Cold War Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.Anti-spam check. Do not fill this in! ==From confrontation to détente (1962–1979)== {{Main|Cold War (1962–1979)|Era of Stagnation}} [[Image:Glassboro-meeting1967.jpg|thumb|left|250px|Soviet Premier [[Alexei Kosygin]] with U.S. President [[Lyndon B. Johnson]] at the 1967 [[Glassboro Summit Conference]].]] [[File:1973 NATO and WP troop strengths in Europe.svg|thumb|NATO and Warsaw Pact troop strengths in Europe in 1973]] In the course of the 1960s and 1970s, Cold War participants struggled to adjust to a new, more complicated pattern of international relations in which the world was no longer divided into two clearly opposed blocs.{{sfn|Karabell|1999|p=916}} From the beginning of the post-war period, with American help Western Europe and Japan rapidly recovered from the destruction of World War II and sustained strong economic growth through the 1950s and 1960s, with per capita GDPs approaching those of the United States, while [[Eastern Bloc#Economies|Eastern Bloc economies stagnated]].{{sfn|Karabell|1999|p=916}}{{sfn|Hardt|Kaufman|1995|p=16}} The [[Vietnam War]] descended into a quagmire for the United States, leading to a decline in international prestige and economic stability, derailing arms agreements, and provoking domestic unrest. America's withdrawal from the war led it to embrace a policy of [[détente]] with both China and the Soviet Union.{{sfn|Milestones: 1969–1976}} In the [[1973 oil crisis]], Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries ([[OPEC]]) cut their petroleum output. This raised oil prices and hurt Western economies, but helped the Soviet Union by generating a huge flow of money from its oil sales.{{sfn|Painter|2014}} As a result of the oil crisis, combined with the growing influence of Third World alignments such as OPEC and the [[Non-Aligned Movement]], less powerful countries had more room to assert their independence and often showed themselves resistant to pressure from either superpower.{{sfn|Gaddis|2005|p=212}} Meanwhile, Moscow was forced to turn its attention inward to deal with the Soviet Union's deep-seated domestic economic problems.{{sfn|Karabell|1999|p=916}} During this period, Soviet leaders such as [[Leonid Brezhnev]] and [[Alexei Kosygin]] embraced the notion of détente.{{sfn|Karabell|1999|p=916}} ===Vietnam War=== {{Main|Vietnam War|Opposition to United States involvement in the Vietnam War}} [[File:Bruce Crandall's UH-1D.jpg|thumb|US combat operations during the [[Battle of Ia Drang]], [[South Vietnam]], November 1965]] Under President [[John F. Kennedy]], US troop levels in Vietnam grew under the [[Military Assistance Advisory Group]] program from just under a thousand in 1959 to 16,000 in 1963.{{efn-ua|{{cite web|url=https://www.jfklibrary.org/learn/education/teachers/curricular-resources/high-school-curricular-resources/military-advisors-in-vietnam-1963|title=Military Advisors in Vietnam: 1963 {{!}} JFK Library|website=www.jfklibrary.org|access-date=21 June 2019}}}}{{efn-ua|[http://25thaviation.org/facts/id430.htm Vietnam War Statistics and Facts 1], 25th Aviation Battalion website.}} South Vietnamese President Ngo Dinh Diem's heavy-handed [[Huế Phật Đản shootings|crackdown on Buddhist monks]] in 1963 led the US to endorse a deadly [[1963 South Vietnamese coup|military coup against Diem]].{{sfn|Miller|Wainstock|2013|pp=315–325}} The war escalated further in 1964 following the controversial [[Gulf of Tonkin incident]], in which a US destroyer was alleged to have clashed with North Vietnamese fast attack craft. The [[Gulf of Tonkin Resolution]] gave President [[Lyndon B. Johnson]] broad authorization to increase US military presence, deploying ground [[Military organization|combat units]] for the first time and increasing troop levels to 184,000.{{sfn|Koven|2015|p=93}} Soviet leader Leonid Brezhnev responded by reversing Khrushchev's policy of disengagement and increasing aid to the North Vietnamese, hoping to entice the North from its pro-Chinese position. The USSR discouraged further escalation of the war, however, providing just enough military assistance to tie up American forces.{{sfn|Tucker|2011|p=131}} From this point, the [[People's Army of Vietnam]] (PAVN), also known as the North Vietnamese Army (NVA), engaged in more [[conventional warfare]] with US and South Vietnamese forces.{{sfn|Glass|2017}} The [[Tet Offensive]] of 1968 proved to be the turning point of the war. Despite years of American tutelage and aid, the South Vietnamese forces were unable to withstand the communist offensive and the task fell to US forces instead. Tet showed that the end of US involvement was not in sight, increasing domestic skepticism of the war and giving rise to what was referred to as the [[Vietnam Syndrome]], a public aversion to American overseas military involvements. Nonetheless, operations continued to cross international boundaries: bordering areas of Laos and Cambodia were used by North Vietnam as [[Ho Chi Minh trail|supply routes]], and were heavily [[Operation Barrel Roll|bombed by US forces]].{{sfn|Kalb|2013}} At the same time, in 1963–1965, American domestic politics saw the triumph of [[Modern liberalism in the United States|liberalism]]. According to historian Joseph Crespino: :It has become a staple of twentieth-century historiography that Cold War concerns were at the root of a number of progressive political accomplishments in the postwar period: a high progressive marginal tax rate that helped fund the arms race and contributed to broad income equality; bipartisan support for far-reaching civil rights legislation that transformed politics and society in the American South, which had long given the lie to America's egalitarian ethos; bipartisan support for overturning an explicitly racist immigration system that had been in place since the 1920s; and free health care for the elderly and the poor, a partial fulfillment of one of the unaccomplished goals of the New Deal era. The list could go on.