To install click the Add extension button. That's it.

The source code for the WIKI 2 extension is being checked by specialists of the Mozilla Foundation, Google, and Apple. You could also do it yourself at any point in time.

4,5
Kelly Slayton
Congratulations on this excellent venture… what a great idea!
Alexander Grigorievskiy
I use WIKI 2 every day and almost forgot how the original Wikipedia looks like.
Live Statistics
English Articles
Improved in 24 Hours
Added in 24 Hours
What we do. Every page goes through several hundred of perfecting techniques; in live mode. Quite the same Wikipedia. Just better.
.
Leo
Newton
Brights
Milds

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Baruch Plan was a proposal by the United States government, written largely by Bernard Baruch but based on the Acheson–Lilienthal Report, to the United Nations Atomic Energy Commission (UNAEC) during its first meeting in June 1946. The United States, Great Britain and Canada called for an international organization to regulate atomic energy and President Truman responded by asking Undersecretary of State Dean Acheson and David E. Lilienthal to draw up a plan. Baruch's version of the proposal was rejected by the Soviet Union, who feared the plan would preserve the American nuclear monopoly. Its collapse led to the beginning of the Cold War arms race.

YouTube Encyclopedic

  • 1/3
    Views:
    2 973 489
    1 593
    1 249
  • ✪ The Cold War: Crash Course US History #37
  • ✪ The Destruction of Al Aqsa (A Must See) Understanding the Link Between Our HIstory With Bani Israel
  • ✪ NO ESCAPING JUDGMENT, TRIBULATION, DAY OF THE LORD, NUCLEAR FIRE! pt 2

