America's Cold War: The Politics of Insecurity

by Campbell Craig, Fredrik Logevall

The Cold War dominated world affairs during the half century following World War II. It ended in victory for the United States, yet it was a costly triumph, claiming trillions of dollars in defense spending and the lives of nearly 100,000 U.S. soldiers. Apocalyptic anti-communism sharply limited the range of acceptable political debate, while American actions overseas led to the death of millions of innocent civilians and destabilized dozens of nations that posed no threat to the United States. In a brilliant new interpretation, Campbell Craig and Fredrik Logevall reexamine the successes and failures of America’s Cold War. The United States dealt effectively with the threats of Soviet predominance in Europe and of nuclear war in the early years of the conflict. But in engineering this policy, American leaders successfully paved the way for domestic actors and institutions with a vested interest in the struggle’s continuation. Long after the USSR had been effectively contained, Washington continued to wage a virulent Cold War that entailed a massive arms buildup, wars in Korea and Vietnam, the support of repressive regimes and counterinsurgencies, and a pronounced militarization of American political culture. American foreign policy after 1945 was never simply a response to communist power or a crusade contrived solely by domestic interests. It was always an amalgamation of both. This provocative book lays bare the emergence of a political tradition in Washington that feeds on external dangers, real or imagined, a mindset that inflames U.S. foreign policy to this day.

Genres: History, Politics, Nonfiction, American History, School, Research, Reference

448 pages, Hardcover

First published January 1, 2009

About the author

Campbell Craig is Professor of International Politics at Aberystwyth University, where he teaches and writes about cold war and nuclear history, US foreign relations, and contemporary international politics.

He is currently working on Marxism and modern war in the twentieth century, classical realism, and a larger project on the nuclear revolution as theory.

Reviews

[Chelsea Lawson · Rating 5 out of 5]

America's Cold War is a thoughtful, fast-paced recap of the personalities, psychology, strategies, and ensuing impacts on global affairs from FDR and Churchill following WWII to the termination of the Soviet Union in 1991.

I remember reading two books about Vietnam-- A Better War and Lessons in Disaster-- after hearing Obama was reading them in the start of his presidency, and I would suggest this book over both of those as it covers Vietnam in depth in addition to the greater historical context.

One thing that stuck out to me was how often political leaders make military and policy decisions out of political dickswinging, like wanting to appear tough on communism to constituents or intimidate foreign leaders. I suppose that is the reason for the subtitle "The Politics of Insecurity." For instance, the authors' analysis of the bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki was that Truman could/should have delayed the bombing on Nagasaki and Japan likely would have surrendered before the second bomb was necessary. But it served as an act of intimidation (and could therefore be considered the first act of the Cold War.) Or Eisenhower undermining and helping to topple legitimate regimes in Iran and Guatemala that posed no threat to the US. Or everything Vietnam (and Russia in Afghanistan, which was basically their Vietnam). Thank god the cold war did not escalate to nuclear mutually assured destruction!!

Another key reason for America's involvement in the Cold War and various escapades into third-world countries after the birth of the CIA in 1947 was the growing influence of a "military industrial complex" (Eisenhower speech in 1961) whos primary interest was "to deny, always and forever, that America had done all it could to make itself safe."

It's amazing that people get angry when they feel politicians are "apologists". We have SO much to apologize for... namely, the death or maiming of several million civilians who never raised a hand against the US over the course of post WWII to the end of the 20th century.

And this was interesting from the conclusion: In the end, "the Soviet collapse was less about US government policies, less about the trillions of dollars spent of nuclear weapons, and more about what is nowadays called soft power-- music, movies, consumer goods, and the prospect of a freer, more comfortable, more exciting life for ordinary Russians and eastern Europeans." Lots of food for thought.

[Piker7977 · Rating 4 out of 5]

The authors provide a sound overview of the American cold war political experience. This includes both domestic and international considerations. While the events resulted in a victory for the West, the United States made sacrifices that included the institutionalized military industrial complex, of which Eisenhower had warned against in 1961, along with the ever increasing belligerent and hawkish rhetoric used against America's perceived foes; both real and exaggerated.

Rather than being the lone superpower who enjoys confidence with global hegemony, we created The Politics of Insecurity which may unnecessarily escalate political tensions, internal and abroad, for the foreseeable future. Victory came at a cost.

[Joel Blankenship · Rating 5 out of 5]

A really great overview on the intersection between domestic politics and foreign policy during the Cold War.

[Laura · Rating 3 out of 5]

[3] I read this book because of a class on American Foreign Policy and it was a pleasant enough read. However, if you're looking to extract information or a timeline of events, it gets a bit trickier since the book is SO detailed. I think that if you have an overview of the history of U.S. foreign policy, this book really contributes in understanding the intricacies of America's politics during the Cold War.

[Jack · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was a strong overview of America's Cold War effort, starting with FDR, and going through to the end with GHW Bush. The authors make the point that domestic politics were quite important to the outcome, and it wasn't just a chess match between US presidents and Soviet leaders. Presidents had to grapple with congresses, face elections, deal with the media, etc. The authors also claim that the Cold War could have ended much earlier than it did if leaders stuck to Kennan's containment approach and held back from more aggressive postures like rollback, etc. I don't find that part of the book particularly compelling. Also, it's very much worth noting that the Cold War was quite hot for a lot of places around the world. Southeast Asia, Latin America, and areas of Africa saw a lot of the tragedies that the Western world naively believes were avoided.
For anyone wanting a great introduction to the Cold War, or for those more familiar with the Gaddis theories, this is a fantastic book.

[Hotavio · Rating 5 out of 5]

A great overview of the Cold War from the lens of American politics. The authors seem fair, with plenty of praises and criticisms of every administration from FDR to George H W Bush (with some presidents favoring slightly more depending on the context of their political standing). With criticisms across the spectrum, the authors are decidedly advocates of the Kennan idea of containment as his thoughts arc their book. The authors do a good job of linking the most asinine foreign policies with sometimes selfish, yet reasonable, political motivations. The authors are always prone to what if's and are eager to fully explore those avenues.

[Andrew O'Connor · Rating 4 out of 5]

A succinct overview of the rise and fall of the policy of containment in relationship to the Cold War. Unfortunately, it views the decades past the late 40s as wholly inconsequential to the decline and collapse of the Soviet Union. As such, many events past the early days of the Cold War are portrayed as inherently asinine. Hindsight 20/20 definitely applies here. Still, it manages to convey a holistic view of the Cold War.

[Ian Divertie · Rating 5 out of 5]

Another must read for the Cold Wart historian. Another book which makes the point of how ridiculous the whole thing was. The biggest se3cret of the Cold War as I have pointed out many times is that there was no Cold War. Just insane levels of paranoia on America's part.

[AskHistorians]

A recent survey of the Cold War era in the U.S. An easy read and an analytically thorough account of U.S. policy during the Cold War. Argues that the United States' Cold War objectives had been met by 1950, but the conflict lasted as long as it did due to domestic political factors in the U.S.

[Matthew Linton · Rating 3 out of 5]

I well-written synthesis that could be useful in the classroom, but adds little new to ongoing scholarly debates between Cold War historians.

[emma · Rating 4 out of 5]

Really enjoyed reading this and found it a very comprehensive account of the Cold War. The only reason I can't give it 5 stars is because I feel like it omitted some key facts