<ref>Joseph Crespino, "A Nation Ruled by Its Fears" ''Reviews in American History,'' 48#1 (March 2020), pp. 119–123, quoting p. 123. https://doi.org/10.1353/rah.2020.0016</ref> ===French withdrawal from NATO military structures=== {{Main|Foreign policy of Charles de Gaulle#Partial withdrawal from NATO in 1966}} The unity of NATO was breached early in its history, with a crisis occurring during [[Charles de Gaulle]]'s presidency of France. De Gaulle protested at the strong role of the United States in the organization and what he perceived as a [[Special Relationship|special relationship]] between the United States and the United Kingdom. In a memorandum sent to President [[Dwight D. Eisenhower]] and Prime Minister [[Harold Macmillan]] on 17 September 1958, he argued for the creation of a tripartite directorate that would put France on an equal footing with the United States and the United Kingdom, and also for the expansion of NATO's coverage to include geographical areas of interest to France, most notably [[French Algeria]], where France was waging a counter-insurgency and sought NATO assistance.{{sfn|Menon|2000|p=11}} De Gaulle considered the response he received to be unsatisfactory and began the development of an [[Force de dissuasion|independent French nuclear deterrent]]. In 1966, he withdrew France from NATO's military structures and expelled NATO troops from French soil.{{sfn|Nuenlist|Locher|Martin|2010|pp=99–102}} ===Finlandization=== {{Main|Sovietization|Finlandization}} [[File:1970 - Lenin.jpg|thumb|A manifestation of the Finlandization period: in April 1970, a Finnish stamp was issued in honor of the 100th anniversary of [[Vladimir Lenin]]'s birth and the Lenin Symposium held in [[Tampere]]. The stamp was the first Finnish stamp issued about a foreign person.]] Officially claiming to be [[Neutral country|neutral]], Finland lay in the [[Grey-zone (international relations)|grey zone]] between the Western countries and the Soviet Union. The [[Finno-Soviet Treaty of 1948|YYA Treaty]] (Finno-Soviet Pact of ''Friendship, Cooperation, and Mutual Assistance'')<ref>[http://countrystudies.us/finland/24.htm The Cold War and the Treaty of 1948] from the [[Library of Congress]] (the Country Studies)</ref> gave the Soviet Union some leverage in Finnish domestic politics, which was later used as the term "Finlandization" by the West German press, meaning "to become like Finland". This meant, among other things, the Soviet adaptation spread to the editors of [[mass media]], sparking strong forms of self-control, [[self-censorship]] (which included the banning of anti-Soviet books<ref>{{cite journal |last=Ekholm |first=Kai |date=2001 |title=Political Censorship in Finnish Libraries in 1944–1946 |journal=Libraries & Culture |volume=36 |issue=1 |pages=51–57 |doi=10.1353/lac.2001.0008|s2cid=152952804 }}</ref><ref>[http://www.uta.fi/laitokset/kirjasto/oppimiskeskus/verkkoaineisto/inf/makinen.pdf Mäkinen, Ilkka. 2001. The golden age of Finnish public libraries : institutional, structural and ideological background since the 1960s]. p. 131</ref>) and pro-Soviet attitudes. Most of the elite of media and politics shifted their attitudes to match the values that the Soviets were thought to favor and approve. Only after the ascent of [[Mikhail Gorbachev]] to Soviet leadership in 1985 did mass media in Finland gradually begin to criticise the Soviet Union more. When the Soviet Union allowed non-communist governments to take power in Eastern Europe, Gorbachev suggested they could look to Finland as an example to follow.<ref>{{Cite news|last1=Keller|first1=Bill|last2=Times|first2=Special To the New York|date=26 October 1989|title=Gorbachev, in Finland, Disavows Any Right of Regional Intervention (Published 1989)|language=en-US|work=[[The New York Times]]|url=https://www.nytimes.com/1989/10/26/world/gorbachev-in-finland-disavows-any-right-of-regional-intervention.html|access-date=16 March 2021|issn=0362-4331}}</ref> For West German conservative politicians, especially the [[Bavaria]]n Prime Minister [[Franz Josef Strauss]], the case of Finlandization served as a warning, for example, about how a great power dictates its much smaller neighbor in its internal affairs and the neighbor's independence becomes formal. During the Cold War, Finlandization was seen not only in Bavaria but also in Western [[intelligence service]]s as a threat that completely free states had to be warned about in advance. To combat Finlandization, propaganda books and newspaper articles were published through CIA-funded research institutes and media companies, which denigrated Finnish neutrality policy and its pro-Soviet President [[Urho Kekkonen]];<ref name="rislakki">{{cite book|author=Jukka Rislakki|title=Erittäin salainen. Vakoilu Suomessa|date=1982|pages=440–454|publisher=LOVE KIRJAT|isbn=951-835-057-4|language=fi}}</ref> this was one factor in making room for the [[Cold War espionage|East-West espionage]] on Finnish soil between the two great powers.