Here is a term paper on the ‘Origin of the Cold War’ for class 9, 10, 11 and 12. Find paragraphs, long and short term papers on the ‘Origin of the Cold War’ especially written for school and college students.

Term Paper # 1. Introduction to the Cold War:

The word “Cold war” was first used by Bernard Baruch, the American financier and statesman, on 16th April 1947, when he says “We are in the midst of a cold war.” Walter Lippman, the journalist, picked up the term and popularised it.

Since then the term has been used to identify the relations between the Soviet Union and the Western Powers, i.e., the East and the West. R. K. Garthoff defines Cold War as “the conflict between the Communist Powers and the rest of the world waged by means short of over major war.” David Thomson suggests “Cold war was no inept description of the series of mounting tensions between East and West which dominated the international scene during these post-war years.”

The verbal conflict between the two vitiated the international situation. This conflict was originally between the “free world and the communist camp in general and between the United States and the Soviet Union in particular. This new war of cold realities in international politics has been waged in every conceivable field of international life, especially in national defence, economic growth, diplomacy and ideology.”


The Cold War was no armed struggle but it was a condition in which both the rival parties, while maintaining diplomatic relations, continued their hostility. It was, in fact, “an ideological war or a propa­ganda war or a diplomatic war. It was neither a condition of war, nor a condition of peace. It was a state of uneasy peace.” R. Barnet calls it “hot peace”. Kennedy describes it as “hard and bitter peace”.

The difference of opinion about the origin of the Cold War is found when some say that the origin should be traced back to the time of the Bolshevik revolution of 1917. During the revolution the communists declared that they would soon export revolution to the capitalist countries. The other view was that the genesis should be traced from the time when the Grand Alliance showed its distinct disunity.

Although the Alliance remained till the war was over, there were “sharp differences among them particularly over the treatment of anti-Nazi resistance forces in Poland and Yugoslavia, the establishment of the Second Front, co-ordination of military strategy and post-war reconstruction”.

Still there is a third view. According to that view the differences between them intensified in the interpretation of the provisions of the Yalta and Potsdam Conferences. The “secrecy over the atom bomb and refusal to invite the Polish provisional government to San Francisco, made Russia suspicious of Anglo-American designs.”


Likewise, the intentional delay of Russia in declaring war against Japan and the occupation of considerable portions of territory in the Far East irritated the Western Powers.

The Second World War profoundly modified the relative position of the Powers in Europe. The fall of the Axis Powers and their satellites enabled Russia to consolidate for herself a position of great importance in Eastern Europe. Soviet influence was then paramount in Hungary, Rumania and Bulgaria. In each of these countries “People’s Republics” had been set up in which communist minorities, backed by Moscow, had come to exercise political control and had gradually put into effect economic and social systems based on the Soviet model.

In Czechoslovakia the Communists seized power with Russian assis­tance by the coup d’etat of 1948 and since then the country had been assimilated into the “Slavbastion”. Through a temporary non-aggression pact concluded with Nazi Germany, Russia had utilized the early days of the war in re-acquiring most of the territory lost as a consequence of the First World War.

The territories thus recovered comprised Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and portions of Poland and Finland. Thus, from the Baltic Sea to the Aegean, a long line of states linked under Russian protection and control. In Eastern Europe “the dream of the nineteenth century Russian pan-Slavs had become a reality”. There is, however, one defection behind the “Iron Curtain” of Russian dominance.


Yugoslavia rebelled against the complete subservience which Russia demanded of her satellites and remained outside the sphere of the influence of Moscow. In Eastern Europe only two other states, Greece and Turkey, have been kept out of the orbit of Soviet Union by American economic and military, assistance. Thus Russia, which immediately after the First World War was an impoverished and shrunken State, a virtual outcaste from the family of nations, emerged from the Second World War as the dominant power in Europe who could scuffle success­fully with America.

In Western Europe, both the greater and lesser States now turn their eyes upon America. The balance of power had shifted. Prof. Young Hum Kim writes, “At the war’s end, the basic incompatibility between Soviet Commu­nism and Western democracy in terms of ideology and security took a new turn towards higher intensity as Stalin reverted from the policy of war­time expediency (alliance with the West) to the policy of pre-war “Ortho- doxy (hard-lined dogmatism)”.

