The Modern World, Part Two: Global History since 1910 -- Week 5 Lecture Summary

This is my summary of Week 5 of the course "The Modern World, Part Two: Global History since 1910", which can be found here: https://www.coursera.org/learn/modern-world-2/home/week/5

Video 1: The Age of the Americans

1940s-mid 1950s. Starting 1898/1990, the US takes on an important role in shaping world history, but in the 1940s, the United States of America takes on a central role in shaping the course of world history. This happens when they decide to get involved in WWII following the fall of France. By 1954, the US has made the international decision that it was going to combat the global rise of communism, setting and defending frontiers in Asia and Europe. And domestically, the US outlawed segregation in schools (the Brown decision).

The phrase National Security comes into use in the 1940s-1950s. It is the notion that it takes the preparation of the whole state to preserve national security. The American Department of Defense is created (replacing the War Department), as well as the Air Force, the National Security Council, the CIA, the NSA. These institutions come into existence and are allocated extensive budgets.

The US becomes an international model of social democracy:

• Big business, big unions, and a big government intermediating
• International cooperation and free trade (taking on this traditionally British role)
• The domestic transformation in the US
• Integration of the South into the economy. Roosevelt's New Deal and the effects of the postwar era allow this to occur.
• Rise of the Golden West -- California. The state started growing mostly thanks to the defense industry. The population is mostly concentrated in Oregon, Washington, and California. Disneyland is built and LA grows.
• The systematic oppression of the Blacks begins to change in the 1940s in a second Reconstruction (the first being, I assume, after the Civil War). WWII made the US take a look at the discrimination happening domestically. It doesn't solve the problem but it begins to change it. A bus boycott for example initiated by Rosa Parks, where Blacks refused to sit in the back seats of buses reserved for Blacks.

Video 2: Choosing War in Korea

We will examine the start of the Korean War. Between 1949-1951 Europe and Asia are being organized into different social systems. This didn't necessarily mean war; the American military stayed out of East Asia (China) and Europe.

The world of 1949-51 as the Americans see it:

• The US envisions a polarized world. They're hoping the USSR and China will begin to disagree with each other
• Western Europe becomes increasingly empowered, on friendly political and trade terms with the US, with declining military support from the US
• Reconstructed Japan and China
• The North Atlantic Treaty, promising that the US would help Western Europe in case of war, is signed between Western Europe and the Americans in 1949
• An Asian treaty (an NSC document) that defines borders for Asia countries and a promise to protect them
• There's a domestic disagreement between how the national budget should be allocated: to defense or to domestic reconstruction. President Truman tends towards the latter, complacent because the Americans are the only ones in possession of the Atomic bomb. Even when, in 1949 the Soviets successfully detonate their own A-bomb. In the same year, China becomes Communist under Mao.

Mao and Stalin become tight. They have lots of Communist activity planned. They plan to get rid of the Chinese Nationalists in Taiwan (the US suspects this but decides not to act if it happens). They plan to help the "insurgents fighting the French in Indo-China."

The situation in Korea

Korea was a colony of Japan until 1910. After WWII, the victorious powers gave Korea back to Korean control. However they were still occupied by the Soviets in the North and the Americans in the south. Subsequently two rival republics are created in the respective regions: the Republic of Korea in the South (led by Rhee, National Conservative) and the Democratic Republic of Korea in the North (led by Kim Il Sung who served in the Soviet red army in WWII). There's tension between the two, obviously. The Americans decide to withdraw their forces from South Korea in 1948, leaving a small number of people advising the South Korean army. Kim Il Sun convinces Stalin to open war against South Korea. Notes from a meeting held by the two mentions that Stalin thinks that 1) China is now strong enough to aid Korea and 2) the success of the Chinese revolution has shown that Asians are strong and the Western allies (like the Americans) are weak (because they left the continent). Stalin also mentions that the American stance is not to interfere in Asia. He had spies in the British army so that may be how he knew. But some indications were also publicly available. Finally, he adds that China, led by Mao Tze Tong, would have to support North Korea for their efforts of conquering Korea to succeed.