Transcription

Hi I’m John Green; this is Crash Course U.S. history and today we’re gonna talk about the Cold War. The Cold War is called “Cold” because it supposedly never heated up into actual armed conflict, which means, you know, that it wasn’t a war. Mr. Green, Mr. Green, but if the War on Christmas is a war and the War on Drugs is a war… You’re not going to hear me say this often in your life, Me from the Past, but that was a good point. At least the Cold War was not an attempt to make war on a noun, which almost never works, because nouns are so resilient. And to be fair, the Cold War did involve quite a lot of actual war, from Korea to Afghanistan, as the world’s two superpowers, the United States and the U.S.S.R., sought ideological and strategic influence throughout the world. So perhaps it’s best to think of the Cold War as an era, lasting roughly from 1945 to 1990. Discussions of the Cold War tend to center on international and political history and those are very important, which is why we’ve talked about them in the past. This, however, is United States history, so let us heroically gaze--as Americans so often do--at our own navel. (Libertage.) Stan, why did you turn the globe to the Green Parts of Not-America? I mean, I guess to be fair, we were a little bit obsessed with this guy. So, the Cold War gave us great spy novels, independence movements, an arms race, cool movies like Dr. Strangelove and War Games, one of the most evil mustaches in history. But it also gave us a growing awareness that the greatest existential threat to human beings is ourselves. It changed the way we imagine the world and humanity’s role in it. In his Nobel Prize Acceptance Speech, William Faulkner famously said, “Our tragedy today is a general and universal physical fear so long sustained by now that we can even bear it. There are no longer problems of the spirit. There is only the question: When will I be blown up?” So, today we’re gonna look at how that came to be the dominant question of human existence, and whether we can ever get past it. intro So after WWII the U.S. and the USSR were the only two nations with any power left. The United States was a lot stronger – we had atomic weapons, for starters, and also the Soviets had lost 20 million people in the war and they were led by a sociopathic mustachioed Joseph Stalin. But the U.S. still had worries: we needed a strong, free-market-oriented Europe (and to a lesser extent Asia) so that all the goods we were making could find happy homes. The Soviets, meanwhile, were concerned with something more immediate, a powerful Germany invading them. Again. Germany--and please do not take this personally, Germans--was very, very slow to learn the central lesson of world history: Do not invade Russia. Unless you’re the Mongols. (Mongoltage.) So at the end of World War II, the USSR “encouraged” the creation of pro-communist governments in Bulgaria, Romania, and Poland--which was a relatively easy thing to encourage, because those nations were occupied by Soviet troops. The idea for the Soviets was to create a communist buffer between them and Germany, but to the U.S. it looked like communism might just keep expanding, and that would be really bad for us, because who would buy all of our sweet, sweet industrial goods? So America responded with the policy of containment, as introduced in diplomat George F. Kennan’s famous Long Telegram. Communism could stay where it was, but it would not be allowed to spread. And ultimately this is why we fought very real wars in both Korea and Vietnam. As a government report from 1950 put it the goals of containment were: 1. Block further expansion of Soviet power 2. Expose the falsities of soviet pretensions 3. Induce a retraction of the Kremlin’s control and influence, and 4. In general, foster the seeds of destruction within the Soviet system. Harry Truman, who as you’ll recall, became President in 1945 after Franklin Delano Prez 4 Life Roosevelt died, was a big fan of containment, and the first real test of it came in Greece and Turkey in 1947. This was a very strategically valuable region because it was near the Middle East, and I don’t know if you’ve noticed this, but the United States has been just, like, a smidge interested in the Middle East the last several decades because of oil glorious oil. Right, so Truman announced the so-called Truman Doctrine, because you know why not name a doctrine after yourself, in which he pledged to support “freedom-loving peoples” against communist threats, which is all fine and good. But who will protect us against “peoples,” the pluralization of an already plural noun? Anyway, we eventually sent $400 million in aid to Greece and Turkey, and we were off to the Cold War races. The Truman Doctrine created the language through which Americans would view the world with America as free and communists as tyrannical. According to our old friend Eric Foner, “The speech set a precedent for American assistance to anticommunist regimes throughout the world, no matter how undemocratic, and for the creation of a set of global military alliances directed against the Soviet Union.”[1] It also led to the creation of a new security apparatus – the National Security Council, the Central Intelligence Agency, the Atomic Energy Commission, all of which were somewhat immune from government oversight and definitely not democratically elected. And the containment policy and the Truman Doctrine also laid the foundations for a military build-up – an arms race – which would become a key feature of the Cold War. But it wasn’t all about the military, at least at first. Like, the Marshall Plan was first introduced at Harvard’s Commencement address in June 1947 by, get this, George Marshall, in what turned out to be, like, the second most important commencement address in all of American history. Yes, yes, Stan, okay. It was a great speech, thank you for noticing. Alright, let’s go to the Thought Bubble. The Marshall Plan was a response to economic chaos in Europe brought on by a particularly harsh winter that strengthened support for communism in France and Italy. The plan sought to use US Aid to combat the economic instability that provided fertile fields for communism. As Marshall said “ our policy is not directed against any country or doctrine, but against hunger, poverty, desperation and chaos.” [2] Basically it was a New Deal for Europe, and it worked; Western Europe was rebuilt so that by 1950 production levels in industry had eclipsed pre-war levels and Europe was on its way to becoming a U.S. style-capitalist-mass-consumer society. Which it still is, kind of. Japan, although not technically part of the Marshall Plan, was also rebuilt. General Douglas MacArthur was basically the dictator there, forcing Japan to adopt a new constitution, giving women the vote, and pledging that Japan would foreswear war, in exchange for which the United States effectively became Japan’s defense force. This allowed Japan to spend its money on other things, like industry, which worked out really well for them. Meanwhile Germany was experiencing the first Berlin crisis. At the end of the war, Germany was divided into East and West, and even though the capital, Berlin, was entirely in the east, it was also divided into east and west. This meant that West Berlin was dependent on shipments of goods from West Germany through East Germany. And then, in 1948, Stalin cut off the roads to West Berlin. So, the Americans responded with an 11-month-long airlift of supplies that eventually led to Stalin lifting the blockade in 1948 and building the