The first signal for the development of Cold War was given by Winston Churchill in his Fulton Speech of March 1956, in which he observed, “If the Western democracies stand together in strict adherence to the principle of United Nations Charter, their influence for furthering these principles will be immense and no one is likely to molest them. If, however, they become divided or falter in their duty and if these all-important years are allowed to slip away, then indeed catastrophe may overwhelm us all.”

Though Grand Alliance was developed between the Soviet Union and the Western Powers due to the exigency of the Second World War, there was no spirit of real co-operation among them and, in fact, “tension increased tremendously” towards the end of the war. The ideological differences among them made the situation unfriendly and distrust developed among them. Narrow national interests also contributed to the Cold War.

Possony points out that even before the end of the World War II the Cold War raised its head. The Eastern European countries occupied by the Nazis were liberated by the Soviet Union who brought those within her tight grip. Next she turned her attention to Turkey and Iran and put pressure on them to get concessions. Britain could not resist this intrusion; and then the United States came in the picture and contained the onward march of communism.

As a result, David Thomson points out “Relations between the Western Powers and the communist states of the East were relations of constant manoeuvre for and almost incessant hostility. They were governed by positive aims and strategies like military campaigns, and they involved tactical skirmishes, careful deployment of forces, surprise attacks and impoverished counter-attacks, in which each side incurred serious losses or made considerable gains.”

The Western Powers considered the Soviet Union as the greatest danger even than that of Hitler. This was despite the fact the existence of alliance between the two was possible because, Ketelbey writes, both determined to destroy Hitler. The only difference was their respective belief in security. While the Western Powers thought that their security was best guaranteed in the democratic pattern of government in the countries freed from Germany and Japanese militarism; the Soviet Union, on the other hand, thought that her security lies in imposing communist rule.

While the Truman Doctrine and the Marshall Plan were introduced by America to achieve its end, Soviet Union brought forward communist programmes initiating Molotov Plan and the Council of Mutual Economic Assistance. “These moves and counter-moves constituted the beginning of the Cold War.”

Term Paper # 2. Problems of the Post-War Settlement:

The Post-War Settlement was invariably based on the decision taken in Teheran, Yalta and Potsdam Conferences held under the auspices of the powers of the Grand Alliance. The Teheran (November 28th to December 1st 1943), Crimea (Yalta, February 4th to 11th 1945) and Potsdam (July 17 — August 2, 1945) conferences of the leaders of Great Britain, the United States of America and the then Soviet Union occupy a special place in the history of the Second World War.

The conference reached an agreement for the establishment of a Council of Foreign Ministers representing the five principal powers to continue the necessary preparatory work for the peace settlements and to take up other matters which from time to time may be referred to the Council by agreement of the Governments participating in the council.

The London Meeting:

The first meeting of the Council of Foreign Ministers was held in London on September 11, 1945. The foreign ministers were unanimous in allowing all the five foreign ministers to take part in the decisions of the treaties, but except the foreign ministers of the ‘Big Three’ the others were not allowed to cast vote in which their own problems were not concerned. The first rift found in their unanimity was when Molotov, the Soviet representative, declined to accepts the terms of Italian Treaty.

The fundamental differences among them were with regard to:

(i) The Italo-Yugoslav boundary;

(ii) Reparations to be extracted from Italy;

(iii) Disposition of the Italian colonies; and

(iv) Disposal of the Italian fleet.

On September 22, Molotov expressed his strong exception to the inclusion of China and France in the meeting and told explicitly that he would attend no further meeting unless China and France were not excluded “where they were not directly concerned as signatories of the armistice agreement.”

Towards the end of November 1945 Byrnes, the American representative, proposed Molotov that the Council of Foreign Ministers be held in Moscow be­fore the close of the year and China and France would not be invited. The exi­gency on the part of America in maintaining peace in the war-ravaged world appears to be clear by her attempt to accept the terms and conditions of Soviet Union. Molotov accepted the offer.

Hence it was decided that the Foreign Ministers of Britain, America and Russia would meet at Moscow on December 16, 1945, to discuss the terms of the peace treaties with the five defeated powers, the question of recognition of the Governments of Rumania and Bulgaria, the control of Atomic Energy, and to solve the problems of the Far East and the problem of Iran. The meeting was, however, very fruitful but Britain alleged that ‘big boss’ — like activities of America had let her down by coming to terms with Russia leaving Britain ‘in the cold’.

