For the Soul of Mankind: The United States, the Soviet Union, and the Cold War

by Melvyn P. Leffler

To the amazement of the public, pundits, and even the policymakers themselves, the ideological and political conflict that had endangered the world for half a century came to an end in 1990. How did that happen? What caused the cold war in the first place, and why did it last as long as it did?

The distinguished historian Melvyn P. Leffler homes in on four crucial episodes when American and Soviet leaders considered modulating, avoiding, or ending hostilities and asks why they Stalin and Truman devising new policies after 1945; Malenkov and Eisenhower exploring the chance for peace after Stalin’s death in 1953; Kennedy, Khrushchev, and LBJ trying to reduce tensions after the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962; and Brezhnev and Carter aiming to sustain détente after the Helsinki Conference of 1975. All these leaders glimpsed possibilities for peace, yet they allowed ideologies, political pressures, the expectations of allies and clients, the dynamics of the international system, and their own fearful memories to trap them in a cycle of hostility that seemed to have no end.

Leffler’s important book illuminates how Reagan, Bush, and, above all, Gorbachev finally extricated themselves from the policies and mind-sets that had imprisoned their predecessors, and were able to reconfigure Soviet-American relations after decades of confrontation.

Genres: History, Nonfiction, Politics, American History, Grad School, The United States Of America, Russia

608 pages, Hardcover

First published September 18, 2007

About the author

Melvyn Paul is an American historian and educator, currently Edward Stettinius Professor of History at the University of Virginia

Reviews

[Olethros · Rating 3 out of 5]

-Desde lo generalista, clarificador a grandes rasgos.-

Género. Historia.

Lo que nos cuenta. El libro La guerra después de la guerra (publicación original: For the Soul of Mankind: the United States, the Soviet Union, and the Cold War, 2007), con el subtítulo Estados Unidos, la Unión soviética y la Guerra Fría, es un acercamiento al fenómeno que se conoció como Guerra Fría y que consistió en la manifestación, de distintas maneras, del choque ideológico, político, económico, social y casi militar entre la URSS y los Estados Unidos de América, más sus aliados respectivos, pero especialmente centrado en cinco momentos muy distintos del enfrentamiento.

¿Quiere saber más de este libro, sin spoilers? Visite:

http://librosdeolethros.blogspot.com/...

[Craig · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very readable summary of Cold War that focuses entirely on the leaders of the Soviet Union and United States, arguing that these leaders ideologies were what shaped the conflict and ultimately, due to the efforts of Gorbachev, ended it.

Nothing ground-breaking in the book, perhaps, but still an excellent review of the events between 1945 and 1989.

[Joe · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is not a general history of the Cold War. Instead the book reads more like a case study of the American and Soviet leaders who stared each other down over five decades. From Truman & Stalin to Reagan & Gorbachev, the author focuses on the individuals and their ideologies. For the Soviets, it was all about Germany and European security. For the Americans, it was containing the perceived global march of communism. By the 1980s, leaders on both sides realized neither was willing to attack the other and the perestroika of Gorbachev allowed the unfolding of events that ended the Cold War.

With so much focus on the personalities, the corresponding events (Cuban Missile Crisis, Berlin Wall, etc.) receive only brief mention. Readers should have an understanding of the general history of the era to better appreciate the narrow focus of this book.

[Richard Barry · Rating 5 out of 5]

An excellent study of the nuances and complexities involved in the international political arena.

[Mianu Kanazawa · Rating 4 out of 5]

I read this book for a class called the Int'l History of Cold War.
This book goes in depth. If you want to know more about the minds of leaders of two super powers during the Cold War, this book is a book for you. I thoroughly enjoyed the book learning the backgrounds of Cold War, the decision making process of leaders, and why the Cold War lasted as long long as it did. It is very astonishing how much paranoia over what the other nation would do existed. We as human always fear uncertainty and act unreasonably when the uncertainty controls your mind. It makes me think all the uncertainty that is surrounding us at this moment in the world... or even for myself. Another thing I reflected this on is the relationships with the U.S. and China, another emerging super power in the world. The tit-for-tat trade war, geopolitical issues, ideologies... Could there be another Cold War? Just like Gorbachev and Reagan/Bush opened up to each other and found a common goal for the world peace, can the two nations work together? Or, is it going to take another 40 years to see an improved situation? Would the COVID-19 crisis teach us to work together, or would it cause more paranoia and blame for others resulting in more polarization in the world?