Revolutionaries = people who start revolutions

Reactionaries = people who oppose these revolutions

Mao agrees to support the Korean revolution (in exchange for stuff) and North Korea attacks South Korea. The US, backed by the UN, decides to back South Korea! This is contrary to Stalin's expectations: the US had resolved in writing several times that they wouldn't defend South Korea. This is an example of axiomatic reasoning versus calculated reasoning. The calculated reasoning said don't attack. But the axiomatic reasoning, the gut reaction was to defend South Korea because it was like a replay of Hitler and 1939.

South Korea and the Americans barely hold on, but they do. This created a whole new war and it seemed like WWIII might be about to break out.

Video 3: Contemplating World War III

The circumstances in 1950 Korea made people recall WWII and fear that the local Korean war would be like WWII's war in Poland that escalated into world war.

In September 1950, the Americans turn the war and the North Korean resistance collapses. The French and Turkish and others help the North Korean effort.

Because the US was scarred from WWII and had learned that dictators must be dealt with harshly, they acted the same way in Korea, invading North Korea after they took back South Korea.

China and Russia have a choice to make. Stalin argues that the Chinese need to go to war against the US. Lots of communist leaders don't want a war; they want to focus on building the Chinese republic. Mao does want to go to war. It's easy to see how the Soviets could get pulled into this war and hey presto! WWIII. 

Stalin has a list of reasons for China to go to war, saying that the US would have to yield because they are not strong enough, and even if they did insist on waging war, the Communists would win.

Mao accepts this reasoning and goes to war with the US. He's willing to allocate millions of foot soldiers but the US + Allies should still seemingly win: they have a better airforce, navy, and better army technology. But the US and UN forces become scattered over the Chinese countryside and are unable to fight cohesively and effectively (marked crooked purple in the map below).

The Chinese are able to fight well and they do, in the cold of winter, at night.

Instead of being scattered, the Americans could have controlled the neck of the continent (straight line in the map above) but they were overconfident and didn't do this. Instead, they have to retreat.

By 1951, the Chinese have infiltrated North Korea and are making their way to South Korea. The US triples its defense budget, declares a national emergency and brings more American soldiers + allies to China. Ridgeway is the leading general. American combat forces manage to stabilize the line between South and North Korea. The war turns into years of trench warfare. There is lots of loss of lives. American combat forces are integrated.

Truman decides not to launch WWIII despite General MacArthur's insistance otherwise, and the former ends up firing the latter. People are initially scornful of the cowardly decision but end up being convinced it was the right thing to do.

Video 4: The Shadow of World War III

In the 1950s, Americans lived under the constant threat of the possibility of WWIII.

The dread of mobilization towards war hung in the air. In the picture below -- illustration of Charles Wilson, head of the Office of defense mobilization.

In 1950-1 the US decides they have to keep the events in Korea from replicating in Germany so they move their forces to Germany (and stay there for 40+ years). There was a definition of frontiers and a vigilance regarding these frontiers -- any violation could mean war. The cold war becomes real ("comes to Main Street") because of the war in China after being a political abstraction.

* A film instructing schoolchildren to duck and cover in case of an atomic bomb flash*

People made this film to save the lives of children at risk of really really scaring them. They fear an imminent nuclear war and hope that the film could prevent some percent of casualties. The film stresses that the atomic bomb could potentially come any time, anywhere, and this was the national atmosphere. This is a new level of insecurity for America, which used to believe it was sheltered by its oceans.

Video 5: The Nuclear Revolution

Initially only the Americans had the atom bomb (1945-9). Once the Soviets had a bomb, the Americans tried to put in place international controls over possession of atomic bombs (equivalent of 10-15 kilotons of TNT). They managed to control a-bombs but not fission bombs.

Heat, blast and radiation are the effects of the atomic bomb.

The American solution to not having a monopoly on the a-bomb was to create fission-fusion (rather than fusion) bombs = hydrogen bombs = h-bombs = "The Super", thermonuclear bombs. The H-bomb does the damage equivalent to a megaton of TNT -- x100 than the a-bomb. Also the H-bomb has a much higher destruction radius. This started in 1950s and the Soviets are a year or two behind. Subsequently, some Americans advocated increasing the defense budget to improve traditional military, because they no longer had the a-bomb trump card. This was argued in NSC 68. This only happened, however once the threat of war became real -- once the Americans opened war in China.