The Paris Peace Conference:

In pursuance of the decisions of the Moscow meeting, a conference of 21 nations was to be held in Paris on July 29, 1946. It lasted until October 15. A large number of changes were brought into the terms of the Peace Treaty and all agreed to finalise the five treaties in the next session to be held in New York. The five treaties to be concluded were with Italy, Rumania, Bulgaria, Hungary and Finland.

On November 4, 1946, the Council of Foreign Ministers resumed its work in New York and unanimously agreed to the amount to be taken from the above five defeated countries as reparations. Italy was to pay $ 360,000,000 payable in kind over a seven-year period to Yugosla­via, Greece, Soviet Union, Ethiopia and Albania.

Rumania had to pay reparations amounting to $ 300,000,000 to Soviet Union in kind, over eight years. Bulgaria was to pay $ 70,000,000 to Greece and to Yugoslavia, payable in eight years. Hungary had to pay reparations amounting to $ 300,000,000 to the Soviet Union, Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia, payable in kind, over eight years. Finland was to pay reparations amounting to $ 300,000,000 to the Soviet Union, payable in kind, over eight years.

Peace Treaties with Germany and Austria:

The tension between East and West appeared in the problems of predisposition and settlement and adjustment of Germany. Germany remained an unsettled problem of great international concern. The conclusion of a peace treaty with Germany was a difficult task as there was no effective government there with whom the treaty could have been concluded. Over and above, the distrust between the Eastern and Western powers also delayed the treaty.

The Allied armies were in occupation of the whole of Germany and the German people had begun to atone for the terrible crimes committed under the leadership of those whom, in the hour of their success, they openly approved and blindly obeyed. In August 1945, the Treaty of London was signed by Britain, France, America and Russia.

By the treaty it was settled that an International Military Tribunal would be set for the prosecution and punishment of those Germans who were directly responsible for the commission of war crimes. German militarism and Nazism would be extirpated. The Allied Control Commission declared the Nazi laws and institutions illegal.

The growing antagonism between the Western Powers and the Soviet Union was developed largely due to the pattern of government to be set up in Germany. Although it was initially decided that the reconstruction of German political life would be prepared on a democratic basis and for eventual peaceful co-operation in international life by Germany, the Soviet Union later on differed on this point.

The Russians formed a communist government in the Eastern German zone and, in Western Germany; German Federal Republic was set up by the Western Powers in 1949. Berlin remained under quadripartite control and, therefore, became a convenient escape route for East Germans who disliked communist rule. Bonn was the capital of German Federal Republic. By the terms of the Yalta Conference it was decided that the reparations would be collected from Germany.

At the Potsdam Conference it was decided that Russia would seize all types of immovable properties of Germany from the Russian occupation zone in Germany and from Finland, Rumania, Bulgaria and Hungary. In addition to this, one-tenth of the industrial capital was to be given to Russia from the occupation zones of the Western Powers in Germany.

Two more problems further sharpened the rivalries between the East and the West. In the first place, Trieste, a port, was to be made free under the protection of the Security Council of the United Nations; secondly, Danube and the Black sea were to be made open waterways where ships of all nations could sail without intervention.

Trieste and Danube are the two main gates through which sea-borne commercial contact between the Balkans and the West could be made. These decisions were firmly resisted by the Soviet Union as she wanted to exercise her control singularly over the Balkan countries. Besides the internationalising of these gateways exposed the Soviet Union to security risks. But considering her shortcomings in naval and air power, in which Anglo-American bloc was far superior, Russia relented.

In Germany, however, four separate zones under separate military occupation were set up. Each of the four powers were allowed to satisfy its demand for reparations from its own zone. After a year three Western Powers, namely, Britain, France and America, decided to combine their zones into one. In 1946 Russia agreed to discuss plans for reuniting all four zones economically, though no progress was made. “The fate of post-war Germany and the outbreak of the Cold War between East and West are inseparable.”

In Austria the problem of making peace treaty with her became a difficult problem. Austria was occupied by Soviet troops and the Russians had set up a provisional government there. The government was, however, recognised by the Western Powers and was supported by the Austrian people.

By the provisions of the Paris Peace Treaties of February 1947, it had been settled that Russia would keep her troops in Hungary and Rumania, pending a final settlement with Austria. Russia also thought that the conclusion of treaty with Austria would weaken her position in Trieste. Hence the conclusion of treaty with Austria became acute.