[Tom Schulte · Rating 4 out of 5]

A thorough examination of the Cold War from the WW II roots through to the dissolution of the USSR and German reunification under Gorbachev. This is largely told through the series of American presidents on one side and Soviet leaders on the author through summitry and other communications and interaction. There are some maps and lots of references and bibliography making this a scholarly work. The one thing that I realized through this is that U.S.-China relations from the 50s on through the Cold War were much about pulling China toward the U.S. and thus away from the Soviet sphere.

[Dave · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a history of key moments in the Cold War - moments when opportunities presented themselves to reduce tensions or even end the Cold War, but which were missed. He starts with the beginning of the Cold War itself, contending that it might have been avoided if different policies had been employed. Leffler tends to place more of the blame on the United States for missed opportunities - sometimes justifiably so, sometimes not so much in my opinion. Either way, it's still an interesting read.

[AskHistorians]

A great survey that focuses on several key periods--Truman's presidency, the Cuban Missile Crisis, Reagan and Gorbachev, etc.--rather than the entirety of the Cold War. It's one of the best introductions to the Cold War that opposes John Lewis Gaddis's interpretations. For Leffler, the Cold War was not inevitable, and it was Gorbachev that ended it. Like Gaddis, this book focuses strictly on the relationship between the U.S. and Soviet Union.

[Aaron Warren · Rating 4 out of 5]

The cold war ended without the destruction of the entire world. This was not guaranteed; this was a hard-fought and expensively paid sacrifice by citizens of this entire world. To have power and not use it, to deftly move away from the brink, should make all of us stand up and take notice. Most importantly, to learn from what these people have to teach us.

This is more of a case study on the opposing ideological views of the national leaders of the United States and the Soviet Union during the Cold War. It is not an exhaustive history and should not be viewed as such.

Melvin P. Leffler did a fantastic job of taking us from the end of World War 2 to the collapse of the Soviet Union in the 1990s. Focusing not on overarching actions done by nations but by individual leaders. Attempting to establish the view that perhaps there were off-ramps if only leaders would have been willing to see them along with their most trusted advisors.

To quote Leffler's conclusion, " No one, then, was more responsible for ending the Cold War than the Soviet leader. Reagan was critically important, but Gorbachev was the indispensable agent of change." pg 466

I read this book because it was part of the class I took on the Cold War. Well I don't agree with everything leffler stated, and i believe that he was perhaps a little too lenient on some of the Soviet leaders such as Khrushchev it is an interesting case study that played out over the better part of 45 years.

For me, removed so far from the Cold War, it almost seemed as a foregone conclusion that America and the West would prove victorious. But that was not always the case when you look at situations such as Vietnam, Korea, China, and Cuba.

Great Book; if this period of time interests you, I would STRONGLY recommend this book.

One of my largest gripes is Leffler regularly jumps around and does not place the year when he references a date. This can be very confusing for those who don't understand all of the ins and outs of the cold war. Seriously, just put the full date.

[Marius Stangeland]

Siccome Gorbaciov riuscì a sconfiggere la Guerra Fredda, fosse stato possibile che alcuno deli capi anteriori siano stati capaci da fare lo stesso prima? Questo è il argomento centrale nel libro e il autore esplora la possibilità, concentrarsi su cinque periodi centrali dal secondo guerra mondiale al crollo della Unione Sovietica. Credo che il autore ha scritto una buona opera che spiega perché la guerra fredda cominciò, e che non fosse inevitabile. Benché né Stalin né Truman bisognassero cominciare una guerra fredda costosa, la situazione geopolitica e li timori per l’altro facevano che ambi capi cominciavano politiche che portava alla guerra fredda.

