|
|
|
|
|
|
The Cold War: A New History
written by John Lewis Gaddis
Studio : Penguin (Non-Classics)
by Penguin (Non-Classics)
Publisher : Penguin (Non-Classics)
Released : 2006-12-26
Availability : Usually ships in 1-2 business days
Number of Items : 1
EAN : 9780143038276
Avg. Customer Rating: (based on 68 reviews)
List Price : $16.00
Our Price : $8.99
|
|
| |
|
Product Description |
|
The "dean of Cold War historians" (The New York Times) now presents the definitive account of the global confrontation that dominated the last half of the twentieth century. Drawing on newly opened archives and the reminiscences of the major players, John Lewis Gaddis explains not just what happened but why—from the months in 1945 when the U.S. and the U.S.S.R. went from alliance to antagonism to the barely averted holocaust of the Cuban Missile Crisis to the maneuvers of Nixon and Mao, Reagan and Gorbachev. Brilliant, accessible, almost Shakespearean in its drama, The Cold War stands as a triumphant summation of the era that, more than any other, shaped our own. |
| |
|
| |
|
Excellent, But.... |
John Lewis Gaddis has written a comprehensive general history of the Cold War that fulfills his stated purpose of acquainting a post-Cold War generation with the history of that era. It also allows the longtime history buff a comprehensive perspective with which to assess his own conclusions to date.
For my part, I have few differences to register. Let me mention three of them:
1) In the early 70s, when the Christian Science Monitor was a major newspaper, I found an article detailing the quality of the arms being sent by the Russians to the North Vietnamese in contrast to those being sent to the Egyptians under Anwar Sadat. Item by item, the article authenticated that the former were consistently second rate and the latter first rate, firm grounding for the the Vietnamese's belief that the Soviet Union was concerned to assist them only enough to keep them and the Americans engaged, but not to win.
When Ronald Reagan sent Stinger missiles to the Afghan rebels, I was very concerned that we might try something like that with them in order to stick it to the Soviets. My predilections run that way. Failing to find any evidence to that effect, I was consciously glib in my speculation that since no Communist regime had ever been permanently overthrown, the administration might not know how to calibrate the flow of Stingers for such an effect. Sheer glibness, I knew and I had to accept the administration's innocence.
Though refusing to be ruled by my predilection, I retained it. Then after 9/11, I found out about the interview in the domestic edition of Le Nouvel Observateur for the second week of January, 1998 with Zbigniew Brzezinski, Jimmy Carter's foreign policy adviser (see Brzezinski / Afghanistan / Le Nouvel Observateur). He said that contrary to CW, our aid to anti-Communist rebels began six months BEFORE the Soviet invasion and was given in the hope of luring them into Afghanistan as a Vietnam quagmire of their own. Professor Gaddis sees the invasion as Soviet retaliation for checks suffered in Europe, as I recall. No indication that he is even aware of the Brzezinski interview. But the reader will note that it sustains my predilection.
2.He seems to think that the Cold War taught our leaders to lie in a way they had not done before. I specifically remember that sometime between 1993-1996, network news hastily reported for one night only that President Clinton had agreed to accede to a Freedom of Information Act request by authorizing the release of documents proving that President Truman okayed experiments exposing American citizens, specifically pregnant women, to nuclear radiation without their knowledge and consent. Not surprisingly the network newscast did not identify, much less interview the party making the request but it must have been Eileen Welsome who would win a Pulitzer Prize for her book on the subject, THE PLUTONIUM FILES. Professor Gaddis gives his full support to the myth of "honest" Harry Truman, Truman the Good. Not a small point when we recall that he led a progressive political party in the fight against fascists whose atrocities included fiendish medical experiments on Jews, Chinese and Koreans. This in turn suggests a deeper and broader perspective that Professor Gaddis might have brought to the work, particularly as he entered his conclusion: the Cold War's belligerents were part of the larger horror of sinister tendancies paralleled THROUGHOUT the fabric of secretive, bureaucratic technological society no doubt EVERYWHERE. In this regard, this fine historian allowed himself to be outclassed by the old X-Files series' very rare Ivy League best.
3. A more respectful difference I have with Professor Gaddis stems from my adherence to the Leninist theory of capitalist imperialism as applied to U.S. foreign policy by the democratic socialist historian, William Appleman Williams and Walter LaFeber of Cornell. We've been in the eastern Pacific Ocean for about a century-and-a-half and we've always found some reason to be there, all of which boil down to markets -- the need for them acknowledged in public statements (ALL of them vintage Leninism) by a virtually unbroken succession of U.S. presidents, key senators and recognized architects of our foreign policy -- and natural resources (See the Asian section in George F. Kennan's 1948 memorandum on the internet.). No mention of them.