<ref name="rislakki"/><ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.economist.com/eastern-approaches/2011/12/01/secret-history|title=Finland and American intelligence – Secret history|newspaper=[[The Economist]]|date=1 December 2011|access-date=16 August 2020}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://yle.fi/uutiset/3-9692396|title=Naisia, autoja ja piilopirttejä – Norjalainen vakoili CIA:n laskuun kylmän sodan Suomessa|first=Satu|last=Helin|publisher=[[YLE]]|date=2 July 2017|access-date=16 August 2020|language=fi}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.is.fi/kotimaa/art-2000005833479.html|title=Näin Neuvostoliitto vakoili Suomessa – Supo seurasi "Jakkea", joka johdatti uusille jäljille|first=Mika|last=Lehto|work=[[Ilta-Sanomat]]|date=19 September 2018|access-date=16 August 2020|language=fi}}</ref> However, Finland maintained [[capitalism]] unlike most other countries bordering the Soviet Union. Even though being a neighbor to the Soviet Union sometimes resulted in overcautious concern in foreign policy, Finland developed closer co-operation with the other [[Nordic countries]] and declared itself even more neutral in superpower politics, although in the later years, support for capitalism was even more widespread.<ref name="equity">[http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTRANETSOCIALDEVELOPMENT/Resources/finland.pdf Growth and Equity in Finland], World Bank</ref> ===Invasion of Czechoslovakia=== {{Main|Prague Spring|Warsaw Pact invasion of Czechoslovakia}} [[File:10 Soviet Invasion of Czechoslovakia - Flickr - The Central Intelligence Agency.jpg|thumb|The [[Warsaw Pact invasion of Czechoslovakia|invasion of Czechoslovakia]] by the Soviet Union in 1968 was one of the biggest military operations on European soil since [[World War II]].]] In 1968, a period of political liberalization took place in [[Czechoslovak Socialist Republic|Czechoslovakia]] called the [[Prague Spring]]. An "[[Socialism with a human face|Action Program]]" of reforms included increasing [[freedom of the press]], [[freedom of speech]] and [[freedom of movement]], along with an economic emphasis on [[Final good|consumer goods]], the possibility of a multiparty government, limitations on the power of the secret police,{{efn-ua|Ello (ed.), Paul (April 1968). Control Committee of the Communist Party of Czechoslovakia, "Action Plan of the Communist Party of Czechoslovakia (Prague, April 1968)" in ''Dubcek's Blueprint for Freedom: His original documents leading to the invasion of Czechoslovakia.'' William Kimber & Co. 1968, pp. 32, 54}}{{sfn|Von Geldern|Siegelbaum}} and potential withdrawal from the Warsaw Pact.{{sfn|Gaddis|2005|p=150}} In answer to the Prague Spring, on 20 August 1968, the [[Soviet Army]], together with most of their Warsaw Pact allies, [[Warsaw Pact invasion of Czechoslovakia|invaded Czechoslovakia]].{{sfn|BBC|2008}} The invasion was followed by a wave of emigration, including an estimated 70,000 Czechs and Slovaks initially fleeing, with the total eventually reaching 300,000.{{sfn|Čulík|1998}}<ref>{{cite web |title=Warsaw Pact invasion of Czechoslovakia |url=http://www.enrs.eu/en/news/1255-invasion-of-czechoslovakia |access-date=5 November 2022 |date=31 July 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170731024148/http://www.enrs.eu/en/news/1255-invasion-of-czechoslovakia |archive-date=31 July 2017 }}</ref> The invasion sparked intense protests from Yugoslavia, Romania, China, and from Western European countries.{{sfn|Gaddis|2005|p=154}} ===Brezhnev Doctrine=== {{Main|Brezhnev Doctrine}} In September 1968, during a speech at the Fifth Congress of the [[Polish United Workers' Party]] one month after the [[Warsaw Pact invasion of Czechoslovakia|invasion of Czechoslovakia]], Brezhnev outlined the [[Brezhnev Doctrine]], in which he claimed the right to violate the sovereignty of any country attempting to replace Marxism–Leninism with capitalism. During the speech, Brezhnev stated:{{sfn|Gaddis|2005|p=150}} {{blockquote|When forces that are hostile to socialism try to turn the development of some socialist country towards capitalism, it becomes not only a problem of the country concerned but a common problem and concern of all socialist countries.}} The doctrine found its origins in the failures of Marxism–Leninism in states like Poland, Hungary and East Germany, which were facing a declining standard of living contrasting with the prosperity of West Germany and the rest of Western Europe.{{sfn|Gaddis|2005|p=153}} ===Third World escalations=== {{See also|1964 Brazilian coup d'état|Dominican Civil War|Indonesian mass killings of 1965–1966|Vietnam War|1973 Chilean coup d'état|1973 Uruguayan coup d'état|1976 Argentine coup d'état|Operation Condor|Six-Day War|War of Attrition|Indo-Pakistani War of 1971|Yom Kippur War|Ogaden War|Angolan Civil War|South African Border War|Indonesian invasion of East Timor|Stability–instability paradox}} Under the [[Lyndon B. Johnson]] [[Presidency of Lyndon B. Johnson|administration]], which gained power after the [[assassination of John F. Kennedy]], the US took a more hardline stance on Latin America—sometimes called the "[[Thomas C. Mann#Mann Doctrine|Mann Doctrine]]".{{sfn|LaFeber|1993a|pp=186–190}} In 1964, the Brazilian military [[1964 Brazilian coup d'état|overthrew the government]] of president [[João Goulart]] with US backing.{{sfn|LaFeber|1993a|p=191}} In late April 1965, the US sent some 22,000 troops to the [[Dominican Republic]] in an intervention, codenamed Operation Power Pack, into the [[Dominican Civil War]] between supporters of deposed president [[Juan Bosch (politician)|Juan Bosch]] and supporters of General [[Elías Wessin y Wessin]], citing the threat of the emergence of a Cuban-style revolution in Latin America. The [[Organization of American States|OAS]] also deployed soldiers to the conflict through the mostly Brazilian [[Inter-American Peace Force]].{{sfn|LaFeber|1993a|pp=194–97}} [[Héctor García-Godoy]] acted as provisional president, until conservative former president [[Joaquín Balaguer]] won the 1966 presidential election against non-campaigning Juan Bosch.