Inoltre, il autore spiega perché i altri capi, sia il presidente degli Stati Uniti che il capo della Unione Sovietica, non riuscivano trasgredire ideologia e paura benché la guerra fredda fosse caro alle due superpotenze.

[Adnan Soysal · Rating 5 out of 5]

Nice, substantive reading for anyone wants to learn what happened after WW2 until Cold War is over
Book is organized good. It particularly emphasizes on the personalities and some memory instances of the involved leaders which I liked most. It gives a good lesson about the formation of people ruling the countries, tackling the huge challenges.

[Erik Roberts · Rating 5 out of 5]

An academic book to be sure, but For the Soul of Mankind is a tour de force of Cold War history, stories, thoughts, reflections. Leffler captures so much amazing, rich detail while weaving a clear arc throughout.

[Zeeshan Butt · Rating 5 out of 5]

You can't get rid of this book once picked up for reading.

[Lishan · Rating 4 out of 5]

informative

[Felix Sun · Rating 4 out of 5]

Sometime the time lines is jumbled up, but a good overview of the History.

[RoxchelKnightly · Rating 3 out of 5]

This read was okay. I’m not well-versed in the History of the Cold War, so I probably would have enjoyed it more if I did understood it more.

[Robert Sparrenberger · Rating 4 out of 5]

If you wanted to read a solid synopsis of the Cold War with the Leaders of the u s s r and the USA as focal points, this would be your book. It’s well written with solid analysis throughout. Ronald Reagan and Gorbachev are featured heavily but deservedly so.

Recommend.

[Ashleigh Dubie · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a helpful book. However, be warned: it is very dense and very dry. Leffler, however, is a brilliant historian and looks at the Cold War through a human lens. Also important to read and refer to if you are analyzing the Cold War, and trying to make sense of what happened.

[J.M. Hushour · Rating 4 out of 5]

Pretty much all Cold War-era politicians, the ones that mattered, Soviet and American, were pieces of shit. This is not in doubt here in this study. Writ large, they were fanatic ideologues, the Americans much more so, it seems, who refused to bend to the other's will for fear that their "way of life" would be threatened. This is a stupid foundation on which to view one's strategic, geopolitical aims, for what is a political ideology, communist or capitalist, but some dumb crap someone else that up that everyone defines their own way anyway?
What really comes out from reading this book, is how much the actual leaders themselves were really, really interested and to varying degrees invested in trying to end the Cold War, even before it began.
Yes, yes, we all know what a dick Stalin was, but it was never so cookie cutter black-and-white as it is often portrayed. From Stalin through Chernenko, the over-riding Soviet strategic aim was to protect the Soviet Union. And meddle in the Third World here and there, for various reasons, sure. The Soviets never, ever, ever received from the US any reassurance over these fears and this was part of the problem. Neither side could countenance the fears of the other and act on it. There was a lot of mutual misunderstanding and over-blown fear-mongering, especially in the US. The Soviets wanted secure borders and an inward focus on their economy. The US wanted to protect the "American way of life" and dominate global resources. This is where we get to the who's-a-bigger-dick bit. And the hero in all this, after we wend our way through Afghanistan and the collapse of the communist regimes of eastern Europe is Gorbachev.
Gorbachev was the one leader on either side who said, "Fuck. It.", screw ideology, screw the military-industrial complex and basically committed political suicide by making concession after concession to the US. Despite Reagan's genial antics, he never really went to great pains to undertake anything proactive towards Gorbachev. Gorby went out on a limb to do what everyone had always talked about: ending the Cold War.
Leffler does a good job of detailing (sometimes over-detailing) the inner machinations of both sides. This is not Red Dawn, people. It was grey as hell. The book could've used a bit more on the proxy conflicts. African decolonization and Afghanistan are mentioned, but issues with China, Japan, the Middle East...much of this is left to the wayside.