The Chinese and Soviets also had some nuclear-bomb-related considerations. Did they move too quickly with traditional warfare before they had enough nuclear weapons in their arsenal?

In the 1950s, Eisenhower's advisers tell him that the US has the upper hand thanks to the h-bomb. They consider waging a preventative war against the Soviets. He decides against it and opts for a strategy of containment and deterrance. He threatens nuclear war as a preventative measure.

Video 6: New Empires and Confederations

What is the power dynamic between world powers?

A lot of the world is still colonized.

There's the British commonwealth, its members including Canada and Australia.

In the 1800s we discussed relationships between the colonial rulers and colonial elites. Now, the structure remains the same but the colonial elites become more dominant than the rulers. Also, the locals have more autonomy.

There's an anti-Communist confederation led by the USA. A confederation is a number of states united by a league for common purposes, for action in relation to entities outside of them ("externals"). The participating states had a common identity and common interests, and were involved to great extent with each others' domestic politics.

Treaties and agreements:

• 1947 - The Rio Pact =.Treaty of Reciprocal Assistance
• 1949 - The North Atlantic Treaty which turned into an organisation spanning multinational military forces, with collaboration between all participating countries.
• The Warsaw Pact - an opposing pact led by the Soviet Union
• The Baghdad Pact - a British attempt to create a Middle Eastern alliance which failed because of anti-British sentiments in the region
• The Southeast Asia treaty organisation was gotten together in Manila, Philippines.

Conflicts happened between the interests of the Confederation and the British. In 1952 there's a nationalist military coup that overtakes the ruler that had been put in place by the Brits. The Brits see this as a threat to the canal and the British empire, but the Americans view this coup as potentially anti-Communist.

Iran is trying to gain independence. The Brits are interested in Iranian oil but nationalist Muhammad Mosaddegh wants the oil for the Iranians, so the Brits are opposed to him. Mosaddegh could be another anti-Communist ally, so the Confederation supports him. Another clash of interests. Eventually the interests of the British Empire win and Brits and the Americans cooperate on a coup to overthrow Mosaddegh. They reinstated the previous ruling family and Iran joined the Confederation for a while.

In the 1950s and 1960s Europe and Japan have a renaissance. Inter-European collaborative associations are formed: GATT, ECA, EPU. The ECSC (the European Coal and Steel Community, a collaboration between France and Germany to pool coal and steel resources, commodities which were at the very core of national military power in this era). NATO, the EEC.

In East Asia there's SCAP = Supreme Command of the Allied Powers. SCAP and Japan worked together on a new Japanese constitution, and the LDP = Liberal Democratic Party emerged as the ruling Japanese party. Trade agreements are put in place with other East Asian countries, and so the GDP of Japan grows at a great rate.

Why are so many collaborative institutions forming? Certainly part of the reason is WWII. No more dictators, no more extremist approaches. Instead: cooperation.

Stalin dies in 1953. Consequently the Americans+South Koreans seem to have the upper hand and the two sides agree to suspend hostilities. Old battle lines are frozen in place and a demilitarised zone that is still in place today! There are tensions there today!

In Geneva in 1954 there's an agreement that France would leave Vietnam and elections would be held. They never were and two Vietnams were formed: North Vietnam which was communist and the southern Republic of Vietnam.

New Communism

• In Western Europe there are still ardent communists but they're starting to become outsiders.
• Titoism in Yugoslavia. Tito puts in place an authoritarian capitalism/authoritarianism blend
• Soviet "modernism" - technologies that will launch the Soviet Union into modernity

Krushchev and Mao

Nikita Krushchev is the new leader of Communist USSR. Veteran communists are wondering whether the new leadership is as committed to the cause of global communism and overthrowing capitalism as the previous leadership was. He has high hopes for the economic state of the Soviet Union and keen to demonstrate his strength.

Mao feels that he and Krushchev ought to be on equal grounds in terms of Communist leadership and urges Kruschev to share nuclear technology with China so China can stand up to the US.

