Compare And Contrast Pakistan And Cold War Essay

When the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan on December 1979, the goal was to help Afghan communist forces set up a communist government. The Soviet Union felt Afghanistan had key resources and a foothold in the Middle East to spread communist ideas. The result would be a war that the Soviet Union wishes it never got involved in and likened to their “Vietnam War”, meaning winning a number of battles but not the war like what happened to the U.S. in Vietnam. The background of the war, outcome of the war, and impact on the United States are key to understanding the Soviet-Afghan War.

Since the end of the Cold War, the cases of nuclear proliferation in Iran and North Korea have gathered enormous international attention. Iran 's nuclear program appeared as a result of the Cold War alliance between the United States and the late Shah of Iran, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi. In 2003, Iran was suspected of developing a military nuclear capability and is now developing medium and intermediate ballistic missiles, which are capable of carrying a nuclear warhead. On the other hand, North Korea set off a nuclear device and declared suspicions about a military nuclear program in 2006. Iran and North Korea have recently started cooperation to develop multi-stage ballistic missiles and have conducted several missile flight tests over the last few years (Schmid, 2008).

In 1947, the Cold War had started, named after how both of the disputing sides did not fight but only threatened each other with new technologies. The U.S and Soviet Union disagreements on political systems and also questioned war reparation, show how they cause the Cold War with their mistrust and technological issues.

Europe after the capitulation of Nazi Germany and the subsequent Allied victory in World War II was in ruins from years of fighting and bombing. Cities and infrastructure lay flattened and shortages of vital consumer products of food and fuel persisted across Europe. The economic situation of Europe was also in tatters; many countries suffered from severe inflation, debt, trade deficits, and depleted gold supplies. The United States having remained virtually untouched by the destruction had emerged from World War II stronger than ever before both an industrial economic, and military powerhouse. The Soviet Union though also suffering from the wounds of the war began to establish pro-Soviet communist governments in the Eastern European countries

In 1961 President John F Kennedy put together a doctrine, which altered from President Eisenhower’s one. It was to “Respond flexibly to communist expansion, especially guerrilla warfare.” (Roskin & Berry, 2010, p. 58) It was a time when the Cold War was at its height and nuclear weapons a mass threat and source of power. This doctrine was aimed at using alternative means before opening into combat. This, in light of the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962, it succeeded in doing.

Nuclear Weapons have persisted to be the decisive deterrent to any assailant, and the best means of establishing peace. There are many different views on nuclear weapons, even though they cost an extravagate amount of money; they come with positive aspects’. In fact nuclear weapons are one of the greatest reasons that nations do not want to go to war, but alternately, strive to inquire clarification through negotiations. First and foremost, it is very important to analyze just how nuclear weapons prevent war.

When one hears the common phrase, “The only good commie is a dead one,” the Cold War comes to mind. This war, cold because of no direct violence towards each country, was a major contribution to future wartime diplomacy. The clever Americans used many tactics to create a “cold” war that would benefit them in every aspect. The fear of communism consuming smaller countries exaggerated the possibility that America’s economy could be jeopardized. Politicians also helped guarantee anti-communist principles in the United States. Imitating the government, the media and other political figures helped create a frenzy of fear. The United States was more to blame for the Cold War than the Soviet Union.

The ongoing conflict between India and Pakistan has been the subject of speculation and study by political scientists and historians for a number of years. The ethnic conflict seems to have been sparked at the very beginning in 1947, when the British used Muslim and Hindu mercenaries against each other before the area finally split into today’s countries of India and Pakistan (Spiegel et al. 2015, 185). The timeline since then has been full of conflicts, both major and minor. Brutal tactics used by security forces and a high rate of unemployment have added to the issue (BBC News 2016).

