who gave us nuclear weapons, to turn their great talents now to the cause of mankind and world peace, to give us the means of rendering those nuclear weapons impotent and obsolete."[25]
Ronald Reagan spoke these words on March 23rd, 1983 when he first introduced his idea of the SDI to the United States. Initially one’s reaction to that quote would be to assume that the president held true to his nuclear abolitionist status and had hopes for peace in the world. However, this assumption would be incorrect as this quote is harshly misleading. The Strategic Defence Initiative, dubbed “Star Wars”, was started by Ronald Reagan as a defence tactic intended to be used against the Soviet Union and their ICBMs (intercontinental ballistic missiles). Though the project gained initial approval from the US Congress in the mid 1980s, this president’s dream would soon be shattered. The monumental costs and unfeasible technicalities would doom the SDI. According to Dr. Ernest Partridge, the SDI could never have worked even if it had been completed. The space shield would only protect against ICBMs, which were only a small portion of nuclear armaments that could have been used to attack the United States[26]. The project failed to account for bombers, offshore submarine missiles, or even perhaps tramp steamers. Furthermore, many Soviets saw the introduction of the SDI as a hostile act on the part of the US that signalled they were preparing for an imminent war. Author Frances Fitzgerald notes that the USSR was afraid of the SDI and what it could mean for the world. Between 1985 and 1987 Gorbachev spent a great deal of time trying to convince the Reagan administration to drop the project before it was too late. At this point, Reagan would offer a strange compromise – to share the SDI in an effort to ensure that a nuclear revival never happened. To this Mikhail Gorbachev replied: “You don't want to share even petroleum equipment, automatic machine tools, or equipment for dairies”[27]. Needless to say, simply the idea of creating an SDI was a step taken by the United States in preparation for war. By definition it was a form of nuclear proliferation to which the Soviets had no choice but to respond with their own research on lasers and other weaponry to combat this multi-million dollar mechanism. Simply put, the SDI was created to further the arms race. The USSR had no choice but to respond with their own nuclear armament to protect their own country in the case of an outbreak of war. In trying to end a war and truly “give [us] the means of rendering those nuclear weapons impotent and obsolete”[28], Reagan actually escalated an arms race that was already in the works. He had the intention of using the SDI to combat nuclear attacks and anyone who anticipates such a form of aggression and violence must be preparing for a war and wanting to win. Ronald Reagan was setting up the country to fight in a nuclear war. Not only that, but he was going to make sure that they won. For no other reason would one imagine a far-fetched idea like Star Wars – an idea that any reasonable thinking individual would deem precarious and unnecessary. This is not to say that the president did not try to convince the American people that the SDI was for their own protection. That being said, protecting the citizens from hardware in space is not promising them much. Therefore the SDI was one hundred percent a fallacy that was only initialized to satisfy the purpose of a man who was strategizing to go to war. Escalation of the arms race was all that was conceived from this project.