Ap World History-Harman vs. Textbook: Nato, the Warsaw Pact, and the Un

598 Words3 Pages
The World Takes Sides: NATO, The Warsaw Pact, and the UN Trimester 3, 2013 During the Cold War, many countries took sides, and the result of this division was the creation of three very powerful groups. One of these groups was NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization) and another, its counterpart, was the Warsaw Pact. Both NATO and the Warsaw Pact included different countries and strove for different goals, and the way the authors of Traditions and Encounters (Bentley and Ziegler) and A People’s History of the World (Chris Harman) see the two groups, as well as the group that emerged later, the United Nations, is very different. In particular, Bentley and Ziegler focus on the creation of NATO and the Warsaw Pact as the beginning of the militarization of the Cold War as well as the United Nations’ positive contribution to the world, while Harman views NATO and the Warsaw Pact as heavily strategic alliances used in war, and sees the United Nations as being negative and oppressive. Bentley and Ziegler, authors of a history textbook, objectively tell us what NATO served to do—its expressed purpose and intent. “The creation of the U.S.-sponsored North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and the Soviet-controlled Warsaw Pact signaled the militarization of the cold war.” In addition, they state, “The intent of the alliance was to maintain peace in postwar Europe through collective defense,” (Bentley and Ziegler 1057) which indicates the belief that the creation of these two powers was not simply out of military advantage, but perhaps signaled something more, like peace. Harman, however, takes a different perspective, pointedly saying that the US “banned a massive range of ‘strategic’ exports…while…Russia insisted on ‘the unreserved subordination of politics, economics, and ideological activity’,” (Harman 546). Harman points out that military spending on both sides
Open Document