In 1956 Mao gives a secret speech at the International Communist Convention that becomes public where he spoke against Lenin, revealing the crimes that Lenin committed. Mao gave a response speech saying that Lenin had been mixed. Mao decides that he needs to part ways with Krushchev and enact a revolution inside China and in the way China handles itself in interactions with other countries.

In Hungary and Poland, Communist rulers try to take a different path like China did but end up waging war with the Soviet Union and getting reclaimed by it.

This is a lot of friction for communism and its followers.

Krushchev exiles (rather than shoots like Stalin) his dissenters.

The competition between Mao and Krushchev makes both of them more extremist.

Video 7: The Third World

The third world is a creation of the 1950s.

Suez and After

In 1956, members of the US-led anti-communist confederation must reconcile the conflict between imperial interests (interests of imperial members of the confederation) and confederation interests.

There's a new nationalist leader in Egypt, Nasser, who wants to take control of the Suez Canal. He forced the Brits out of Egypt. The Brits are against him and also the French, who think he is helping out the Algerian rebels (Algeria is a French colony).

The French and Brits collude with Israel and together they launch an attack on Egypt to take back the Suez Canal. The attack failed because the American government forced the French, Brits and Israelis to retreat by playing the "you need us financially" card. Thus it was made clear that America prioritizes anti-communist interests over imperial interests and France and Britain might need to make peace with decolonisation. Europe understood that it might need to develop a stronger inter-European identity, as well as a relationship with the US that was less friendly and dependent. Subsequently, the Soviet Union saw this conflict among Western powers as an opportunity to be more active in the Middle East.

The Third World is the countries that are aligned with neither Communism or Capitalism but rather their own brand of nationalism. The world powers viewed them as determining the future of the world, tipping the balance one of the two ways. They thought of these countries as objects, models of neocolonialism as well as grounds for experimental development. They idealised their inhabitants as authentic symbols of liberation. People were interested in the goings-on in the Third World.

There's a non-aligned movement comprising of Third World countries including Indonesia, India, even China joined the movement. These countries are contending with having been shaped by imperial rule and the struggle against it. There's this dichotomy. After 1945, countries all over the world undergo decolonisation. This comes with problems:

• Fragility: New states might be fragile. Small army, hyperconsciousness of fragility and the possible imminent downfall of the new state
• Independence: They're struggling to maintain independence and avoid collaborations and unifications
• Modernization: Catching up and getting out of poverty
• Finance: Where do the countries get money? Do the banks or the governments decide this?
• Key industries: What's the relationship between the government and key industries? Who controls them? Private people/foreigners/government?
• Land distribution
• Trade: Free or limited trade?
• Wages: Does the market set wages or are they controlled?
• Prices: ""
• Justice: How the court system will be run? What rights will the courts protect?

Approaches to modernisation

• The communist approach (Russia, China): the country controls everything
• Democratic socialism: the state would control key industries and finance but would allow scope for the market and industry to set terms
• Import-substitution industrialisation (ISI) (Brazil)
• The idea here is for countries to develop themselves by being more independent
• Increased trade barriers
• Low trade
• Increased local industry
• Reduced imports
• Export-oriented industrialisation (EOI) (Japan, South Korea)
• Barriers to import are high
• Accelerated trade
• Depressed wages (I guess so that goods can be manufactured more cheaply and then sold more cheaply). Sucks for workers. Applies to China today as well as Japan and SK then.
• Depress the value of the currency = low exchange rates. This as an incentive for foreign countries to buy more despite trade barriers
• Anti-communist powers forgave developing EOI countries because they were anti-communist allies
• Liberals
• Minimal governmental regulations
• Criticism: lack of regulations leads to preservation of social inequities.
• Old-fashioned predatory state
• Control the thing that makes money and grab a lot for themselves

Some 1950s Third World leaders: Kwame Nikrumah of Africa, Ho Chi Minh of North Vietnam, Premier Nassar of Egypt, Ferhat Abbas of Algieria, Tom Mboya of Kenya.

Mao Tze Tong is redistributing land from peasants to city folks and to the state in China just like Stalin in Soviet Ukraine. He is trying to industrialise rural areas and this caused a famine just like in the Ukraine in the 30s, costing 20-30 million lives.