{{sfn|Itzigsohn|2000|pp=41–42}} Activists for Bosch's [[Dominican Revolutionary Party]] were violently harassed by the Dominican police and armed forces.{{sfn|Itzigsohn|2000|pp=41–42}} [[File:Suharto at funeral.jpg|thumb|[[Suharto]] of Indonesia attending funeral of five generals slain in [[30 September Movement]], 2 October 1965]] In Indonesia, the hardline anti-communist [[Suharto|General Suharto]] wrested control of the state from his predecessor [[Sukarno]] in an attempt to [[Transition to the New Order|establish a "New Order"]]. From 1965 to 1966, with the [[CIA activities in Indonesia#Anti-communist purge|aid of the United States]] and other Western governments,{{sfn|Robinson|2018|p=203}}{{sfn|Simpson|2010|p=193}}{{sfn|Thaler|2015}}{{sfn|Perry|2016}}{{sfn|Bevins|2017}} the military [[Indonesian mass killings of 1965–66|led the mass killing]] of more than 500,000 members and sympathizers of the [[Communist Party of Indonesia|Indonesian Communist Party]] and other leftist organizations, and detained hundreds of thousands more in prison camps around the country under extremely inhumane conditions.{{sfn|Farid|2005|pp=3–16}}{{sfn|Aarons|2007}} A top-secret CIA report stated that the massacres "rank as one of the worst [[mass murder]]s of the 20th century, along with the Soviet purges of the 1930s, the Nazi mass murders during the Second World War, and the Maoist bloodbath of the early 1950s."{{sfn|Aarons|2007}} These killings served US strategic interests and constitute a major turning point in the Cold War as the balance of power shifted in Southeast Asia.{{sfn|Bevins|2020|p=2}}{{sfn|Scott|2017}} [[Joint warfare in South Vietnam, 1963–1969|Escalating the scale of American intervention]] in the ongoing conflict between [[Ngo Dinh Diem|Ngô Đình Diệm]]'s [[South Vietnam]]ese government and the communist [[Viet Cong|National Front for the Liberation of South Vietnam]] (NLF) insurgents opposing it, Johnson deployed some 575,000 troops in Southeast Asia to defeat the NLF and their North Vietnamese allies in the [[Vietnam War]], but his costly policy weakened the US economy and sparked domestic anti-war protests, which lead to the US withdrawal by 1972. Without American support, South Vietnam was [[Fall of Saigon|conquered by North Vietnam in 1975]]; the US reputation suffered as a result, as most of the world saw the events in Vietnam as the defeat of the world's most powerful superpower at the hands of one of the world's poorest nations.{{sfn|LaFeber|1993|pp=194–197}} [[File:Henry Kissinger with Anwar Sadat cph.3b13868.jpg|thumb|230px|Egyptian leader [[Anwar Sadat]] with Henry Kissinger in 1975]] The Middle East remained a source of contention. [[Egypt]], which received the bulk of its arms and economic assistance from the USSR, was a troublesome client, with a reluctant Soviet Union feeling obliged to assist in both the 1967 [[Six-Day War]] (with advisers and technicians) and the [[War of Attrition]] (with pilots and aircraft) against pro-Western [[Israel]].{{sfn|Stone|2010|p=230}} Despite the beginning of an Egyptian shift from a pro-Soviet to a pro-American orientation in 1972 (under Egypt's new leader [[Anwar Sadat]]), the Soviets supported Egypt and [[Syria]] during the [[Yom Kippur War]] the following year, as the United States supported Israel.{{sfn|Grenville|Wasserstein|1987}}<ref>{{cite book |last1=Quandt |first1=William |title=Peace Process: American Diplomacy and the Arab–Israeli Conflict Since 1967 |date=2005 |publisher=[[University of California Press]] |location=California |isbn=978-0520246317 |pages=104–105 |edition=third |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=MVXxUGe9qEkC}}</ref> Although pre-Sadat Egypt had been the largest recipient of Soviet aid in the Middle East, the Soviets were also successful in establishing close relations with communist [[South Yemen]], as well as the nationalist governments of [[Algeria]] and [[Iraq]].{{sfn|Grenville|Wasserstein|1987}} Iraq signed a 15-year Treaty of Friendship and Cooperation with the Soviet Union in 1972. According to historian [[Charles R. H. Tripp]], the treaty upset "the US-sponsored security system established as part of the [[Arab Cold War]]. It appeared that any enemy of the Baghdad regime was a potential ally of the United States."{{sfn|Tripp|2002}} In response, the US covertly financed Kurdish rebels led by [[Mustafa Barzani]] during the [[Second Iraqi–Kurdish War]]; the Kurds were defeated in 1975, leading to the forcible relocation of hundreds of thousands of Kurdish civilians.{{sfn|Tripp|2002}} Indirect Soviet assistance to the Palestinian side of the [[Israeli–Palestinian conflict]] included support for [[Yasser Arafat]]'s [[Palestine Liberation Organization]] (PLO).{{sfn|Friedman|2007|p=330}} In East Africa, a territorial dispute between [[Somalia]] and [[Ethiopia]] over the [[Ogaden]] region resulted in the [[Ogaden War]]. Around June 1977, Somali troops occupied the Ogaden and began advancing inland towards Ethiopian positions in the [[Ahmar Mountains]]. Both countries were client states of the [[Soviet Union]]; Somalia was led by self-proclaimed Marxist military leader [[Siad Barre]], and Ethiopia was controlled by the [[Derg]], a cabal of military generals loyal to the pro-Soviet [[Mengistu Haile Mariam]], who had declared the Provisional Military Government of Socialist Ethiopia in 1975.{{sfn|Erlich|2008|pp=84–86}} The Soviets initially attempted to exert a moderating influence on both states, but in November 1977 Barre broke off relations with Moscow and expelled his Soviet military advisers.