After German occupation of Austria, the Germans compelled the Austrians to sell their property to the Germans at a throwaway price. In 1945 at Potsdam it was decided that the German assets in Eastern Austria would be taken away by Russia, while the assets in the rest of Austria would be taken away by the Western Powers.

But at the Moscow meeting in 1947 Russia renounced its claims to repa­rations from Austria and demanded all German property in Austria be used to compensate the victorious powers. Whereas, the Western Powers decided that, the Austrian assets, as had been forcibly occupied by the Germans after 1938, should be restored to Austria. Russia vehemently protested against this Western proposal. Hence the conclusion of peace treaty with Austria became a thorny problem.

Term Paper # 3. The Beginning of the Cold War:

The immediate reasons of the beginning of the Cold War were:

(a) The East-West clashes in Eastern Europe;  

(b) The enunciation of the Truman Doctrine and the Marshall Plan;

(c) The establishment of the Communist Information Bureau, i.e., the COMINFORM, by Moscow.

Now let us throw some light on these problems:

(a) The East-West Clashes in Eastern Europe:

Utilising the advantage of Communist occupation, the States of Eastern Europe — between Finland in the north and Greece in the south — became Russian satellite states. In Greece, however, the communists were militarily de­feated in a civil war and in October 1944 Churchill, by means of an agreement with Stalin, conceded the Russian interest in Rumania and Bulgaria in return for the Russian recognition of a similar British interest in Greece. In Yugoslavia and Hungary also there would be joint Anglo-Soviet influence.

When Roosevelt met Stalin at Yalta, the Red Army was within 40 miles of Berlin and the joint Anglo-American army led by Eisenhower had not yet crossed the Rhine. America was badly engaged in the Far East and requested Stalin to attack Japan from their side.

This factor might have led Walter Lippman to remark that “the overriding fact was that the Western democracies had become grossly dependent for their security upon the power of the Red Army. In February 1945 they had not yet become able to make themselves secure without, much less against, the Red Army. This is the key to Yalta.”

All the East European States — Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, Albania, Poland, Finland, Hungary, Romania and Bulgaria — fell in the Soviet sphere of influence during and after the World War II. To these states were added Austria and the Soviet zones off occupation in Germany.

But after the reforms of the German currency and huge material help to Germany by America, the economic condition of the three Western zones were obviously stimulating, while in Russian zones of occupation, the economy was limping. The Russians were alarmed at the effects the Western prosperity would have on the impoverished East Germans. Russia then took a novel way. She forced the Western Powers to evacuate Berlin by blocading Berlin from all sides. Berlin was divided into four sectors.

The three sectors administered by Britain, France and America lay in the midst of the Russian zone of Germany and the Russians controlled all means of access to the city by road, rail and canal. On 24 June 1948 the Russians blockaded Berlin cutting off all supplies from West. There would have been sure war between them but America began supplying food, fuel clothing etc. by airlift on a scale massive enough. On 11 May 1949, the Russians, finding the blockade futile, lifted it.

(b) Truman Doctrine:

Meanwhile, putting Eastern Europe under Iron Curtain, Russia turned her attention towards Turkey and Iran and put pressure on them to get concessions. She masterminded a communist revolution in Greece and also tried to exert her communist influence in Italy. These moves of Russia were looked with disapproval by the Western countries. David Thomson remarks that the international political situation compelled the West to accept a strategy which was “crystallized as policy of containment.”

This new policy found its manifestation in an address given by President Truman at 1 P.M. on March 12, 1947 before a joint session of the American Congress and enunciated what came to be known as the Truman Doctrine.

To quote Truman “The very existence of the Greek State is today threatened by the terrorist activities of several thousand armed men led by communists who defy the Government’s authority…. Greece must have assistance if it is to become a self-supporting and self-respecting democracy. Turkey has sought financial assistance from Great Britain and the United States for the purpose of effecting that modernisation necessary for the maintenance of its national integrity. That integrity is essential for the preservation of order in the Middle East. We shall not realise our objectives unless we are willing to help free people to maintain their free institutions and their national integrity against aggressive movements that seek to impose upon them totalitarian regimes. This is no more than a frank recognition that totalitarian regimes imposed on free people by direct or indirect aggressions undermine the foundations of international peace and hence the security of the United States. The United States has made frequent protests against coercion and intimidation in violation of the Yalta Agreement in Poland, Rumania and Bulgaria…. I believe that it must be policy of the United States to support free peoples who are resisting attempted subjugation by armed minorities or outside pressures. We must take immediate and resolute action. The free peoples of the world look to us for support for maintaining their freedom. If we falter in our leadership, we may endanger the peace of the world and we shall surely endanger the welfare of our own nation.”