Berlin Wall, which stood until 1991, when Kool Aid Guy--no, wait, wait, wait, wait, that wasn’t when the Berlin Wall was built. That was in 1961. I just wanted to give Thought Bubble the opportunity to make that joke. Thanks, Thought Bubble. So right, the Wall wasn’t built until 1961, but 1949 did see Germany officially split into two nations, and also the Soviets detonated their first atomic bomb, and NATO was established, AND the Chinese Revolution ended in communist victory. So, by the end of 1950, the contours of the Cold War had been established, West versus East, Capitalist Freedom versus Communist totalitarianism. At least from where I’m sitting. Although now apparently I’m going to change where I’m sitting because it’s time for the Mystery Document. The rules here are simple. I guess the author of the Mystery Document and about 55% of the time I get shocked by the shock pen. “We must organize and enlist the energies and resources of the free world in a positive program for peace which will frustrate the Kremlin design for world domination by creating a situation in the free world to which the Kremlin will be compelled to adjust. Without such a cooperative effort, led by the United States, we will have to make gradual withdrawals under pressure until we discover one day that we have sacrificed positions of vital interest. It is imperative that this trend be reversed by a much more rapid and concerted build-up of the actual strength of both the United States and the other nations of the free world.” I mean all I can say about it is that it sounds American and, like, it was written in, like, 1951 and it seems kind of like a policy paper or something really boring so I...I mean... Yeah, I’m just going to have to take the shock. AH! National Security Council report NSC-68? Are you kidding me, Stan? Not-not 64? Or 81? 68? This is ridiculous! I call injustice. Anyway, as the apparently wildly famous NSC-68 shows, the U.S. government cast the Cold War as a rather epic struggle between freedom and tyranny, and that led to remarkable political consensus--both democrats and republicans supported most aspects of cold war policy, especially the military build-up part. Now, of course, there were some critics, like Walter Lippmann who worried that casting foreign policy in such stark ideological terms would result in the U.S. getting on the wrong side of many conflicts, especially as former colonies sought to remove the bonds of empire and become independent nations. But yeah, no, nothing like that ever happened. Yeah, I mean, it’s not like that happened in Iran or Nicaragua or Argentina or Brazil or Guatemala or Stan are you really going to make me list all of them? Fine. Or Haiti or Paraguay or the Philippines or Chile or Iraq or Indonesia or Zaire or, I’m sorry, THERE WERE A LOT OF THEM, OKAY? But these interventions were viewed as necessary to prevent the spread of communism, which was genuinely terrifying to people and it’s important to understand that. Like, national security agencies pushed Hollywood to produce anticommunist movies like “The Red Menace,” which scared people. And the CIA funded magazines, news broadcasts, concerts, art exhibitions, that gave examples of American freedom. It even supported painters like Jackson Pollack and the Museum of Modern Art in New York because American expressionism was the vanguard of artistic freedom and the exact opposite of Soviet socialist realism. I mean, have you seen Soviet paintings? Look at the hearty ankles on these socialist comrade peasants. Also because the Soviets were atheists, at least in theory, Congress in 1954 added the words “under God” to the pledge of allegiance as a sign of America’s resistance to communism. The Cold War also shaped domestic policy--anti-communist sentiment, for instance, prevented Truman from extending the social policies of the New Deal. The program that he dubbed the Fair Deal would have increased the minimum wage, extended national health insurance and increased public housing, Social Security and aid to education. But the American Medical Association lobbied against Truman’s plan for national health insurance by calling it “socialized” medicine, and Congress was in no mood to pay money for socialized anything. That problem goes away. But the government did make some domestic investments as a result of the Cold War--in the name of national security the government spent money on education, research in science, technology like computers, and transportation infrastructure. In fact we largely have the Cold War to thank for our marvelous interstate highway system, although part of the reason Congress approved it was to set up speedy evacuation routes in the event of nuclear war. And, speaking of nuclear war, it’s worth noting that a big part of the reason the Soviets were able to develop nuclear weapons so quickly was thanks to espionage, like for instance by physicist and spy Klaus Fuchs. I think I’m pronouncing that right. Fuchs worked on the Manhattan Project and leaked information to the Soviets and then later helped the Chinese to build their first bomb. Julius Rosenberg also gave atomic secrets to the Soviets, and was eventually executed--as was his less-clearly-guilty wife, Ethel. And it’s important to remember all that when thinking about the United States’s obsessive fear that there were communists in our midst. This began in 1947 with Truman’s Loyalty Review System, which required government employees to prove their patriotism when accused of disloyalty. How do you prove your loyalty? Rat out your co-workers as communists. No seriously though, that program never found any communists. This all culminated of course with the Red Scare and the rise of Wisconsin senator Joseph McCarthy, an inveterate liar who became enormously powerful after announcing in February 1950 that he had a list of 205 communists who worked in the state department In fact, he had no such thing, and McCarthy never identified a single disloyal American, but the fear of communism continued. In 1951’s Dennis v. United States, the Supreme Court upheld the notion that being a communist leader itself was a crime. In this climate of fear, any criticism of the government and its policies or the U.S. in general was seen as disloyalty. There was only one question--when will I be blown up--and it encouraged loyalty, because only the government could prevent the spread of communism and keep us from being blown up. We’ve talked a lot about different ways that Americans have imagined freedom this year, but this was a new definition of freedom--the government exists in part to keep us free from massive destruction. So, the Cold War changed America profoundly: The U.S. has remained a leader on the world stage and continued to build a large, powerful, and expensive national state. But it also changed the way we imagine what it means to be free, and what it means to be safe. Thanks for watching. I’ll see you next week. Crash Course is created by all of these nice people and it is possible because of you and your support through Subbable.com. Subbable is a crowdfunding website that allows you to support the stuff you love on a monthly basis. Our Subbable subscribers make this show possible. Thanks to them. If you value Crash Course, please check out our Subbable. There are great perks there. And thanks to all of you for watching. As we say in my hometown, don’t forget to be awesome...Wait, wait, wait Stan, is that music copyrighted? Alright. It’s not. Whew. That saved us a thousand dollars. ________________ [1] Foner. Give me Liberty ebook version p. 954 [2] ibid

