{"id":3556,"date":"2026-08-11T22:11:57","date_gmt":"2026-08-11T16:41:57","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/psir\/notes\/rise-of-super-powers-bipolarity-arms-race-and-cold-war\/"},"modified":"2026-08-11T23:02:01","modified_gmt":"2026-08-11T17:32:01","slug":"rise-of-super-powers-bipolarity-arms-race-and-cold-war","status":"publish","type":"psir_note","link":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/psir\/notes\/rise-of-super-powers-bipolarity-arms-race-and-cold-war\/","title":{"rendered":"Rise of super powers, bipolarity, arms race and cold war"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\n
PSIR Notes<\/a>\u203a<\/span>II-A Comparative Political Analysis and International Politics<\/a>\u203a<\/span>Rise of super powers, bipolarity, arms race and cold war<\/span><\/div>\n
\n
Paper I \u00b7 Comparative Political Analysis and International Politics<\/div>\n

Rise of super powers, bipolarity, arms race and cold war<\/h1>\n
Syllabus \u00b7 Paper II-A \u00b7 7<\/b> \u2014 Changing International Political Order : (a) Rise of super powers; Strategic and ideological Bipolarity, arms race and cold war; Nuclear threat; (b) Non-aligned Movement : Aims and achievements. (c) Collapse of the Soviet Union; Unipolarity and American hegemony; Relevance of non-alignment in the contemporary world.<\/div>\n<\/header>\n
\n
<\/p>\n

The Order and Its Two Shifts<\/h3>\n

The international political order<\/span> is the pattern of power, rules and relationships that governs how states behave at a given moment. Since 1945 that pattern has shifted twice over.<\/p>\n

Two shifts, one unfinished transition.<\/span> 1945\u20131991 \u00b7 Bipolar<\/span> (Rivalry of the USA and the USSR \u2014 the Cold War) \u2192 1991\u2013 \u00b7 Unipolar moment<\/span> (Collapse of the USSR leaves the USA sole superpower) \u2192 Today \u00b7 Diffusion<\/span> (Power moves from the trans-Atlantic to the Indo-Pacific \u2014 multipolarity? new bipolarity? disorder?)<\/p>\n

The question that runs through the unit: did the Cold War\u2019s end bring a new order<\/span> \u2014 or a new disorder<\/span>?<\/p>\n

The Cold War: Meaning and Origins<\/h3>\n

An intense ideological, political and strategic rivalry between the USA and the USSR after the Second World War.<\/p>\n

Meaning<\/span><\/p>\n

    \n
  • \u201cCold\u201d because it never escalated into direct military conflict<\/span> between the two superpowers \u2014 yet the whole world was shaped by their competition.<\/li>\n
  • Term first used by George Orwell<\/span> (1945) for an \u201cundeclared state of war\u201d; popularised soon after by Walter Lippmann<\/span> and Bernard Baruch<\/span>.<\/li>\n
  • Winston Churchill<\/span> (1946) gave it its imagery \u2014 the division of Europe as an \u201cIron Curtain\u201d<\/span>.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

    Origins<\/span><\/p>\n

      \n
    • No single start date; tensions hardened around 1945 as the wartime alliance broke down.<\/li>\n
    • Post-war shift from a multipolar<\/span> to a bipolar<\/span> system dominated by the USA and the USSR.<\/li>\n
    • Spheres of influence carved out in Europe at Yalta<\/span> and Potsdam<\/span>; Germany and Berlin divided into a Soviet-controlled East and a Western-controlled West.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

      Phases of the Cold War<\/h3>\n

      Four movements, from confrontation to thaw and back to confrontation.<\/p>\n

      The arc of the rivalry.<\/span> 1 \u00b7 1945\u20131962<\/span> (Confrontation and containment \u2014 Berlin, Korea, Suez) \u2192 2 \u00b7 The Crises<\/span> (Berlin Wall (1961); Cuban Missile Crisis (1962)) \u2192 3 \u00b7 D\u00e9tente<\/span> (1962\/69\u201379 \u2014 Ostpolitik, SALT, Helsinki) \u2192 4 \u00b7 New Cold War<\/span> (1979\u201389 \u2014 Afghanistan, Reagan, SDI)<\/p>\n

