One of the major causes of tension was the Berlin blockade which caused an accelerated involvement of the US in Europe. The US disagreed with many of the SU’s political ideologies and decisions like its control over Poland. Also, Britain sided with the US and backed Iran in its struggle to be independent of the SU. There were several other problems concerning the Soviet Union’s pursuit of power; namely its conquests in Turkey, Greece and Korea. These heightened the US’s fear of communism and continued to radically change its foreign policy to deal with this threat.
Why was the war not over by Christmas 1914? There are many factors as to why the war was not over by Christmas 1914, a war that was supposed to be of quick movement, perhaps with one or two big battles. One of these factors was the failure of the Schlieffen Plan. More than anyone, Germany assumed they would get a quick victory by a strategy known as the Schlieffen Plan. It involved Germany defeating France rapidly and then turning to the eastern front for a major offensive on Russia.
Despite Hitler’s wealth of well put together weaponry, well trained and seemingly invincible army and a seemingly tactical mind-set (which made him at first so fearful and successful) he eventually made some vital errors which led to the Nazi demise. One of the key mistakes Hitler made, which allowed Russia to defeat them, is that of his overambitious stretching of the army. Whilst it was a strong army it couldn’t handle being attacked/ attacking both Britain and Russia as its resources became so overstretched that the army officers became ill-equipped and unable to fight effectively, in addition the easing of pressure from Britain also enabled the British to recover from The Battle of Britain and became a much stronger ally to the Russians in later years. The second mistakes the Germans made, which again made the Russians stronger and enabled their victory over the Germans, was the way in which they chose to attack Russia. By embarking on their attack in mid-1941 the Germans left little time to cross Russia’s vast land and reach their intended targets before the bitter winters set
Alexander’s Empire was even more evanescent, however, because his military victories were never followed by effective planning for the inevitable transition from battlefield to administering law and order. Often, as was the case for the U.S., a state rises to primacy through events that were not fully planned by its leaders. Throughout the 19th century, Americans assumed that the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans provided an impassible barrier to any enemy attacks, permitting a foreign policy of “no entangling alliances.” Our war with Spain concerned threats on the North American continent rather than the European balance of power. American entry in the First World War, while hotly opposed by some, was seen by Woodrow Wilson as a way to “Make the World Safe for Democracy” – i.e., to preserve political principles favorable to our trade and economic interests – not to embark on a permanent role in European power politics. When Hitler’s rise to power and military conquests of Czechoslovakia and France renewed the threat of German hegemony in Europe, strong feelings – symbolized by the “America First” movement
There were two views on the Tsarism regime, the Liberal theory where they believed things were getting better and the regime could have survived and the Marxist theory where they believed the Tsarist regime was outdated and could no longer work and the masses would rise up. Although these two views were debated amongst the people of Russia it was not what made the revolution inevitable, different factors such as the war, food shortages, working conditions, etc.... are what mad the revolution inevitable as they showed the Tsar’s weaknesses and made him vulnerable. The main reasons why it was inevitable that Russia would face a revolution in 1917 was the War. This was one of the main reasons as the Tsar was over ambitious once he got to the Front, he thought they could win the war which meant pro-longing the suffering back in Russia, as the people thought the war was dragging on and that they were unlikely to win, therefore even more soldiers would die leaving the women and children without husbands, fathers or brothers. This made the people more frustrated with the Tsar as 10 million soldiers had already died, therefore they did not want the suffering to go on longer if they were not going to win.
The British Indian Empire was declared as a belligerent against the Axis powers by the United Kingdom without consulting prominent Indian leaders. Several leaders of the Indian independence movement, including Mahatma Gandhi, expressed strong opposition against Nazism and Fascism but termed Britain's "war to save democracy" as hypocrisy since it was denying democratic rights and individual liberties to Indians. The British, under Churchill, were critical of the Indians, with Churchill at moments describing them as “vile creatures”. Churchill did not want to offer them anything. In 1942, Sir Stafford Cripps on his first mission to India made on behalf of the British Government his offer of independence after the war in exchange for cooperation, but the Indian political parties rejected his proposals.
After the Second World War had ended, large parts of the world were divided among the Allied victors, (called the spheres of influence.) America retained influence over the Western Hemisphere, and a large majority of the Eastern European and Asian Hemispheres were relinquished as the Soviet Union’s. This clash of hemispheres brought much attention to Europe and Asia at the time, due to the heavy drive for the Sino-Soviet communists to expand, and America to repress that expansionism. But, for those highly publicized decades, there are hardly any reports of the influence of the cold war over the Middle East. While Russia sought to expand gradually through the world, Afghanistan until the late 1970’s was the last of the Soviet’s worries.
Ideological concern shaped the development of Cold War because the two Superpowers’ ideology was the total opposite sides of the coins. Each of their policies such as economic and domestic policies contradicts each other, added with the bipolar assumption and zero-sum perception of the world; it seemed to them that it would be impossible for the two superpowers to coexist together. USA had a misperception about USSR that they practice the monolithic expansionistic ideology, thus stating that every country that were to turn or had a communist revolution must have started off by the incentive of the USSR. One very famous and obvious example is the Greece Crisis, where USSR was not involved at all but was accused to giving aid to the communists in Greece. Another distinct event where their difference in ideology was clearly shown was during the Yalta Conference where the party declined strictly to have their say accepted about the liberal of the Eastern Europe.
The absence of a real leader, any political overthrow and a change from autocracy to democracy is the key reasons i believe that there was not in fact a revolution, however a cluster of spontaneous uprisings, at unplanned instances for the most part. To begin, I believe the first reason why the 1905 revolution failed was due to the concessions made by Nicholas II. In October 1905, Tsar Nicholas II released a manifesto, alongside the consultation of Sergei Witte. This manifesto entitled the Russian civilians to more human rights, and the ability to vote in the Duma, a legislative body for the people to vote on. This manifesto was issued before the revolters could gain any real momentum and being a coup d'etat.
' Colonial Secretary Joseph Chamberlain, heavily effected by the teachings of JR Seely, feared Britain would be eclipsed as a great power by the USA and Russia 'unless the resources of the British Isles could be buttressed by those of the British Empire. ' Doubts were raised about the continuation of this now precariously placed empire and 'no event was more responsible for raising doubts about the nation's future than the South African War. ' The longevity and events of the war signified a crisis of British imperialism and in this essay I will attempt to detail why this was the case. Internationally, in the lead up to the war, there was an 'intensified struggle for markets and spheres of influence...this signalled a significant resructuring in the global economy that carried troubling implications for Britain. ' Other countries had undergone rapid development and were now forcing there way onto the world stage.