{{sfn|Perrett|2016|pp=216–217}} He then turned to the China and [[Safari Club]]—a group of pro-American intelligence agencies including those of Iran, Egypt, Saudi Arabia—for support and weapons.<ref>"Chinese to Increase Aid to Somalia". The Washington Post. 21 April 1987.</ref>{{sfn|Bronson|2006|p=134|ps=: "Encouraged by Saudi Arabia, Safari Club members approached Somali president Siad Barre and offered to provide the arms he needed if he stopped taking Soviet aid. Barre agreed. Egypt then sold Somalia $75 million worth of its unwanted Soviet arms, with Saudi Arabia footing the bill."}}{{efn-ua|Miglietta, ''American Alliance Policy'' (2002), p. 78. "American military goods were provided by Egypt and Iran, which transferred excess arms from their inventories. It was said that American M-48 tanks sold to Iran were shipped to Somalia via Oman."}} While declining to take a direct part in hostilities, the Soviet Union did provide the impetus for a successful Ethiopian counteroffensive to expel Somalia from the Ogaden. The counteroffensive was planned at the command level by Soviet advisers attached to the Ethiopian general staff, and bolstered by the delivery of millions of dollars' of sophisticated Soviet arms.{{sfn|Perrett|2016|pp=216–217}} About 11,000 Cuban troops spearheaded the primary effort, after receiving a hasty training on some of the newly delivered Soviet weapons systems by East German instructors.{{sfn|Perrett|2016|pp=216–217}} [[File:Reunión Pinochet - Kissinger.jpg|thumb|Chilean leader [[Augusto Pinochet]] shaking hands with Henry Kissinger in 1976]] In [[Chile]], the [[Socialist Party of Chile|Socialist Party]] candidate [[Salvador Allende]] won the [[1970 Chilean presidential election|presidential election of 1970]], thereby becoming the first democratically elected [[Marxism|Marxist]] to become president of a country in the Americas.{{sfn|BBC|2003}} The CIA targeted Allende for removal and operated to undermine his support domestically, which contributed to a period of unrest culminating in General [[Augusto Pinochet]]'s [[1973 Chilean coup d'état|coup d'état]] on 11 September 1973. Pinochet consolidated power as a military dictator, Allende's reforms of the economy were rolled back, and leftist opponents were killed or detained in internment camps under the [[Dirección de Inteligencia Nacional]] (DINA). The socialist states—with the exception of China and [[Socialist Republic of Romania|Romania]]—broke off relations with Chile.<ref>J. Samuel Valenzuela and Arturo Valenzuela (eds.), ''Military Rule in Chile: Dictatorship and Oppositions'', p. 317</ref> The Pinochet regime would go on to be one of the leading participants in [[Operation Condor]], an international campaign of political assassination and [[state terrorism]] organized by right-wing military dictatorships in the [[Southern Cone]] of South America that was covertly supported by the US government.{{sfn|McSherry|2011|p=107}}{{sfn|Hixson|2009|p=223}}{{sfn|Grandin|2011|p=75}} [[File:Cuban PT-76 Angola.JPG|thumb|left|upright|Cuban tank in the streets of [[Luanda]], [[Angola]], 1976]] On 24 April 1974, the [[Carnation Revolution]] succeeded in ousting [[Marcello Caetano]] and Portugal's right-wing ''[[Estado Novo (Portugal)|Estado Novo]]'' government, sounding the death knell for the Portuguese Empire.{{sfn|Hamann|2007|pp=15–32, 44}} Independence was hastily granted to a number of Portuguese colonies, including [[Angola]], where the disintegration of colonial rule was followed by a violent civil war.{{sfn|Stockwell|1979|pp=161–165, 185–194}} There were three rival militant factions competing for power in Angola: the [[MPLA|People's Movement for the Liberation of Angola]] (MPLA), the [[UNITA|National Union for the Total Independence of Angola]] (UNITA), and the [[National Liberation Front of Angola]] (FNLA).{{sfn|Rothschild|1997|pp=115–121}} While all three had socialist leanings, the MPLA was the only party with close ties to the Soviet Union.{{sfn|Rothschild|1997|pp=115–121}} Its adherence to the concept of a Soviet one-party state alienated it from the FNLA and UNITA, which began portraying themselves as anti-communist and pro-Western in orientation.{{sfn|Rothschild|1997|pp=115–121}} When the Soviets began supplying the MPLA with arms, the CIA and China offered substantial covert aid to the FNLA and UNITA.{{sfn|Vanneman|1990|pp=48–49}}<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB67/gleijeses4.pdf|title=Document obtained by National Security Archive, from National Archives Record Group 59. Records of the Department of State, Policy Planning Staff, Director's Files (Winston Lord), 1969–1977, Box 373|website=Gwu.edu|access-date=3 January 2020|archive-date=17 June 2014|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140617093833/http://www2.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB67/gleijeses4.pdf|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>Hughes, Geraint (2014). My Enemy's Enemy: Proxy Warfare in International Politics. Brighton: Sussex Academic Press. pp. 65–79. {{ISBN|978-1-84519-627-1}}.</ref> The MPLA eventually requested direct military support from Moscow in the form of ground troops, but the Soviets declined, offering to send advisers but no combat personnel.{{sfn|Vanneman|1990|pp=48–49}} Cuba was more forthcoming and began amassing troops in Angola to assist the MPLA.{{sfn|Vanneman|1990|pp=48–49}} By November 1975, there were over a thousand Cuban soldiers in the country.{{sfn|Vanneman|1990|pp=48–49}} The persistent buildup of Cuban troops and Soviet weapons allowed the MPLA to secure victory and blunt an abortive intervention by Zairean and [[South Africa]]n troops, which had deployed in a belated attempt to assist the FNLA and UNITA.