But for the rest, a solid read. Powerful. |
| |
|
A Brief History of the Cold War. An Accessible and Excellent Read |
John Gaddis has written an excellent and accessible history of the Cold War. His descriptions and comments about the Cold War through the mid-1960s were thoroughly enjoyable, though I have to agree with the Washington Post Review that his description of the latter period of the Cold War felt too abreviated - a necessary restriction for such a condensed work.
Many people have experienced some or all of the events described in this book. Perhaps Mr. Gaddis's best achievement with this book is that it allows the reader to integrate personal memories of the events described in order to see how they fit into the larger context of the movement of history of the era. |
| |
|
A one sided abbreviated perspective on a complex historical time |
John Lewis Gaddis presents an establishment view of The Cold War in this abbreviated book. Gaddis states that he wrote the book because his students at Yale were beginning to see this period as ancient history. But this book is not a college text despite the plethora of references. It is a simplified retelling from a decidedly American perspective of a period of time in history where the world hung by a nuclear thread. For those of us who were alive during this period the book is mostly old hat. It does provide a few insights and some esoteric information, but there are no startling revelations. The viewpoint is clearly American and thus this work lacks the objectivity that would be provided by a more neutral observer.
Gaddis largely glosses over the immoral acts committed by the American side. In fact with chapter five (The Recovery of Equity) he implies that America was a moral country that just temporarily went wrong (for good reason) and then after Nixon recovered its moral compass. This, of course, is nonsense. America has a long history of immoral and violent acts including the stealing of the land from the native people and their virtual imprisonment in desolate areas (read Dee Brown's book, Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee for the truth here), the enslavement of an entire race of people which was ended only by a violent Civil War, the wars of aggression against Mexico and Spain, etc. For a more critical (and accurate) view of American history read A People's History of the United States by Howard Zinn.
Gaddis fails to understand that history is a continuum and by focusing on one short period of American history he fails to portray the country in an accurate light. He also whitewashes President Truman for his decision to drop atomic bombs on two Japanese cities. There is ample evidence at this time that the Japanese had largely agreed to the eventual surrender terms prior to this heinous act. He also claims that the Cold War can be symbolized by the ideological differences between Wilson and Lenin. At the beginning Lenin seemed to be winning, Gaddis states, but in the end Wilsonian principles prevailed. We have only to look at the rise of China and the current financial crisis in the democratic west to see how wrong this perspective is.
In sum, for most people reading this book will be a waste of time for anyone but the most ignorant, pro-America readers.
|
| |
|
A Long Hard Winter! |
The title to the New York Times book review of "The Cold War: A New History" is called "Look Back in Relief" written by Michael Beschloss.
That title indeed is what one could say at the end of this rather long odyssey called the Cold War. What Gaddis has done in this rather easy to read and gripping dialogue is to give a great general outline as to the cause and effects of the Cold War. Mr. Gaddis can utilize this work to write a definitive history which indeed would go into greater depth and detail.
To this time frame of World historical crisis would be an historical narrative on the order of the works of both the "World Crisis" and the "Second World War" written by Winston Churchill.
Gaddis gives the basic background and takes of the major political players such as Stalin, Mao Zedong, Harry Truman, Winston Churchill, Dwight Eisenhower, JFK, Ronald Reagan, Margaret Thatcher and Pope John Paul II.
All the major conflicts and incidents such as the Berlin Wall, the Korean War, the Hungarian invasion etc. are all described here. Gaddis indeed gives mention and explanation to all these major events.
For the young students that Mr. Gaddis described in his Preface he does state this indeed may be like studying about the Carthaginians. However, I myself grew up and lived in this era throughout my childhood and into adulthood unto fatherhood. It was indeed a way of life.
How these political leaders dealt with each other and reacted to each other, determined the difference from living a normal life or facing utter annihilation.
What Gaddis has done here is excellent. It does need to be expounded and enhanced. At one point of his narrative I did have to laugh at his analysis. On page 33 he states "Meanwhile, Stalin had a blockade of Berlin. His reasons, even now, are not clear." Oh really, Gaddis is confused? Stalin has no clear reasons?? Stalin was no fool, he was pressing the Allies to determine their resolve. At this time he was testing the theory of the Communist proxy that the Allies would indeed separate and not be united in their efforts against the Soviet block. Indeed Stalin's ruse was foiled.
Outside of that particular diatribe, I concur with Gaddis' work. Good job 5 Stars.
|
| |
|
The Cold War - Recommended |
|
This book is highly recommended for the student and the general reader interested in an overall survey of the Cold War as it was viewed and acted upon by the United States. A book on this topic from the French, British or Russian perspective would be a valuable adjunct to reading this volume. At times the book reads like an expanded outline but that is understandable considering the massive amount of information to be covered from the end of WW-2 to the fall of communism in 1991. For readers of American history on the watch for events and individuals worthy of additional study this book is a gold mine. The ample footnotes, extensive bibliography and index add to the usefulness of this book. |
| |
|
|
|
