Recent Research on Cold
War Studies
Dr Eirini Karamouzi
Teaching History at post-16 and beyond Conference
Tuesday, 16 June 2015
Cold War Studies
1) Why Study the Cold War?
2) Old and New Historiography
3) Five paradigms: Ideology; Politics and Economics;
Technology and Arms Race; Culture and Propaganda;
Human Rights;
4) Primary Sources
5) Questions
Why Study the Cold War?
 25 years after the end of the Cold war, we stand a precise moment when
scholarship and sources are coming together
 What impact did the Cold War have? Did the Cold War define the post
war period?
 What was the Cold War? Is there a definitive history of the Cold War?
Historisation of the Cold War
 25th anniversary and talk about a new Cold War (Edward Lucas) has
galvanized the literature: more emphasis on the World that the Cold
War made
 GOAL is to offer out students factual grounding and conceptual
apparatus necessary to understand the contemporary world
The Old Historiography
Orthodox: Those who blamed Soviet aggression
(Arthur Schlesinger)
Revisionist: Those who blamed US expansionism
(William Appleman Williams)
Post-Revisionist (or Realist): Those who focus on concepts of
national interest ; no assignment of blame
(John Lewis Gaddis I)
Neo-Orthodox: Those who return to Stalin’s culpability
(Gaddis II, of We Now Know)
The New Historiography: Multi-archival,
multipolar (analytical frameworks), multilevel
(crossroads of national, transnational and global
perspectives)
Material factors vs. ideal concepts
‘Young’ Gaddis vs. Westad
Authoritarian rule vs. US global power
‘Late’ Gaddis vs. Anders Stephanson
Europe vs. the Third World
Federico Romero vs. Michael Latham
Major Publications
Cambridge History of the Cold War :3 volumes
The Routledge History of the Cold War
Two journals dedicated on the Cold War:
Cold War History, LSE:
http://www.tandfonline.com/toc/fcwh20/current
Journal of Cold War Studies, Harvard:
http://www.mitpressjournals.org/loi/jcws
What is new about Cold War history in the last decade?
the pervasiveness of the Cold War has often been used as an
argument for studying it on its own terms; the bipolar
system and its dynamics dominated all the nooks and
crannies of the societies involves. But its very pervasiveness
means that it was also permeable and subject to a myriad of
influences and transformative trends.
The only dangerous form of observation is the idea that
the part being observed is the only constituent part of the
whole
Odd Arne Westad (LSE): proponent of intellectual and
methodological pluralism
New Cold War History
BUT with such a pluralistic approach: how do we untangle the
Cold from all the other strands of 20th century history; what was
distinctive about this period? Otherwise we may dilute its
importance and obscure the centrality of many other factors both
in the domestic and international realms ;decentring the field
from diplomatic and military realm Cold War risks of losing its
War character
One or many Cold War Histories? Cold War affected different
groups in a multiplicity of ways, based on location and
temporality;
New Cold War History
Also do we need to ‘take off the Cold War lenses” especially in
the case of the Third World or even postwar Europe?
Major theme the importance of a Global Cold War: major
advanced on Latin America studies, Africa, Southeast Asia
A focus on Europe: Walter LaFeber observed in his classic
America, Russia and the Cold War ‘He controls all of
Europe is well on his way towards controlling the whole
world’. HOWEVER instead of an object of superpower
politics, more importance attached to European actors in
transforming the international arena
Federico Romero Cold War Historiography
at the Crossroads, Cold War History, 14:4
(2014), 685-702
How is the Cold War understood in an expanding and diversifying
historiographical field? Conceptual precision and specificity seem
to be giving way to a looser understanding of the Cold War as an
era that encompassed different although interconnected conflicts
and transformations. Some scholars ask for specificity and
consistency while current centrifugal trends point to multiple
approaches and centres of interest. Diversity is galvanising the
field, but historians need to (re)define their object of inquiry and
strive for at least a minimum of conceptual clarity. In particular, we
should aim at a broad cultural understanding of the Cold War,
contextualise it in larger processes of historical change without
confusing the two dimensions, and reassess relations between
Europe and other Cold War contexts.
A. Ideology as a Modernization
Project
Engerman: Russia’s 1917 October revolutions triggered
confrontation between USA and SU: Became global in the
40s
A battle of ideas: American liberalism vs Soviet Communism
Both ideologies progressive, universalistic and
deterministic/messianistic; both presented as projects on
modernity seeking to supplant moribund European traditions
B. Politics and Economics
ECSC, 1950
Treaty of Rome (EEC), 1957
NATO, 1949
Politics and Economics
Cold War and European Integration: interaction evolution of the
Cold War and the gradual development of today’s European
Union (EU) was so intimate as to make it vital for historians to
break down the barriers between the two fields.