{{sfn|Weigert|2011|pp=56–65}} [[File:Skulls from the killing fields.jpg|thumb|right|During the [[Khmer Rouge]] [[Democratic Kampuchea|regime]] led by [[Pol Pot]], 1.5 to 2 million people died due to the policies of his four-year premiership.]] During the Vietnam War, North Vietnam [[Sihanouk Trail|used border areas of Cambodia as military bases]], which Cambodian head of state [[Norodom Sihanouk]] tolerated in an attempt to preserve Cambodia's neutrality. Following [[1970 Cambodian coup d'état|Sihanouk's March 1970 deposition]] by pro-American general [[Lon Nol]], who ordered the North Vietnamese to leave Cambodia, North Vietnam attempted to overrun all of Cambodia following negotiations with [[Nuon Chea]], the second-in-command of the Cambodian communists (dubbed the [[Khmer Rouge]]) fighting to overthrow the Cambodian government.{{sfn|Mosyakov|2004|p=54}} Sihanouk fled to China with the establishment of the [[GRUNK]] in Beijing.<ref>Norodom Sihanouk, My War with the CIA, Random House, 1973, p. 62</ref> American and South Vietnamese forces responded to these actions with a [[Operation Menu|bombing campaign]] and a brief [[Cambodian campaign|ground incursion]], which contributed to the violence of the [[Cambodian Civil War|civil war]] that soon enveloped all of Cambodia.{{sfn|BBC|2018}} US carpet bombing [[Operation Freedom Deal|lasted until 1973]], and while it prevented the Khmer Rouge from seizing the capital, it also accelerated the collapse of rural society, increased social polarization,{{sfn|Chandler|2000|pp=96–98}} and killed tens of thousands of civilians.{{sfn|Power|2013}} After taking power and distancing himself from the Vietnamese,{{sfn|Mosyakov|2004|p=66}} pro-China Khmer Rouge leader [[Pol Pot]] killed 1.5 to 2 million Cambodians in the [[Killing Fields|killing fields]], roughly a quarter of the Cambodian population (an event commonly labelled the [[Cambodian genocide]]).{{sfn|Locard|2005}}{{sfn|Kiernan|2003}}{{sfn|Heuveline|2001|pp=102–105}}{{sfn|World Peace Foundation|2015}} [[Martin Shaw (sociologist)|Martin Shaw]] described these atrocities as "the purest genocide of the Cold War era."{{sfn|Shaw|2000|p=141}} Backed by the [[Kampuchean United Front for National Salvation]], an organization of Khmer pro-Soviet Communists and Khmer Rouge defectors led by [[Heng Samrin]], Vietnam invaded Cambodia on 22 December 1978. The [[Cambodian–Vietnamese War|invasion]] succeeded in deposing Pol Pot, but the new state would struggle to gain international recognition beyond the Soviet Bloc sphere. Despite the previous international outcry at the Pol Pot regime's gross human rights violations, representatives of the Khmer Rouge were allowed to be seated in the [[United Nations General Assembly|UN General Assembly]], with strong support from China, Western powers, and the member countries of [[ASEAN]]. Cambodia would become bogged down in a guerrilla war led from refugee camps located on the border with [[Thailand]]. Following the destruction of the Khmer Rouge, the national reconstruction of Cambodia would be severely hampered, and Vietnam would suffer a punitive [[Sino-Vietnamese War|Chinese attack]].{{sfn|Slocomb|2001}} Although unable to deter Vietnam from ousting [[Pol Pot]] from Cambodia, China demonstrated that its Cold War communist adversary, the [[Soviet Union]], was unable to protect its Vietnamese ally.<ref name="auto">{{cite book|last=Elleman|first=Bruce A.|title=Modern Chinese Warfare, 1795–1989|url=https://archive.org/details/modernchinesewar00elle|url-access=limited|year=2001|publisher=Routledge|isbn=0415214742|page=[https://archive.org/details/modernchinesewar00elle/page/n309 297]}}</ref> Former U.S. Secretary of State [[Henry Kissinger]] wrote that "China succeeded in exposing the limits of...[Soviet] strategic reach" and speculated that the desire to "compensate for their ineffectuality" contributed to the Soviets' decision to [[Soviet–Afghan War|intervene in Afghanistan]] a year later.<ref>{{Citation| title=On China| author1=Kissinger, H.| year=2011| publisher=New York:Penguin Press| isbn=9781101445358| language=English| pages=304–305}}</ref> ===Sino-Soviet split and Nixon-China visit=== [[File:President Richard Nixon and Premier Chou En-Lai Shake Hands at the Nixons' Arrival in Peking, China.jpg|thumb|U.S. President [[Richard Nixon]] shakes hands with Chinese Premier [[Zhou Enlai]] at [[Beijing Capital International Airport]]]] As a result of the [[Sino-Soviet split]], tensions along the Chinese–Soviet border [[Sino-Soviet border conflict|reached their peak]] in 1969. United States President [[Richard Nixon]] decided to use the conflict to shift the balance of power towards the West in the Cold War through a policy of rapproachment with China, which began with his [[1972 visit by Richard Nixon to China|1972 visit to China]] and culminated in 1979 with the signing of the [[Joint Communiqué on the Establishment of Diplomatic Relations]] by [[Visit by Deng Xiaoping to the United States|President Carter and Chinese President Deng Xiaoping]].<ref>{{Cite journal|date=January 1979|title=People's Republic of China-United States: Establishment of Diplomatic Relations|journal=International Legal Materials|volume=18|issue=1|pages=272–275|doi=10.1017/s0020782900043886|s2cid=249005911 |issn=0020-7829}}</ref>{{sfn|Gaddis|2005|pp=149–152}} ===Nixon, Brezhnev, and détente=== {{Main|Presidency of Richard Nixon|Détente|Brezhnev Doctrine|Strategic Arms Limitation Talks|Helsinki Accords|Vladivostok Summit Meeting on Arms Control|Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe}} [[File:Nikolai-Podgornyi-1969-in-Tampere.jpg|thumb|right|[[Nikolai Podgorny]] visiting [[Tampere]], [[Finland]] on 16 October 1969]] [[File:Carter Brezhnev sign SALT II.jpg|thumb|left|Soviet general secretary [[Leonid Brezhnev]] and US President [[Jimmy Carter]] sign the [[Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty II|SALT II arms limitation treaty]] in Vienna on 18 June 1979.]] Although indirect conflict between Cold War powers continued through the late 1960s and early 1970s, tensions were beginning to ease.