      First phase (1945\u201362): confrontation and containment<\/span><\/p>\n

        \n
      • Europe<\/span> \u2014 Berlin Blockade<\/span> (1948\u201349): the USSR cut ground access to West Berlin; the Western Berlin Airlift<\/span> supplied the city \u2014 the first major confrontation. Marshall Plan<\/span> (1948): US aid to rebuild Western Europe; the USSR answered with COMINFORM<\/span> and the Molotov Plan<\/span>. NATO<\/span> (1949): US-led mutual defence pact \u2192 the USSR formed the Warsaw Pact<\/span> (1955). Containment formalised in the Truman Doctrine<\/span> (1947). Berlin Wall<\/span> (1961) \u2014 the Iron Curtain in concrete.<\/li>\n
      • Asia<\/span> \u2014 Korean War<\/span> (1950\u201353): North Korea crossed the 38th parallel with Soviet approval; the USA intervened under the UN banner; Mao Zedong<\/span> sent Chinese troops to aid the North; stalemate at the 38th parallel. Vietnam War<\/span>: rooted in Eisenhower\u2019s fear of the domino effect<\/span>; the USA formed SEATO<\/span> (1954).<\/li>\n
      • Middle East<\/span> \u2014 Suez Crisis<\/span> (1956): Gamal Abdel Nasser<\/span> nationalised the Suez Canal; Britain, France and Israel intervened; the USA and the USSR pressed them to withdraw \u2014 exposing the declining weight of the old European powers. The USA formed CENTO<\/span>.<\/li>\n
      • Latin America<\/span> \u2014 Cuban Missile Crisis<\/span> (1962): Soviet missiles in Cuba brought the world to the brink. Khrushchev<\/span> sought to protect Fidel Castro<\/span> and offset US missiles in Turkey. The settlement: the USSR to remove its missiles from Cuba; the USA not to invade Cuba and, secretly, to withdraw its missiles from Turkey.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

        Cambridge histories of the Cold War read these episodes as proof that the superpowers were willing to fight through <\/em>proxy wars<\/em> (<\/em>Odd Arne Westad<\/em>), and that Berlin and Cuba dramatised the era\u2019s dangers (<\/em>James G. Hershberg<\/em>, <\/em>Douglas Little<\/em>).<\/em><\/p>\n

        Second phase: the crises<\/span><\/p>\n

          \n
        • Followed Stalin<\/span>\u2019s death (1953) and the rise of Nikita Khrushchev<\/span>.<\/li>\n
        • Berlin Crisis<\/span> (1961): East Germany built the Wall to stop the exodus westward; John F. Kennedy<\/span> chose not to confront the USSR militarily. Then the Cuban Missile Crisis<\/span> (1962) \u2014 the peak of nuclear brinkmanship.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

          Third phase \u2014 D\u00e9tente (1962\/1969\u20131979)<\/span><\/p>\n

            \n
          • A thaw, as both sides recognised the costs of overstretch.<\/li>\n
          • Charles de Gaulle<\/span> (France) and Willy Brandt<\/span> (West Germany) sought better ties with the East; Brandt\u2019s Ostpolitik<\/span> aimed to normalise relations with East Germany and the USSR.<\/li>\n
          • Richard Nixon<\/span> and Henry Kissinger<\/span> pursued d\u00e9tente with the USSR and opened relations with China, working the Sino-Soviet split (Jussi M. Hanhim\u00e4ki<\/span>).<\/li>\n
          • Helsinki Accords<\/span> (1975): the West acknowledged Soviet control over Eastern Europe; the USSR accepted human-rights commitments.<\/li>\n
          • Arms control: SALT<\/span> talks and the ABM Treaty<\/span>.<\/li>\n
          • D\u00e9tente was partial \u2014 proxy wars continued (1971 India\u2013Pakistan war, Arab\u2013Israeli wars).<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

            The Sino-Soviet split<\/span><\/p>\n

              \n
            • USSR\u2013PRC relations deteriorated in the late 1960s over ideology and strategy, producing border clashes (Zhang Shu Guang<\/span>).<\/li>\n
            • The split opened the door to US engagement with China, shifting the balance of power (Sergey Radchenko<\/span>).<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

              New Cold War (1979\u20131989)<\/span><\/p>\n

                \n
              • Triggered by the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan<\/span> (1979), read by the USA as expansionism.<\/li>\n
              • Jimmy Carter<\/span> imposed sanctions; the USA boycotted the 1980 Moscow Olympics.<\/li>\n
              • The fall of South Vietnam (1975) had already signalled d\u00e9tente\u2019s failure and raised US domestic pressure to confront Soviet influence (Fredrik Logevall<\/span>).<\/li>\n
              • Ronald Reagan<\/span> took a hardline stance; his rhetoric and military build-up were read by the USSR as aggressive (Beth A. Fischer<\/span>). Reagan combined two pressures \u2014 backing Islamic fighters against Soviet forces in Afghanistan, and launching a renewed nuclear arms race.<\/li>\n
              • The fall of the Berlin Wall<\/span> (1989) and the Malta Summit<\/span> marked the end.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                The Arms Race during the Cold War<\/h3>\n

                Cause and casualty of the rivalry at once.<\/p>\n

                Definition<\/span><\/p>\n

                An arms race<\/span> is the competitive acquisition and advancement of military capability among two or more powerful states.<\/p>\n

                The nuclear race<\/span><\/p>\n

                  \n
                • The US use of the atomic bomb in 1945 opened the nuclear age and bred mistrust; the USSR tested its first bomb in 1949.<\/li>\n
                • The missile gap<\/span> perception of the 1950s drove US spending.<\/li>\n
                • Strategic Defence Initiative<\/span> (SDI \/ \u201cStar Wars\u201d), proposed by Reagan<\/span> in 1983 \u2014 a space-based missile defence. Never realised, yet the USSR read it as a major threat and the race intensified.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                  Other examples<\/span><\/p>\n