The Cold war was a war that was based on the idea that one way of controlling a nation whether it be by communism or capitalism. The two nations involved in this war was the United States of America (Democracy/Capitalism) and The USSR (Capitalism). This lead to an arms race, a space race and resulted in the two superpowers becoming competitors to spread their form of government across the world. This also caused wars in countries that had half of it believe in communism and the other half believe in democracy/Capitalism. The Vietnam war and The Korean War where two wars resulting in the Cold War. The war was called the Cold War because the war never really heated up in a battle between the two countries only countries supported by those two nations. The threats between the two superpowers include deturants these

After World War II, Stalin did not remove his troops from Eastern Europe as he pledged he would in the Yalta Agreement. Instead, he setup “puppet governments” which did exactly as Mother Russia stated. To protect it’s interests for national security, the American Dream, and the belief that all people should have the right to a democratic life, complete with liberty, equality, and a representative government. Also playing a large part in Cold War tensions was the US interest in protecting its profitable foreign markets. The spread of communism challenged every one of these US aim’s, and therefore the US became convinced it had to stop this spread. The deliberate opposition to the spread of communism to capital countries is known as

Like many countries throughout the world, the America’s involvement in Afghanistan began during the Cold War. Communists in 1978 seized power under the People’s Democratic Party of Afghanistan, the PDPA, led by Nur Muhammad Taraki. The PDPA attempted to impose secular reforms and land redistribution, resulting in serious opposition. This opposition proved particularly forceful amongst the country’s religious leaders, who also represented a new wave Islamic revivalism within the Muslim world. By 1979 the communists were loosing control and President Carter authorized funding for covert action in the form of medical aid and propaganda for the opposition. In response the Soviets stepped up their presence and contributions to the communists

Besides, everybody believed that India would have never undertaken such a step. Since the beginning of the nuclear age, the leaders of the United States understood that the civil nuclear research could contribute to the studies in the result of which nuclear weapons would be obtained by India. The US intelligence services spent five decades gathering information on any nuclear researches in India. All available means of intelligence were used including open information sources and communications intelligence (Richelson, 2006). Thus, careful work to obtain information on the activities of India in nuclear research, peaceful or military, has allowed the US government to create the most complete picture of events. However, the collective efforts of the CIA and other intelligence-gathering organizations have not led to the drawing up of a clear and complete report, which would have warned the US government that India is going to conduct nuclear tests in 1974 and 1998 (Richelson, 2006). As a result, the US officials learned about Indian nuclear tests only after they saw images from their satellites. The “billion-dollar spies in the sky” (Chengappa, 2010). Therefore, not all data received from satellites was exploited carefully enough. Besides, Indians managed to calculate the trajectory of US satellites and prepare for nuclear tests during the hours when the satellites have looked elsewhere (CIA serching for answer behind its Indian Nuclear failure,

The subject of nuclear development has been very sensitive in world politics among nations that have vested interest. As some countries steered towards the development of such sophisticated weapons, they were met with heavy criticism, from those who already possess them. Those countries that already developed nuclear weapons worked towards minimizing and safety securing such weapons. Different interest groups pushed the agenda for their perspective states to mounting towards nuclear capability. In the field of nuclear proliferation it is politically motivated with different key players advocating for the need to proliferate. The development for nuclear capability has been echoed as being the basis for bringing peace and stability to such countries. Scholarly minds have jumped into the notion that being nuclear arm can bring peace and stability among those states that have nuclear weapons. However as every argument is met with skepticism, there are those scholars that suggest being nuclear arm is a bad idea waiting to explode. This research will locate the case between the two nuclear arm states of Pakistan and Indian and the conflict that brews between them. The analysis and assumptions between these two states will be based on the theories of deterrence and organizational theory. These states present an interesting point of view due to their

The continued conflict between India and Pakistan is the main driver behind the stalling of Pakistan to move towards an FMCT. Pakistan claims that an FMCT “would lock-in an unfair strategic advantage for India” thus resulting in the continuation of both countries building their nuclear arsenals making these two countries the largest fissile material contributors.12 North Korea’s production of fissile material is centered on their belief that it provides regional security serving as a nuclear deterrent “preserving peace and stability in the Korean peninsula and other parts of Northeast Asia.”12 Israel’s lack of transparency regarding both its own nuclear capability and/or production of fissile material further poses potential issues in achieving consensus of an FMCT.

In 1945, a great technological innovation was dropped over Japan, the atomic bomb. Ever since the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the world has faced the threat of nuclear attack. In reaction to this, world governments have been forced to find a defense against nuclear attack. One solution to the danger of nuclear attack is the use of nuclear deterrence. Nuclear deterrence is the possession and launching of nuclear weapons for the sole purpose of defense and retaliation against a nuclear attack from another country. Nuclear deterrence is the best answer to the danger of nuclear war, resulting in world security and the prevention of nuclear war. However, some people believe