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Détente and Arms Control, 1969–1979 |url=https://history.state.gov/milestones/1969-1976/detente |access-date=November 9, 2023 |website=U.S. State Department}}</ref> Following the ousting of Khrushchev, another period of [[collective leadership]] ensued, consisting of Leonid Brezhnev as general secretary, [[Alexei Kosygin]] as Premier and [[Nikolai Podgorny]] as Chairman of the Presidium, lasting until Brezhnev established himself in the early 1970s as the preeminent Soviet leader. Following his visit to China, Nixon met with Soviet leaders, including Brezhnev in Moscow.{{sfn|BBC|1972}} These [[Strategic Arms Limitation Talks]] resulted in two landmark arms control treaties: [[Strategic Arms Limitation Talks#SALT I Treaty|SALT I]], the first comprehensive limitation pact signed by the two superpowers, and the [[Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty]], which banned the development of systems designed to intercept incoming missiles. These aimed to limit the development of costly anti-ballistic missiles and nuclear missiles.{{sfn|Karabell|1999|p=916}} Nixon and Brezhnev proclaimed a new era of "peaceful coexistence" and established the groundbreaking new policy of [[détente]] (or cooperation) between the two superpowers. Meanwhile, Brezhnev attempted to revive the Soviet economy, which was declining in part because of heavy military expenditures. The Soviet Union's [[military budget]] in the 1970s was gigantic, forming 40–60% of the entire federal budget and accounting to 15% of the USSR's GDP (13% in the 1980s).<ref>{{cite web|url=https://su90.ru/defence.html|title=Расходы на оборону и численность вооруженных сил СССР|translator-last=Defense spending and size of the Armed Forces of the USSR}}</ref> Between 1972 and 1974, the two sides also agreed to strengthen their economic ties,{{sfn|LaFeber|1993|pp=194–197}} including agreements for increased trade. As a result of their meetings, ''détente'' would replace the hostility of the Cold War and the two countries would live mutually.{{sfn|Litwak|1986}} These developments coincided with [[Bonn]]'s "[[Ostpolitik]]" policy formulated by the West German Chancellor [[Willy Brandt]],{{sfn|Gaddis|2005|p=154}} an effort to normalize relations between West Germany and Eastern Europe. Other agreements were concluded to stabilize the situation in Europe, culminating in the [[Helsinki Accords]] signed at the [[Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe]] in 1975.{{sfn|Gaddis|2005|p=188}} The Helsinki Accords, in which the Soviets promised to grant free elections in Europe, has been called a major concession to ensure peace by the Soviets. In practice, the Soviet government significantly curbed the [[rule of law]], [[civil liberties]], [[Criminal justice|protection of law]] and [[Property rights|guarantees of property]],<ref name="Pipes2001">[[Richard Pipes]] (2001) ''Communism'' Weidenfeld & Nicolson. {{ISBN|0-297-64688-5}}</ref><ref name="Pipes1994">[[Richard Pipes]] (1994) ''Russia Under the Bolshevik Regime''. Vintage. {{ISBN|0-679-76184-5}}., pages 401–403.</ref> which were considered examples of "bourgeois morality" by Soviet legal theorists such as [[Andrey Vyshinsky]].<ref name="Vyshinsky1949">{{Cite book|title = Teoria dowodów sądowych w prawie radzieckim|last = Wyszyński|first = Andrzej|publisher = Biblioteka Zrzeszenia Prawników Demokratów|year = 1949|pages = 153, 162|url = http://echelon.pl/files/echelon/Wyszy%C5%84ski%20-%20Teoria%20dowod%C3%B3w%20s%C4%85dowych%20(OCR).pdf|access-date = 29 March 2023|archive-date = 29 July 2018|archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20180729141510/https://echelon.pl/files/echelon/Wyszy%C5%84ski%20-%20Teoria%20dowod%C3%B3w%20s%C4%85dowych%20%28OCR%29.pdf|url-status = dead}}</ref> The Soviet Union signed legally-binding human rights documents, such as the [[International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights]] in 1973 and the Helsinki Accords in 1975, but they were neither widely known or accessible to people living under Communist rule, nor were they taken seriously by the Communist authorities.<ref name=thomas-hrideas>{{Cite journal| volume = 7| issue = 2| pages = 110–141| last = Thomas| first = Daniel C.| title = Human Rights Ideas, the Demise of Communism, and the End of the Cold War| journal = Journal of Cold War Studies| year = 2005| url = http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/cws/summary/v007/7.2thomas.html| doi=10.1162/1520397053630600| s2cid = 57570614}}</ref>{{rp|117}} Human rights activists in the Soviet Union were regularly subjected to harassment, repressions and arrests. The pro-Soviet American business magnate [[Armand Hammer]] of [[Occidental Petroleum]] often mediated trade relations. Author [[Daniel Yergin]], in his book ''The Prize'', writes that Hammer "ended up as a go-between for five Soviet General Secretaries and seven U.S. Presidents."<ref>{{Cite book|last=Yergin|first=Daniel|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=WiUTwBTux2oC|title=The Prize: The Epic Quest for Oil, Money & Power|date=2011-04-05|publisher=Simon and Schuster|isbn=978-1-4391-3483-2|pages=557|language=en}}</ref> Hammer had extensive business relationship in the Soviet Union stretching back to the 1920s with Lenin's approval.