Early EEC; Maastricht/German Unification; enlargements
For example, geopolitical Cold War reasons
explain Greek entry to the EEC:
C. Technology and Arms Race
Technology and Arms
Race
•
Nuclear weapons essential about the cold war,
distinguishes it fundamentally from other conflicts. A
Cold War without nuclear weapons seems unthinkable
•
BUT Fear of nuclear annihilation made the Cold War
‘over the long pull’: defeat capitalism or communism
by means of peaceful competition: culturetechnological innovation, consumer satisfaction
Technology and Arms Race
Westad: Technology was the epitome of the two modernist USA and
Soviet ideologies and the systems they represented: attempts at simplifying
and conquering a complex world
How did technology contribute to the many weapons with which the Cold
War was fought?
Crucial areas of technology that were opened up though defence related
funding include navigation systems, space exploration, and even genetics
MOST IMPORTANT: Funding in electronics and communications- the
most important areas of technology that contributed to global changes and
the way the conflict ended
Reynolds: the technologies that have shaped the late 20th c, though derived
from CW science, are emphatically the products of capitalism , not
communism ( computer, transistors)
C. Cultural and Propaganda
C. Cultural and Propaganda
Despite two superpower domination: the implementation of cultural
policies neither monolithic nor uniformly successful. local factor
important; a process of cultural adaptation and rejection on both sides
of the Iron Curtain
Cold War privileged Cultural relations in an unprecedented degree:
The repressive side of cold war culture, although significant, should
not obscure how the Cold War also helped secure progressive and
inclusive reforms.
Importance of popular culture; but bear in mind the cultural version of
Cold War triumphalism in historiography: Americanization: Mainly
used for the period after 1945-USA by virtue of technological-militaryindustrial prowess and Cold War dynamics abandon isolationism, engage
in western Europe reconstruction
D. Human Rights
Akira Iriye: The Human Rights Revolution (Oxford, 2012)
Since 1945, the human rights have been defined and
redefined according to political needs, moral imperatives, and
local contexts’.
Role of Human Rights in ending the Cold war: Snyder and
Thomas show how the ‘Helsinki process’ facilitated the rise
of organized dissent in Eastern Europe and pressures for
human rights reforms in the Soviet Union; NOT
containment won the Cold War BUT efforts of activists,
lawyers, minority-right advocates across the borders that set
the stage for the political earthquakes that followed.
Primary Resources
Hanhimanki/Westad: The Cold War: A History in Documents
and Eyewitness Accounts ( Oxford University Press, 2013)
Judge, Edward & Langdon, John (eds.), The Cold War: A Global
History with Documents, Pearson, 2010
Jane Degras, Soviet Documents on Foreign Policy, Oxford University
press, Royal Institute of International Affairs, 1953
Primary Sources
a) The National Archives: Cabinet Papers, 1915-1986
http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/cabinetpapers/
b) Foreign Relations of the United States ( NOW all digitalised)
The Foreign Relations of the United States (FRUS) series presents the
official documentary historical record of major U.S. foreign policy
decisions and significant diplomatic activity
https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments
c) The US Presidential Libraries hold a wealth of documents
Primary Sources
d) Wilson Center, Digital Archive
The Digital Archive contains once-secret documents from governments ( and
especially the Soviet Union) all across the globe, uncovering new sources and
providing fresh insights into the history of international relations and diplomacy. It
collects the research of two Wilson Center projects which focus on the interrelated
histories of the Cold War, and Nuclear Proliferation. The third link points to
publications based on these declassified documents
http://digitalarchive.wilsoncenter.org/theme/cold-war-history
http://digitalarchive.wilsoncenter.org/theme/nuclear-history
http://www.wilsoncenter.org/programpublications/Cold%20War%20International%20History%20Project
Primary Sources
CVCE: The research infrastructure on European Integration
http://www.cvce.eu/en/hom
Kings College London: Oral History Witness Seminars:
http://www.kcl.ac.uk/sspp/departments/icbh/witness/Online
Archive.aspx
British Cartoon Archives holds collections by over three
hundred cartoonists
http://www.cartoons.ac.uk/collections-bca
Reviews
If you are interested in reviews of major works on Cold War
or roundtables, the h-diplo is the best sources which is part of
the h- net: H-Net Reviews in the Humanities and Social
Sciences an online scholarly review resource.
https://networks.h-net.org/h-diplo
Questions?
Thank you