To What Extent Was the Nuclear Arms Race a Stabilising Factor in the Cold War Between 1949 and 1963?

1304 Words6 Pages
To a large extent the nuclear arms race was a stabilising factor in the Cold War but contained de-stabilising factors. The nuclear arms race was a key issue throughout the Cold War; each country believing that the one with more arms was more powerful. This meant that each country was creating larger and more dangerous bombs in order to stay technologically ahead of the other. Since both countries were able to catch up with each other, the nuclear arms race was stabilising for the Cold War. Also, both countries realised the devastating capability of the weapons and as a result did not use them. Furthermore, due to Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD), nuclear weapons were used as a deterrent and nothing more, thus stabilising the Cold War. Therefore, due to the fear of the consequences of arms race, and the fact that nuclear war did not occur, the nuclear arms race stabilised the Cold War between 1949 and 1963. Until 1949 the USA was at a clear advantage since the USSR had not successfully tested a nuclear bomb. However, moving into the 1950’s, when both countries each had enough power to destroy their enemy; for example both countries had developed the hydrogen bomb by the end of 1953. This meant that both countries held immense power and would be able to destroy each other, thus nuclear weaponry became a deterrent, which was known as Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD). MAD meant that if a country were to use nuclear weapons, the opposition would retaliate, thus destroying their enemy and themselves. An example of nuclear weapons being used as a deterrent can be seen in 1953 at the end of the Korean War wherein Eisenhower threatened to drop nuclear bombs in North Korea. This shows how nuclear weapons were used to create peace. Furthermore, MAD was unquestionably a stabilising factor within the Cold War because it relieved huge amounts of tension between countries
Open Document