<ref name=":7">{{Cite news|date=1980-07-03|title=Deal-maker Armand Hammer Moscow's capitalist comrade|work=Christian Science Monitor|url=https://www.csmonitor.com/1980/0703/070362.html|access-date=2021-11-07|issn=0882-7729}}</ref><ref name=":8">{{Cite news|date=1981-11-29|title=The Riddle of Armand Hammer|language=en-US|work=The New York Times|url=https://www.nytimes.com/1981/11/29/magazine/the-riddle-of-armand-hammer.html|access-date=2021-11-07|issn=0362-4331}}</ref> According to ''Christian Science Monitor'' in 1980, "although his business dealings with the Soviet Union were cut short when Stalin came to power, he had more or less single-handedly laid the groundwork for the [1980] state of Western trade with the Soviet Union."<ref name=":7" /> In 1974, Brezhnev "publicly recognized Hammer's role in facilitating East-West trade." By 1981, according to the ''New York Times'' in that year, Hammer was on a "first-name basis with Leonid Brezhnev."<ref name=":8" /> [[File:1979 Iranian Revolution.jpg|thumb|upright|Iranian people protesting against the [[Pahlavi dynasty]], during the [[Iranian Revolution]]]] Kissinger and Nixon were "realists" who deemphasized idealistic goals like anti-communism or promotion of democracy worldwide because those goals were too expensive in terms of America's economic capabilities.<ref>Caldwell 2009</ref>{{pages?|date=November 2023}} Instead of a Cold War they wanted peace, trade and cultural exchanges. They realized that Americans were no longer willing to tax themselves for idealistic foreign policy goals, especially for containment policies that never seemed to produce positive results. Instead, Nixon and Kissinger sought to downsize America's global commitments in proportion to its reduced economic, moral and political power. They rejected "idealism" as impractical and too expensive, and neither man showed much sensitivity to the plight of people living under Communism. Kissinger's realism fell out of fashion as idealism returned to American foreign policy with Carter's moralism emphasizing human rights, and Reagan's rollback strategy aimed at destroying Communism.<ref>Schwartz 2011</ref>{{pages?|date=November 2023}} ===Late 1970s deterioration of relations=== {{See also|East German uprising of 1953|Hungarian Revolution of 1956|Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia|Soviet reaction to the Polish crisis of 1980–1981|Soviet invasion of Afghanistan|Antisemitism in the Soviet Union|Refuseniks}} In the 1970s, the KGB, led by [[Yuri Andropov]], continued to persecute distinguished [[Soviet dissidents]], such as [[Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn]] and [[Andrei Sakharov]], who were criticising the Soviet leadership in harsh terms.{{sfn|Gaddis|2005|p=186}} Indirect conflict between the superpowers continued through this period of détente in the Third World, particularly during political crises in the Middle East, Chile, Ethiopia, and Angola.{{sfn|Gaddis|2005|p=178}} In 1973, Nixon announced his administration was committed to seeking [[Most favoured nation|most favored nation]] trade status with the USSR,<ref>{{Cite news |date=5 October 1973 |title=NIXON IN APPEAL ON SOVIET TRADE |language=en-US |work=The New York Times |url=https://www.nytimes.com/1973/10/05/archives/nixon-in-appeal-on-soviet-trade-urges-congress-to-include.html |access-date=December 7, 2021 |issn=0362-4331}}</ref> which was challenged by Congress in the [[Jackson–Vanik amendment|Jackson-Vanik Amendment]].<ref>{{cite book |last1=Herring |first1=George C. |url=https://archive.org/details/fromcolonytosupe00herr |title=From Colony to Superpower; U.S. Foreign Relations Since 1776 |date=2008 |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=978-0-19-507822-0 |pages=804}}</ref> The United States had long linked trade with the Soviet Union to its foreign policy toward the Soviet Union and, especially since the early 1980s, to [[Human rights in the Soviet Union|Soviet human rights policies]]. The [[Jackson-Vanik Amendment]], which was attached to the [[Trade Act of 1974|1974 Trade Act]], linked the granting of [[most-favored-nation]] to the USSR to the right of persecuted [[Soviet Jews]] to emigrate. Because the Soviet Union refused the right of emigration to Jewish [[refusenik]]s, the ability of the President to apply most-favored nation trade status to the Soviet Union was restricted.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Pomeranz |first=William E. |title=The Legacy and Consequences of Jackson-Vanik: Reassessing Human Rights in 21st Century Russia |url=https://www.wilsoncenter.org/publication/the-legacy-and-consequences-jackson-vanik-reassessing-human-rights-21st-century-russia-0 |access-date=2021-10-21 |website=wilsoncenter.org |language=en}}</ref> Although President [[Jimmy Carter]] tried to place another limit on the arms race with a [[Strategic Arms Limitation Talks#SALT II Treaty|SALT II]] agreement in 1979,{{sfn|BBC|1979}} his efforts were undermined by the other events that year, including the [[Iranian Revolution]] and the [[Nicaraguan Revolution]], which both ousted pro-US governments, and his retaliation against the [[Operation Storm-333|Soviet coup in Afghanistan]] in December.{{sfn|LaFeber|1993|pp=194–197}} Summary: Please note that all contributions to Christianpedia may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here. You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource (see Christianpedia:Copyrights for details). Do not submit copyrighted work without permission! Cancel Editing help (opens in new window) Discuss this page