Contents

Text of plan

The plan proposed to:[1]

  1. extend between all countries the exchange of basic scientific information for peaceful conclusions;
  2. implement control of nuclear power to the extent necessary to ensure its use only for peaceful purposes;
  3. eliminate from national armaments atomic weapons and all other major weapons adaptable to mass destruction; and
  4. establish effective safeguards by way of inspection and other means to protect complying States against the hazards of violations and evasions

Reaction

The US agreed to turn over all of its weapons on the condition that all other countries pledge not to produce them and agree to an adequate system of inspection. The Soviets rejected this plan on the grounds that the United Nations was dominated by the United States and its allies in Western Europe, and could therefore not be trusted to exercise authority over atomic weaponry in an evenhanded manner (Nationalist China, a UN Security Council member with veto privileges, was anti-communist and aligned with the US at this time). The USSR insisted that America eliminate its own nuclear weapons before considering proposals for a system of controls and inspections.[2]

Although the Soviets showed increased interest in the cause of arms control after they became a nuclear power in 1949, and particularly after the death of Stalin in 1953, the issue of the Soviet Union submitting to international inspection was always a thorny one upon which many attempts at nuclear arms control were stalled. Crucially, the Baruch Plan suggested that none of the permanent members of the United Nations Security Council would be able to veto a decision to punish culprits. In presenting his plan to the United Nations, Baruch stated:[3]

We are here to make a choice between the quick and the dead. That is our business. Behind the black portent of the new atomic age lies a hope which, seized upon with faith, can work our salvation. If we fail, then we have damned every man to be the slave of fear. Let us not deceive ourselves; we must elect world peace or (elect) world destruction.

The Baruch Plan was not agreed to by the Soviet Union, and though debate on the matter continued until 1948, it was not seriously advanced later than the end of 1947. The USSR was, at the time of the negotiations, pursuing their own atomic bomb project, and the United States was continuing its own weapons development and production. With the failure of the plan, both nations embarked on programs of weapons development, innovation, production, and testing as part of the overall nuclear arms race of the Cold War.

Bertrand Russell urged control of nuclear weapons in the 1940s and early 1950s to avoid the likelihood of a general nuclear war, and felt hopeful when the Baruch Proposal was made. In late 1948 he suggested that "the remedy might be the threat of immediate war by the United States on Russia for the purpose of forcing nuclear disarmament on her." Later he thought less well of the Baruch Proposal as "Congress insisted upon the insertion of clauses which it was known that the Russians would not accept."[4]

In his 1961 book Has Man a Future?, Russell described the Baruch plan as follows:

The United States Government ... did attempt ... to give effect to some of the ideas which the atomic scientists had suggested. In 1946, it presented to the world what is now called "The Baruch Plan", which had very great merits and showed considerable generosity, when it is remembered that America still had an unbroken nuclear monopoly. The Baruch Plan proposed an International Atomic Development Authority which was to have a monopoly of mining uranium and thorium, refining the ores, owning materials, and constructing and operating plants necessary for the use of nuclear power. It was suggested that this Authority should be established by the United Nations and that the United States should give it the information of which, so far, America was the sole possessor. Unfortunately, there were features of the Baruch Proposal which Russia found unacceptable, as, indeed, was to be expected. It was Stalin's Russia, flushed with pride in the victory over the Germans, suspicious (not without reason) of the Western Powers, and aware that in the United Nations it could almost always be outvoted.[5]

The Baruch Plan is often questioned by scholars (such as David S. Painter, Melvyn Leffler, and James Carroll) on whether it was a legitimate effort to achieve global cooperation on nuclear control.[6][7] [8]

References

  1. ^ Rumble, Greville (1985). The Politics of Nuclear Defence – A Comprehensive Introduction (1st ed.). Cambridge: Polity Press. pp. 285 (8–9, 219). ISBN 0-7456-0195-2.
  2. ^ U.S. State Department: The Acheson–Lilienthal & Baruch Plans, 1946 Archived October 15, 2011, at the Wayback Machine
  3. ^ Williams, Joshua. "The Quick and the Dead". Carnegie International Non-Proliferation Conference. June 16, 2005.
  4. ^ Russell, Bertrand (1969). The Autobiography of Bertrand Russell: 1944-1967, Volume III. London: George Allen and Unwin. pp. 17, 18, 181. ISBN 978-0-04-921010-3.
  5. ^ Bertrand Russell, Has Man a Future? [London: Allen and Unwin, 1961], pp. 28-9.
  6. ^ Gerber, Larry. "The Baruch Plan and the Origins of the Cold War". Diplomatic History.
  7. ^ Painter, David S. (September 2007). "From Truman to Roosevelt Roundtable". H-Diplo.
  8. ^ Carroll, James (2007-06-04). House of War: The Pentagon and the Disastrous Rise of American Power. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. pp. 120–121. ISBN 9780547526454.

External links

This page was last edited on 3 April 2019, at 23:16
Basis of this page is in Wikipedia. Text is available under the CC BY-SA 3.0 Unported License. Non-text media are available under their specified licenses. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. WIKI 2 is an independent company and has no affiliation with Wikimedia Foundation.