In Indonesia, Sukarno is the president of a country torn apart by civil war.

When British India gained independence it was partitioned into two states: India and Pakistan, with Pakistan being a Muslim majority nation. Pakistan had several different faiths within it. Bangladesh later seceded from Pakistan in 1971.

Fidel Castro represented hope for Cuba, but after some time American became disillusioned with him as it became clear he was choosing a Communist model for rule.

All these Third World countries have varied problems with their newfound independence or just their nationalism.

What should their relationship be with foreign powers? The great powers have interests but the same goes for the less powerful third world countries.

Video 8: To the Brink

The world almost came to nuclear war between 1958-62 in the context of the Cold War. In 1957 the Soviets demonstrated their missile and space capabilities. Sputnik the Russian satellite was alarming to the Americans.

In 1958 the Iraqi leader is murdered and America is worried that the Soviets will meddle in the region. America puts troops in Lebanon in order to promote an anti-Communist presence. An additional 1958 crisis occurs between Communist China and the exiled Chinese government. Communist China wants nuclear weapons from Russia but Krushchev refuses, deepening the split. Berlin is divided, with East Berlin Communist. Krushchev wants to convert all of it to part of the Soviet Union.

Grand designs

• Mao has plans for rapid industrialisation. Tension with India
• Krushchev doesn't trust Mao enough to give him weapons, and also he wants to be the leader of the Communist movement => Sino-Soviet split
• Krushchev wants to reinvigorate the USSR and make his country appreciate him. He does this by:
• Increasing apparent missile power
• Cutting spending on conventional military
• Celebrating the Berlin victory
• Develop the Soviet economy and allow some cultural evolvement

The Soviets shoot down an American intelligence plane and the pilot, Gary Powers, is captured by the Russians. There's a diplomatic crisis.

Cuba becomes increasingly more Communist. In 1961 the Americans collaborate with Cuban exiles to put together a rebellion in Cuba but it fails and the Americans don't back them up.

Krushchev and Kennedy have a summit meeting. Kennedy's takeaway is that the conflict will soon escalate in Berlin. A wall is built between East and West Berlin. The American bluff that defends Berlin from the Russians is that they would open nuclear war if Russia attacked West Berlin.

"Act One" of the Nuclear Missile Crisis

The Americans realise that the soviets don't have as many nuclear missiles as they claim. Following this, the Soviet Union demonstrates explosions of 50+ megatons. In May 1962, Krushchev PLANS to deploy nuclear missiles and troops to defend Cuba. He wants to do this to checkmate the American bluff in Berlin, because now the Americans can get nuclear blasted easily and diminish the Western position in Berlin. Cuba allows this to happen and the Soviets begin moving into Cuba. Kennedy publicly announces that he'll tolerate conventional defensive aids but not offensive missiles that can reach the US. An American reconnaissance (intelligence) flight is sent over Cuba where the Americans see the nuclear missiles being prepared.

"Act Two" of the Nuclear Missile Crisis

What is Kennedy to do? Recordings show Kennedy's reasoning. He empathises with the Russians to understand them better. He points out that the Russian position is a great place to be because America's allies are unlikely to support an American attack against Cuba, especially if the Russians subsequently attacked Berlin.

Kennedy then analyzes American options. If they attack then they neutralise the option of an attack on America. On the other hand an attack would invite a reprisal from the Soviet Union, of them taking Berlin.

---Something about a blockade I don't understand---

It seems that Kennedy is stuck, but also that he has to act because if he doesn't Krushchev will enact his Berlin plan (not sure what this is. To invade Berlin? And then have the Americans paralysed because of the proximity of nuclear missiles?).

What he plans is a blockade and an ultimatum: get those missiles out or else. It becomes clear that the world is on the brink of nuclear war. The Americans hit the Russians with a diplomatic onslaught, rallying international support for their position and also they put in place a naval blockade around Cuba to keep more missiles from coming in.