The President asked the Congress to sanction 400 million dollars by June 1948 to help Greece and Turkey. Early in May, the Congress approved of the Bill and it was signed by the President on 22 May 1948.

The Truman Doctrine ushered a new trend in American foreign policy and political thinking. The United States broke away from the Roosevelt tradition of maintaining a lasting understanding with the Soviet Union. Secondly, by mak­ing this confession, Truman recognised that the world was now divided into two ideologically hostile camps. “It was a prelude to the reversion of the world to the old diplomacy of spheres of influence and military alignments.”

Thirdly, the policy of isolation so long maintained by America henceforth was over and the traditional policy of ignoring Europe had now come to an end. It is deliberately declared that any attack by the communists anywhere in world would be regarded as attack on the United States. “It was, therefore, a sort of universalization of the Monroe Doctrine.”

It indicated that the American interest was not merely confined to Greek and Turkey situations but was only a starting point of deepening American interest. Fourthly, the Truman Doctrine and the determination of remaining in Berlin despite Russian blockade expressed the resolve to resist further extension of communist influence by any means available.

Fifthly, the Doctrine exhibited the policy of “negotiating from a position of strength” and indicated the threat of war should these limits be crossed. Finally, the United States was determined to take the place of Britain who had been sharply undermined by World War II and caused a power vacuum in world politics.

The American commitment was a clear recognition of strategic calculation by which America was determined to outflank the Soviet position in the Balkans and to thwart the Russian advance on the oil reserves of the Near and Middle East. Thus the strategy was not inspired by the consideration of the defence of freedom or democracy but by economic aspiration.

It was found in 1950 that American policy had completely routed the communist influence in Greece and Turkey. With the passage of the Bill in the American Congress providing aid to Turkey and Greece the United States “has served notice that the march of communism would not be allowed to succeed by default.”

The Marshall Plan:

The United Nations Balkan Enquiry Commission after survey came to the conclusion that Yugoslavia, Bulgaria and Albania were supporting the communist uprising against the Greek government. On June 16, 1947, the Greek govern­ment appealed to the United Nations for immediate military aid.

Considering the gravity of the situation, the Secretary of State George Marshall delivered his famous speech at Harvard on June 5, 1947, which initiated the European Recovery Programme.

In that speech Marshall proclaimed:

“Our policy is directed not against any country or doctrine but against hun­ger, poverty, desperation and chaos. Its purpose should be the revival of a work­ing economy in the world so as to permit the emergence of political and social conditions in which free institutions can exist. Such assistance must not be on a piecemeal basis as various crises develop. Any assistance that this Government may render in the future should provide a cure rather than a mere palliative. Any government that is willing to assist in the task of recovery will find full coopera­tion on the part of the United States government. Any government which manoeuvres to bloc the recovery of other countries cannot expect help from us. Furthermore, governments, political parties or groups which seek to per­petuate human misery in order to profit there from politically or otherwise will encounter the opposition of the United States. It is already evident that before the United States government can proceed much further in its efforts to alleviate the situation and help start the European world on its way to recovery, there must be some agreement among the countries of Europe as to the requirements of the situation and the part those countries themselves will take in order to give proper effect to whatever action might be undertaken by the government. It would neither be fitting nor efficacious for this government to undertake to draw up unilaterally a programme designed to place on its feet economically. This is the business of the Europeans. The initiative, I think, must come from Europe. The role of this country should consist of friendly aid in the drafting of a European programme and of later support of such a programme so far as it may be practical for us to do so.”

This speech divulged the theme of the Marshall Plan which was constituted very shortly.

The European Recovery Programme (ERP), commonly known as the Marshall Plan, was, however, an extension of the principle underlying the Truman Doctrine. It dealt with European countries in general and not with any particular State or States as was the case with the Truman Doctrine. Its original participants were former enemy states, former neutrals and also the Allied Powers.

