In the past couple of days I reread this book (see pic) on the Soviet's side of the Cold War (up to 1964). I would strongly recommend it b/c it shows how things are similar (geopolitics did not change much). 
US was then, as now, in a huge strategic advantage, USSR was always trying to catch up and (most important) to be taken seriously, as an equal partner.
In doing so, it precipitated crises like Berlin & Cuba. This was esp. the case w/ Khrushchev. Stalin was more cautious.
In doing so, it precipitated crises like Berlin & Cuba. This was esp. the case w/ Khrushchev. Stalin was more cautious.
US policy is one of slow and deliberate increase of power, Soviet is a policy of stop-and-go, much more dependent on the leadership.
The authors in the concluding chapter single out absence of LT view on the Soviet side & of great personalities.
The authors in the concluding chapter single out absence of LT view on the Soviet side & of great personalities.
They also cover the Sino-Soviet split, but do not bring up any new details.
The book was written in the 1990s when many Russian archives were open. It has an optimistic tinge that the Cold War will never reoccur. It partakes in the Western climate of the 90s.
The book was written in the 1990s when many Russian archives were open. It has an optimistic tinge that the Cold War will never reoccur. It partakes in the Western climate of the 90s.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
