The Changing Faces of the Soviet Bloc
The Cold War brought a new bipolar system of alliances to the world upon the close of World War Two. The Soviet Union gained the control of many of the eastern parts of Europe, and enshrouded them in communism. These countries became dependent on the USSR and started with a mutual acceptance of Soviet control. This view changed over the next forty years of the Cold War, ultimately culminating in satellite countries wanting to leave the Warsaw pact. The Soviet Union began this series of alliances with almost complete control in some of the countries. As historians Joel Palmer and R.R. Colton say, even when the communists (directly influenced by Moscow) had to share control in a country, they still "held key ministries of interior, propaganda, and justice, and controlled the police, the army, and the courts" (850). These countries became dependent on the Soviet Union for agricultural reform, rebuilding after World War Two, and for leadership. As Louis J. Halle says, the Soviets did "everything they could" to keep control over these countries that would later become the Soviet bloc. The replacement of International Communism, Comimform, helped to tie the Soviet Union to the smaller countries, causing, as Halle says, a stron
nment controlled completely by Communists with very strong ties to Moscow (440). The same type of event, while not quite as dramatic, happened in the satellite nations across Western Europe, including Hungary, Rumania, Bulgaria, and Albania. All came out with the same result: a government with extremely strong ties to the Soviet Union. Relations within the Communist bloc from that point on were almost non-existent. Workers revolt were very common and the bloc deteriorated to the breaking point in 1989 when it all fell apart. In Poland, workers held strikes following price increases without wage increases in December of 1970. The strikes were partly because Poland was "being drawn toward the booming Western economies" according to LaFeber, but could not enter them (267) The responses to these strikes by Brezhnev set a horrible precedence. The USSR responded with military force to put down the strikes. By 1980 in many of the Eastern European nations, the workers demanded higher wages and better working conditions. As Urquhart says, these demands were not met, and this "continued to erode the relations to almost nothing" (56). This downturn of relations was emphasized by the Soviet Union's new type of colonialism. As historian Brian Urquhart says, the shift of the USSR's attention toward the newly developing nations of the world left the superpower spread out (17). Halle calls it "overextended" in both domestic and foreign arenas (227). By the mid-1950's, the Soviet Union had turned to developing nations in Southeast Asia, Africa, and the Caribbean as possible spots for communism to grow. Khrushchev expended much effort there, and, ended up with the resources of his country spread out. As Urquhart says, this spread of resources meant that the countries in Eastern Europe were not getting the attention and support they wanted, and the re
Some common words found in the essay are:
Soviet Union, Relations Communist, Zorin Prague, Leonid Brezhnev, Eastern Europe, Colton Palmer, Eastern European, RR Colton, Cold War, Brian Urquhart, soviet union, cold war, eastern europe, soviet leadership, satellite countries, colton palmer, eastern european nations, russian bloc, warsaw pact, leadership world, relations soviet, relationship soviet union, union satellite countries, soviet union satellite, relations soviet union,
Approximate Word count = 1255
Approximate Pages = 5 (250 words per page double spaced)
|
