Scientific literature tries to give an answer to the question of the ‘Cold War’s End’ in multiple ways. In order to relate eventual domestic factors with the peaceful ending of the East-West conflict, three questions have to be asked: What are the possible factors? Which states were involved? How can an impact of endogenous elements be validated? In order to identify eventual domestic factors, it seems expedient to have an initial look at the merit of two winners of the Nobel Prize for peace: Mikhail Gorbachev and Willy Brandt, founding fathers of glasnost and perestroika in the USSR and Ostpolitik in Western Germany, respectively. It is, however, kept in mind that the United States of America exerted indirect, as well as direct influence on domestic policy of both countries.
Given these preliminaries, the structure of this essay is fourfold. First of all, domestic factors are put into historical context considering social, political and economical factors both in Eastern and Western Germany and the Soviet Union. Afterwards, the historical facts are endowed with standpoints of several IR scholars, explaining theoretical issues and making predominant use of a social constructivist approach. Finally, a conclusion is drawn, summarizing and interpreting the results.
Table of Contents
1. GDR and FRG – Two states, one domestic factor
2. Glasnost and perestroika – Two reforms, one domestic fracture
3. Two domestic factors, one theoretical approach
4. Conclusion
Objectives and Topics
This essay explores the influence of internal domestic developments on the conclusion of the Cold War, specifically analyzing the roles of German Ostpolitik and Soviet reforms under Mikhail Gorbachev through a social constructivist lens.
- Analysis of West Germany's Ostpolitik as a catalyst for changing state identity.
- Examination of the impact of Gorbachev's glasnost and perestroika on the Soviet Union's internal stability.
- Evaluation of constructivist versus realist interpretations of Cold War systemic changes.
- Investigation of the interplay between internal domestic shifts and international foreign policy outcomes.
Excerpt from the Book
GDR and FRG – Two states, one domestic factor
Apart from the ‘hot’ proxy wars in Vietnam, Angola and Afghanistan, the main-stage of the Cold War’s end was Europe. Germany, politically, physically and ideologically divided, virtually served as a “neuralgic point” of the international policy of détente (Wolfrum and Arendes, 2007, p.202). The separation into the Federal Republic of Germany (FRG) and the German Democratic Republic (GDR) took place after previous efforts in order to achieve a peaceful unification. However, these struggles had been made impossible by ideological and power-political restraints by both Western and Eastern allies. After the cementation of the German break-up in 1949, Western German politicians were determined to enact only laws with provisory character. In 1952, USSR-leader Josef Stalin reinitiated unification talks, proposing a neutral Germany without membership in any military alliance; nevertheless, the degree of ideological cleavage was already too high to allow such an undertaking. This was not least originated by the fact that Western Germany’s first Chancellor Konrad Adenauer, then chairman of the conservative Christian Democratic Union (CDU), expedited Western Germany’s further integration into the West.
Summary of Chapters
GDR and FRG – Two states, one domestic factor: Examines the division of Germany and how Willy Brandt’s Ostpolitik initiated a pivotal shift in domestic state identity, paving the way for bilateral dialogue.
Glasnost and perestroika – Two reforms, one domestic fracture: Details Mikhail Gorbachev’s internal reforms in the USSR, explaining how these policies eroded the Communist regime from within and ultimately led to the Soviet collapse.
Two domestic factors, one theoretical approach: Synthesizes the case studies through a constructivist framework, arguing that collective interests and changing identities are essential to understanding the end of the Cold War.
Conclusion: Interprets the findings by asserting that internal domestic transformations were crucial, albeit often unforeseeable, catalysts that reshaped the global political landscape.
Keywords
Cold War, Ostpolitik, Glasnost, Perestroika, Social Constructivism, German Reunification, Mikhail Gorbachev, Willy Brandt, Soviet Union, Domestic Policy, International Relations, Detente, Ideology, Political Change, Reform
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core focus of this paper?
The paper examines whether domestic factors played a significant role in ending the Cold War, specifically looking at internal shifts within Germany and the Soviet Union.
What are the primary themes discussed?
The main themes include the transformation of German state identity via Ostpolitik, the impact of Soviet domestic restructuring, and the application of social constructivist theory to historical events.
What is the primary research question?
The research seeks to identify what role, if any, domestic factors played in the peaceful conclusion of the Cold War.
Which methodology is employed in this research?
The author primarily utilizes a social constructivist approach, focusing on the interpretation of historical and social facts while also acknowledging neo-realist perspectives.
What topics are covered in the main body of the text?
The text covers the historical context of a divided Germany, the political implications of Ostpolitik, the internal dynamics of Gorbachev's reforms, and the theoretical debate between realism and constructivism.
Which keywords best characterize the work?
Key terms include Cold War, Ostpolitik, Glasnost, Perestroika, Social Constructivism, and domestic factors.
How did Ostpolitik alter West-German domestic politics?
Ostpolitik signified a fundamental turnaround by moving away from disparaging terminology toward the GDR and recognizing it as a sovereign entity, which was essential for the eventual reunification process.
Why does the author consider Gorbachev's reforms as domestic factors?
The author argues they are domestic because they aimed primarily at rectifying internal defects within the Soviet Union, despite having massive, unforeseen consequences for the international system.
What role does the U.S. play in the author's analysis?
The author acknowledges that the United States exerted significant influence but cautions against attributing the end of the Cold War solely to external factors, emphasizing the necessity of considering internal society dynamics.
- Citar trabajo
- Alexander Tutt (Autor), 2012, What role did domestic factors play in ending the Cold War?, Múnich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/275408