The States included Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Eire, France, Greece, Iceland, Italy, Turkey, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, Portugal, Switzerland and Britain. The Plan aimed at financing the recovery and reconstruction of Europe. Britain and France immediately invited Russia to a meeting between the three Foreign Ministers in Paris to find out the possible means for the reconstruction of Europe.

But Russia believed that the capitalist world was on the brink of financial collapse and declined to accept the invitation and also forbade the states under her control to attend the meeting. David Thomson points out “It was in 1947 that the “Iron Curtain” was first lowered, betokening the new era of “Cold War”, dispelling the hopes which for two years had encouraged the United States and Great Britain to disarm, and so perpetuating the division of Germany.”

By the end of September these nations submitted to President Truman a scheme of self-help and mutual aid in the hope of receiving financial help from America. The plan was passed and the Congress granted $ 6.8 billion for the first fifteen months and undertook to follow this with three further annual grants. The new Economic Cooperation Administration (ECA) was formed which was to be lead by Paul G. Hoffman.

Each recipient state was asked to form a “counterpart fund” — a sum of money equivalent to grants received. It was decided that counterpart fund would be spent only to develop the nation’s economy and promote European recovery in general and only when it was permitted by the American authorities. By the end of 1948 another $ 4 billion was sanctioned. In April 1949 $ 5.43 billion was further allocated for the next fifteen months. This was when the three western zones of Germany also took part.

The Marshall Plan, as is found, had some novel characteristics and these were:

(i) It was essentially an economic plan and to last for four years. America wanted to avert the economic crisis which was apprehended as a result of World War II;

(ii) It encouraged the determination of America to fight against commu­nism. In France and Italy the Communist Parties grew in strength and America felt the urge to check the influence of communism;

(iii) There was obviously political objective behind the plan but its humanitarian object cannot be overruled;

(iv) It put the initiative for reconstruction in the hands of the European countries themselves;

(v) Like the Truman Doctrine, it by-passed the United Nations;

(vi) It strengthened the movement of Western European Union.

Obviously, the Marshall Plan — though welcomed in the Unites States — was directed against the Soviet Union and communism. In Europe, “The Marshall offer was like Manna from Heaven and it did not require much imagination to grasp it with favour.” For the Soviet Union it was a serious challenge.

By the time the European Recovery Programme came to an end in June 1952, it had achieved triumphantly what it had set out to do. Except France and Italy, the economic plans in other aided countries achieved tremendous success. Even West Germany recovered her pre-war economic solvency. Apart from improvement in agriculture and industry, the political, social and economic stability returned to the disturbed and war-ravaged Western Europe as a whole and Western Europe made wonderful progress in every direction.

The Soviet Union and the other communist countries were also invited to accept the Marshall Plan, but the offer was rejected. The Russian contention was that the Plan was opposed to the basic principles of the Charter of the United Nations, and, under the cover of the Plan, the United States wanted to create an economic empire by taking the advantage of the poor conditions of the war- battered Europe. The negative attitude of the Soviet Union intensified the gravity of the Cold War and economic cooperation between Eastern and Western Eu­rope became a difficult, if not impossible, proposition.

(c) The Cominform:

The effects of the Marshall Plan in Soviet Union were fierce. On September 18, 1947, Vyshinsky, the Soviet representative in the United Nations, said that by this Plan the American imperialism wanted to make 16 European States her stooges. On September 30 the Russian Literary Gazette made a violent attack on Truman which led the American Government to lodge an official protest.

The Soviet Union strengthened its tie with the East European countries by concluding treaties of friendship, cooperation and mutual assistance with Rumania on 4th February 1948, with Hungary on 13th February, with Bulgaria on 18th March, with Finland on 6th April.

At a conference held at Wiliza Gora in Silesia on September 22 and 23, representatives of the Soviet Union, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Rumania, Bulgaria, Yugoslavia, Poland, France, Italy established the Communist Information Bureau (the Cominform) with head-quarters at Belgrade.

The differences between the East and the West became so tense at this stage that the Cold War crystallized. Prof. Young Hum Kim writes, “At the war’s end, the basic incompatibility between Soviet communism and Western democracy in terms of ideology and security took a new turn towards higher intensity as Stalin reverted from the policy of war-time expediency (alliance with the West) to the policy of pre-war orthodoxy (hard-lined dogmatism).”

Home››Term Paper››Cold War››