Introduction
Nuclear war is a severe danger to humankind, which worries writers, politicians, and public figures. This weapon was created by human hands and can take millions of innocent lives, raising many existential questions. These weapons are under the rule of states and; therefore, other people are obliged to act within the framework of international regulations and treaties, regardless of their emotional impulses, principles, and pride. It is what the example of the Cuban Missile Crisis demonstrates, when President Kennedy withstood the pressure of passionate colleagues, worried about his reputation, and did not allow a nuclear war on Earth.
Development of the Cuban Missile Crisis
The crisis arose in October 1962 against the secret transfer of nuclear weapons to Cuba by Nikita Khrushchev. The Soviet leader did not give a warning or an official statement, and the spirit of the Cold War, when the two most substantial nuclear powers could not trust each other, hovered in space. Temporally, the crisis surrounds a series of events that turned out to be unfortunate for both America and President Kennedy personally. The Vienna summit marked the victory of Khrushchev, his power and strength over the United States in the geopolitical space: “Headed into their June summit in Vienna, Khrushchev, 67, basked in a stunning triumph” (Bustin, 2019, para. 7). The Berlin crisis served as pressure for Kennedy since neither he nor especially his entourage and advisers wanted to lose the reputation that Berlin had placed on them.
The attack on the Bay of Pigs was a shock to Kennedy, who acted carelessly out of inexperience, succumbing to the influence of the special services. Bustin (2019) noted that Kennedy’s mood was close to insane: “Kennedy’s obsession with removing Cuba’s Fidel Castro backfired in the disastrous Bay of Pigs invasion in April 1961” (para. 6). Castro had serious and close contact with Khrushchev, constantly engaged in a dialogue with him about the placement of weapons, and was ready to start the war as soon as possible, sacrificing his state. “The two superpowers plunged into one of their biggest Cold War confrontations after the pilot of an American U-2 spy plane piloted by Major Richard Heyser making a high-altitude pass over Cuba on October 14, 1962” (History.com Editors, 2021, para. 4). The U-2 crisis also seriously heated the situation around the globe. It was in this tense atmosphere of a quiet war that the Cuban Missile Crisis began.
Kennedy Administration
The presidential administration tried to support him; brainstorms and debates were held in the offices, but not everyone could have adequate debates. Some were determined to respond aggressively to the reckless act of the Soviet authorities, but this only responded to emotional outbursts of revenge and a desire to win back their reputation. They insisted that “The missile sites must be destroyed with the full might of the country’s military arsenal” (Holiday, 2019, para. 7). It was difficult for Kennedy to maintain composure and sobriety, but he could do this; he offered a different way out of the situation (Loftus, 2014).
He held back his emotions and was not afraid for the reputation of his country. The lessons of the crisis remain relevant to this day because this unique historical event provides a practical example of teamwork with a strong leader who has a veto rule (Parshley, 2019). Kennedy, when most of the advisers were trying to curry favor or reacting emotionally, was able to endure the situation calmly.
Crisis Management
Kennedy had to become, for a time, a subtle psychologist in the fight against a possible nuclear war. When decision-making becomes the basis for a series of actions, brainstorming is required from many angles (Emmons, 2007). Criticizing an overbearing leader is not easy; people tend to smooth things over, especially if the same leader is in the same room and wants feedback. People do not want to cause antipathy and anger; these reactions of the human psyche are challenging to overcome, so leaders often go for tricks and negotiate with subordinates and advisers indirectly.
Kennedy acted subtly and expectantly, giving time to his rival, who was also in a state of excitement. He tried to think as he thought, perhaps Castro or Khrushchev. He understood that all the countries’ leaders are also emotionally strained by the existing situation (The New Yorker, 2020). Taking the side of the rival, Kennedy chose the right decision based on the logic and knowledge of the human psyche.
