Why did the Cold War develop first in Europe?
The Cold War refers to an era of geopolitical and ideological tensions between the Soviet Union and the United States from 1947 to 1991. Westad explains that division was the primary reason why this conflict began in Europe (15). Nazi Germany’s surrender in May 1945 and collaboration between American and Great Britain as one team and the Soviet Union on another side resulted in uneasy wartime. The Soviet Union had established left-wing governments in Eastern European countries by 1948 (Westad 32). The Red Army had played a significant role in liberating these nations.
The United States and Great Britain feared because the USSR had dominated the Eastern countries in Europe. Therefore, these allies wanted to prevent the spread of communism in the democratic western European countries. On the contrary, Westad states that USSR was determined to continue dominating Eastern Europe to safeguards against any German threats (37). Additionally, the Soviets had ideological reasons for spreading communism worldwide. The United States’ aid under the Marshall Plan between 1947 to 1948 in the West had solidified the Cold War (Westad 41). This is because American influenced the Western nations while the USSR openly spread communism to the Eastern regions. However, these rivals did not directly engage in a physical war.
How did the Cold War define Europe’s development in the second half of the 20th Century?
The emergence of the Cold War adversely affected the development of Europe because there was significant tension, injuries, and deaths. Westad expounds that the United States and its allies and Soviets on the other side wanted to adopt the same economic standards as Europe (44). The two countries invaded Europe to control the government and economy. This brought about division because individuals in the two European regions were uncertain about what would happen. Westad asserts that Cold War changed Europe’s growth from extensive, which had dominated the 1950s and 1960s, to intensive development by the 1970s (48). This era of uncertain technology resulted in the inefficiency of state holding companies that concentrated on developing the continent’s growth.
Eastern Europe was the most affected because its GDP dropped by more than half between 1950 and 1973. The uncertainty brought about by the Cold War propelled Western Europe to embrace market capitalism while the Eastern regions adopted socialism (Westad 53). The decisions made by these two areas played a crucial role in determining their development. Notable, not all parts of Europe developed equally during this period. Additionally, not all portions of the second half experienced rapid growth. For example, the development of the Western regions was faster than that of the Eastern nations. Notably, Westad states that there was slow growth in 1973 compared to other years, mainly in the East (60). This was caused by a culminated central planning crisis and breakdown of its authoritative political structure
What were the major transformations in Europe’s global position after 1945?
The position of Europe changed globally after 1945 because it was divided into two phases. This is because the country’s economy had significantly improved between the 1950s and 1960s and engaged in trading activities with other nations (Westad 123). Every government strived to attain the economic status of Europe. Many individuals’ lives were transformed beyond recognition in the second half of the twentieth century. Individuals used ice to cool their food, heated their homes with coal, and had inadequate rudimentary indoor plumbing forms. However, Westad explains that electric refrigerators and gadgets and natural gas furnaces eased their lives (129). This simple measure played a crucial role in enhancing the quality of life for Europeans. During this period, the gross domestic product per capita tripled. Moreover, the working hours declined by one-third, resulting in increased leisure time.
The advanced medicals sciences and improved nutrition lengthened an individual’s life expectancy. However, Westad expounds that all sectors were not positively affected because this era was marked by intense unemployment and increased tax burdens (140). There was also political repression, environmental degradation, and pervasive consumer sovereignty limits caused by authoritarian regimes dominating Eastern Europe for forty years after World War II. However, the conflict between USSR and the United States created tension, and Europe’s trading partners withdrew (Westad 153). As a result, trade in Europe was carried out within the country. This led to economic depression and affected the living status of individuals.
How did Europe’s leaders meet these challenges?
The Soviet Union was unwilling to surrender its control over the eastern regions. Different leaders had varying perceptions, which resulted in the establishment of alliances. The leaders were reluctant to negotiate the best way forward because they were interested in controlling Europe. This resulted in disagreements between the people in power and the citizens. However, Westad states that the Berlin wall’s fall in 1990 opened the borders, and people from the East and West started to interact (211). Previously America’s President Ronald Reagan had given a speech challenging Mr. Gorbacher, his Soviet counterpart, to bring the wall down. This resulted in negotiations between U.S President George W. Bush, Gorbachev, and Helmut Kohl, the chancellor of the German West. The agreements were made at the Yalta Conference held in February 1945 (Westad 256). These leaders concluded that free elections would be held, which ousted the communist leadership in the Eastern regions. As a result, the Soviet Union dissolved its states into republics; therefore, people enjoyed democracy, and the Cold War ended.
How did European leaders respond to the key challenges which they faced in the 20th Century?
Various challenges resulted from the conflict between America and Soviet nations. These issues included asymmetrical threats, for example, terrorism, transnational and regional disagreements (Westad 311). International capitals also aimed to control the country’s government and economy. Another problem is the Cold War legacy which would adversely affect Europe’s relationship with other nations. These challenges divided the European leaders who convinced their followers to support them. The Western and Eastern regions were the most affected, and the Berlin wall was built to separate the two areas (Westad 321). The Eastern support towards communism caused the disagreement while the Western embraced capitalism.
What lessons can be learned from how European leaders engaged the massive conflicts and deep crises that shaped 20th Century Europe?
Massive conflicts and crises in Europe characterized the twentieth century. The leaders in these nations expressed divisive leadership, with some embracing communism and others believed in capitalism (Westad 327). Therefore, many alliances were established, resulting in increased tensions among leaders and other individuals. The desperation of influential people prompted them to seek alternatives without considering the harm they would cause to people. These events teach individuals about the essentiality of maintaining the appropriate leadership skills. For example, the economic depression experienced in the 1970s would have been avoided if the leaders remained united and fought for the rights of Europeans. People-oriented leaders have the interests of individuals at heart; therefore, consider what will benefit others. In this case, the leaders did not consider the adverse effects of their consequences. For example, the Berlin wall played a significant role in the economic depression because people from the East would not access the West and vice versa (Westad 345). Additionally, the disunity of European leaders caused the loss of lives, for instance, during the Berlin Wall fall, where 140 people lost their lives.
How can studying European leadership benefit the UAE?
Studying the leadership of Europe during the twentieth century is essential to the United Arab Emirates leaders and citizens. People in power should strive to solve disagreements when they occur peacefully. This is because although conflict affects them, the adverse consequences are felt by the citizens. UAE leadership should also learn to mind about the well-being of the people they lead. For example, the disagreement of European leaders caused tension, harm, and deaths of innocent people. People in power in UAE should be ready to accept defeat when it happens. Although Mr. Gorbachev eventually agreed to sit and negotiate with other leaders, he had initially refused to let the Soviet nations practice democracy. Additionally, leaders should understand the power of listening to other people’s points of view. For example, the United States and Britain would on one side and the Soviet Union on the other have sat down and agreed about the best way forward for citizens’ interest.
What are the most important leadership lessons for the UAE?
There are leadership lessons that the United Arab Emirates can learn from Europe. They include the power of listening to other people and avoiding making hasty decisions during tough times. Both the communists and capitalists failed to listen to one another and make an appropriate decision but chose conflict instead. Taking care of other people is crucial because it prevents them from harm or injury that can adversely affect their lives. Another leadership lesson is the desire to inspire other people. In this case, the Eastern European leaders failed to accomplish this trait by setting an excellent example. As a result, they were ousted during the election, which shows that people were displeased with their leadership.
Work Cited
Westad, Odd Arne. The Cold War: A World History. Basic Books;1st Edition, 2017.