"Act three"

It becomes clear to Moscow that they have to step down but they want to try to salvage some prestige. The Americans want to keep the situation dynamic so that they prevent a state of standoff, of permanent threat of missiles in Cuba. On Saturday, October 27, Castro is ready for war. The Soviets also. American surveillance flies over Cuba and an airplane is shot down. Castro writes a letter to the Russians saying that nuclear war is imminent. Alarmed that the situation is getting out of hand, Krushchev backs down. There's a settlement where the US agrees to get nuclear missiles out of Turkey in return for the missiles getting out of Cuba. But Cuba is angry and the deal falls apart.

Aftermath

The Americans and Soviets negotiate a way to get the missiles out without Cuban cooperation. It's also decided that they won't publicise the withdrawal of the Turkish missiles. The world is saved from WWIII. There's a sense that the arms race needs to be managed. The Berlin crisis is avoided: the Soviets no longer wants to invade West Berlin or change the status quo in Europe. Routine is achieved once more and we turn back to proxy battles in the third world.

Video 9: Wars of Containment

The third world meets the US-Soviet confrontation.

In Southeast Asia,  Communist North Vietnam is trying to help South Vietnam become Communist too. There are Communist-supported insurgencies in Malaysia and Indonesia, a lot of them prompted by Chinese immigrants to the region.

In the Middle East the superpowers are adopting proxies: Egypt and Syria are getting weapons from the Soviets and Saudi Arabia and Israel from the US. The UN-recognized borders of Israel are in yellow below, but Israel controls the region in red as well. Israel feels pressed in by Jordan and Egypt and Syria. Israel pre-emptively attacks forces that have gathered to attack them in 1967. Israel prevails and seizes control of the West Bank of the Jordan river, the Golan Heights, and Sinai.

Iran is ruled by the Shah and it's anti-Communist.

The Americans are looking for a centrist ruler in South America they can pin their hopes on and they set their sight on Belunde Terry, the 1965 president of Peru. America is very concerned with the future of third world countries, as evidenced by Time magazine covers. There are little proxy battles in Africa such as over the independence of the Democratic Republic of the Congo. The Nigerian state is also consolidated in the 60s.

The War in Vietnam

After the French are pushed out in the 50s, an election is supposed to be held but Vietnam ends up being divided into two states: North Vietnam (Communist; capital, Hanoi) and South Vietnam (Ruled by Ngo Dinh Diem; strings pulled by Le Duan; capital formerly Saigon, today Ho Chi Minh City). In 1959 North Vietnam decides to funnel military supplies to South Vietnam, but then they send in troops to overthrow the government there.

The Ho Chi Minh trail + Cambodia are used to funnel arms and troops from North to South Vietnam.

The US decides to give military supplies to South Vietnam. The Chinese give the North supplies and the war intensifies. Diem is competent and capable and the Americans hinge their hopes on him. The Vietnamese, however, don't love him, especially the Buddhist Vietnamese. The Americans have a choice to make. How do they handle the situation? They are hesitant to do nothing because that would communicate to the Communists that they are pulling out of the third world power proxy game. So they decide to do something [both the American and Vietnamese governments have internal disagreements as to what should be done] and they help South Vietnam overthrow Diem and he is killed by Vietnamese coup plotters.

[A Kennedy recording from November 4, 1963, describing the internal disagreements in the White House. Kennedy expresses regret about how communications regarding the coup were handled]

[A Lyndon Johnson recording from 1964. He's on the phone with Richard Russell, Johnson's mentor and Chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee. Russell and Johnson agree it's a huge mess and they don't see a way out of a war with the Chinese. The Vietnamese don't seem to help themselves. Fighting a war would mean lots of American lives lost and a war with China. They debate pulling out.]

Johnson stalls on a decision but decides that fighting communism is important and by 1968 over 500k American troops are deployed to Vietnam. Hundreds die weekly. Bombs are dropped in Indo-China. The Americans stay in South Vietnam and avoid going into North Vietnam because of the Chinese stationed there and the threat that an American invasion would mean war. The American will break first.

The Vietnam war created a split in the US and in Southeast Asia. In Southeast Asia there's a polarised communist vs. anti-communist movement. In Indonesia, the Communists are overthrown to create a right-wing dictatorship. There's a cultural revolution in China, too.

All over the world, there are demonstrations protesting the American involvement in the war.