[Caleb · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book was an interesting commentary on the cold war. It begins at Stalin's takeover of Russia. This leads up to the beginning of the Cold War. This commentary is mainly from an American perspective. Starting with President Truman and Stalin, Then all the way to Reagan and Gorbachev. Although the book mainly focuses on Presidents and the Kremlin (the leaders of soviet Russia), it also has some commentary on Winston Churchill and some Secretary of States. Leffler strikes me as a moderate leaning toward some conserative views and is at some points evident in his writing.
The most interesting part of the book was the part about Eisenhower and Dulles (his secretary of state). In this section, he describes what the real reason for the Cold War was. Eisenhower was really concerned about the threat of nuclear weapons. Eisenhower was also very concerned about the rise of communism around the world. He sent aid against what he thought were communist movements to the Vietminh and also to parts of Africa and South America.
The worst part of the book was during the conclusion. It was well written and informative, but lacked the ability to be as interesting as the rest of the book. I felt that it was a summary of what had happened during the rest of the book but had been summarized to the point that it almost made me feel like I could have written a paragraph to get all the information in the book.
This book was overall well written and very informative. The title drew me in and I am glad that it did. The only word to describe this book in one word is analytical. I think Leffler can see very well the general ideas that both sides of the war was like. I also think that he understood what the sources he used were trying to say.
This is one of the better books I have read recently and I would recommend it to anyone who likes history or likes to learn. While this isn't the best book ever I think that it really deserves four out of five stars.

[Lori · Rating 3 out of 5]

Ideology was at the heart of the Cold War. Though traditional aims of war and diplomacy – such as resources and territory – played their role, ideology informed nearly every word spoken, every decision made. Neither the United States nor the Soviet Union sought to expand themselves per se; it was authority and influence they wished to spread. Minor conflicts in minor countries became proxy battles between two superpowers trying to staunch the proliferation of rival principles and beliefs. Sabotage, espionage, nuclear blackmail, and dangerous arm races all served the same purpose: contain, intimidate, and quarantine. Of course, the whole thing was in many ways a bad idea, as leaders in both nations recognized. The global standoff drained resources and distracted from domestic issues, while continuous interference in regional clashes brought little reward and could potentially spiral out of control. The truth is, however, that at the end of the day, governments are run by human beings shaped by memories and cultural values. I find myself comparing Melvyn P. Leffler’s book For the Soul of Mankind: The United States, The Soviet Union, and the Cold War with Stanley Krubrick’s 1964 film Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb as demonstrating in very different ways the overriding focus of ideology in the Cold War, as well as this focus's inherent hazards and drawbacks.

Read more.

[Mike · Rating 4 out of 5]

Great overview on the Cold War and the important decisions that occurred during that dangerous 45 year period. The author is very evenhanded in his judgment of the major players during the era. Gorbachev and Reagan both played pivotal roles in ending the Cold War; the author feels Gorby's contributions outweighed Ronnie's in that Gorbachev initiated glasnost and perestroika which inevitably led to the demise of the Soviet Union.

[Todd]

Excellent work that explores the fine line between human agency and contingency as it related to key events throughout the Cold War. This book was well written and focused on the power players, such as Truman and Stalin, and showed how ideology, domestic considerations, and other factors shaped their responses to a rapidly changing post war world.

[Jason · Rating 4 out of 5]

Excellent review of the Cold War, effectively covering all of the major leaders and decisive events. While I love Cold War history, I had never actually read any; this book was a marvelous introduction, and was highly readable. My only complaint is how the late 50's and early 70's are skipped entirely.

[Barry]

The capsule biographies were good, especially the one of Stalin. And I never realized just how scared the Soviets were of Germany. Gorbachev's allowing the reunification seems to have loosened his hold on power.

[Squeemu · Rating 4 out of 5]

3.5/5

A little too long, but I found the depth fascinating at times. Really helped me understand the mindset of each country during the Cold War, which is something I had been unable to grasp before -- particularly that of the United States.

[Joshua · Rating 1 out of 5]

Great man history at its finest.

[Richard Garcia · Rating 4 out of 5]

Loved it

[Dan Gorman · Rating 4 out of 5]

This compelling history of the Cold War shows how Americans and Russians repeatedly fail to move from zero-sum to non-zero-sum politics, prolonging the Cold War. But I am not sure that Leffler's focus on the ideology of leaders is fully successful. He may overestimate the sincerity of leaders regarding ideological claims.