Exclusive Power of the President
Kennedy’s inexperience and some mistakes in his government heated the atmosphere. He suffered from feelings of guilt and regret and sometimes openly expressed this (Hansen, 2014; Sherwin, 2020). The CIA could influence Kennedy’s decisions; he considered these structures responsible and reliable. The danger of making decisions alone for the president is that his area of responsibility is too broad. One person, a priori, cannot decide for millions of other people since he (or she) cannot recognize their intentions and priorities (Suchlicki, 2020). Leadership balance is critical to the president’s reputation because no one wants to be blamed by the media as a weak-willed coward. A person who respects his team and knows how to cooperate with the group is a true leader since different people with different opinions are concentrated under his control.
Trump Situation
Recent events and Donald Trump’s politics in general (especially international) may indicate that Trump would not have been able to withstand such pressure and a severe crisis in Kennedy’s place. The display of composure is not combined with such a bright person (Martinez, 2021; Means, 2021). Trump loves to speak, brag, throw loud statements – do whatever will impress the public. The outcome of his presidency revealed Trump’s total irresponsibility (The Editors, 2021), and Biden faced this complicated problem. It would be challenging for him to show managerial courage and endurance. Trump is probably also not a subtle player who tries to think one step ahead of the opponent and take his side.
Nuclear War and Nuclear Weapons
The modern world is full of danger, which in most cases is caused by enormous competition. Iran, Pakistan, and India with nuclear development remind of themselves (Rothman, 2020), and North Korea with periodic surges and claims and ambitions on the territory and ideology of South Korea. Every year, there is a growing mistrust between countries, which threatens the violation or non-conclusion of the treaties that currently (and years before) regulate nuclear weapons use, development, and storage (Kolbert, 2020). At the moment, there is no great need for an increase in nuclear weapons for the whole world. The same applies to individual countries, in whatever environment they may be. The bulk of the money spent developing and storing nuclear weapons could benefit the medical and social spheres.
Conclusion
The Cuban Missile Crisis case demonstrates in detail the importance of staying calm in crises and following the principles of crisis management. As Kennedy rightly considered, the rival is also a person with the same aspirations, and a nuclear war will destroy everything that millions and billions of people have so diligently built. To show such strength of character, you must not be afraid to sacrifice your reputation, not be scared to be ridiculed. For the politicians of the modern world, this is not always possible due to a different prioritization and low willpower.
Works Cited
Bustin, Greg. “John F. Kennedy and Nikita Khrushchev End Cuban Missile Crisis.” Vistage Research Center. 2019. Web.
Emmons, Garry. “Encouraging Dissent in Decision-Making.” HBS Working Knowledge. 2007. Web.
Hansen, Morten T. “How John F. Kennedy Changed Decision Making for Us All.” Harvard Business Review. 2014. Web.
History.com Editors. “Cuban Missile Crisis.” HISTORY. 2021. Web.
Holiday, Ryan. “Leadership Lessons from the Cuban Missile Crisis.” Management Today. 2019. Web.
Kolbert, Elizabeth. “The Day Nuclear War Almost Broke Out.” The New Yorker. 2020. Web.
Loftus, Geoff. “JFK’s On-The-Brink Leadership Lessons.” Forbes. 2014. Web.
Martinez, Charlie, et al. “Donald Trump Is No Jack Kennedy. Or Khrushchev.” Defense One. 2021. Web.
Means, Grady. “Biden Brings the World Closer to Nuclear War.” TheHill. 2021. Web.
Parshley, Lois Farrow. “The 9 Most Important Lessons from the Cuban Missile Crisis.” Foreign Policy. 2019. Web.
Rothman, Joshua. “Waiting for World War III.” The New Yorker. 2012. Web.
Sherwin, Martin. “Inside JFK’s Decision-making During the Cuban Missile Crisis.” Time. 2020. Web.
Suchlicki, Jaime. “What We Learned from the Cuban Missile Crisis.” Cuban Studies Institute. 2020. Web.
The Editors. “Biden Must Take Immediate Action to Reduce the Risk of Nuclear War.” Scientific American. 2021. Web.
The New Yorker. “Sunday Reading: On the Precipice.” The New Yorker. 2020. Web.