                    \n
                  • UK\u2013Germany<\/span> (pre-WWI): naval race; the launch of HMS Dreadnought<\/span> (1906) set off rapid expansion and fed the tensions behind the First World War.<\/li>\n
                  • India\u2013Pakistan<\/span>: continuing missile competition and a persistent nuclear standoff in South Asia.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                    Assessment<\/span><\/p>\n

                      \n
                    • Francis J. Gavin<\/span>: the race heightened tension but also built a deterrent<\/span> that prevented direct superpower conflict.<\/li>\n
                    • On balance the effects are negative \u2014 heavy economic cost, debt and dependency (worst for arms importers), heightened hostility, and a measurable rise in the risk of war. The strain of the race contributed to the collapse of the USSR, leaving the USA as sole superpower.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                      Interpretations of the Cold War<\/h3>\n

                      Who is to blame? Three schools, and the standard three-mark opening of any Cold War answer.<\/p>\n

                      \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
                      School<\/th>\nHolds responsible<\/th>\nCore argument<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n
                      Traditionalist \/ Orthodox<\/span><\/td>\nUSSR<\/span><\/td>\nSoviet conduct was driven by the Marxist-Leninist doctrine of worldwide class struggle and the spread of international communism.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      Revisionist<\/span><\/td>\nUSA<\/span><\/td>\nSoviet expansion was defensive \u2014 a \u201cbuffer zone\u201d<\/span> against the West, and a weakened Germany to prevent future invasion.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      Post-Revisionist<\/span><\/td>\nBoth<\/span><\/td>\nBoth pursued hegemonic ambitions; alternative readings stress miscalculation<\/span> on both sides.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<\/div>\n

                      The Arms Race, Nuclear Order and Disarmament<\/h3>\n

                      Nuclear weapons still shape power politics, alliances and regional security after the Cold War.<\/p>\n

                      The persistence of deterrence<\/span><\/p>\n

                        \n
                      • Thomas Schelling<\/span>: coercion as the credible \u201cpower to hurt\u201d<\/span>.<\/li>\n
                      • Mutually Assured Destruction<\/span> (MAD) as a \u201cbalance of terror\u201d<\/span>, resting on second-strike capability<\/span> and the nuclear triad<\/span>, and extended to allies (Japan, South Korea) through extended deterrence<\/span>.<\/li>\n
                      • Kenneth Waltz<\/span>: nuclear weapons helped keep the Cold War \u201ccold\u201d \u2014 a logic many realists apply to great-power restraint after 1991.<\/li>\n
                      • Henry Kissinger<\/span>: reliance on deterrence assumes rational actors, which is unsafe.<\/li>\n
                      • Morton Kaplan<\/span>\u2019s \u201cunit veto\u201d<\/span> system projects a world where each actor can destroy every other.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                        Disarmament<\/span><\/p>\n

                        Definition<\/span><\/p>\n

                        Disarmament<\/span> is the reduction or elimination of military forces and weapons through cooperation, treaties and oversight. Four components: reduction in quantity; formal negotiation and treaties; focus on weapons and tools; an oversight body. The United Nations has mediated disarmament since the 1960s through resolutions, committees and monitoring.<\/p>\n

                        Armaments make war physically possible and politically probable; disarmament can reduce tension and redirect spending to human welfare. The Arms Trade Treaty<\/span> seeks to prevent transfers that enable rights violations.<\/p>\n

                        The instruments<\/span><\/p>\n

                        \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
                        Instrument<\/th>\nStatus and the point to make<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n
                        NPT<\/span> (1968; in force 1970)<\/td>\nThe core of the non-proliferation regime. George Perkovich<\/span>: India and Pakistan remain non-signatories because they are not recognised as nuclear-weapon states; the 1995 indefinite extension<\/span> is seen as discriminatory by such states.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                        CTBT<\/span> (1996) & FMCT<\/span><\/td>\nThe CTBT is not in force; the FMCT remains stalled \u2014 both blocked largely by US and other nuclear-weapon-state resistance.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                        GICNT<\/span> (2006)<\/td>\nCoordinates against nuclear terrorism<\/span> by non-state actors.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                        The Obama push<\/span><\/td>\nThe Prague speech (2009); UNSC Resolution 1887<\/span>; four Nuclear Security Summits.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                        Nuclear Weapon Ban Treaty<\/span> \/ TPNW (2017)<\/td>\nThe first legally binding comprehensive prohibition, yet to enter into force \u2014 all major nuclear powers absent.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                        New START<\/span> (2010)<\/td>\nThe cornerstone of US\u2013Russia arms control, set to expire in 2026<\/span> \u2014 the sharpest present worry for the future of arms control.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                        India\u2019s policy<\/span> (post-1998)<\/td>\nCredible minimum deterrence \u00b7 No First Use \u00b7 assured command and control \u00b7 reliable delivery vehicles.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                        Civil society<\/span><\/td>\nThe Pugwash Movement<\/span> (Nobel Peace Prize).<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<\/div>\n

                        John Simpson<\/span>: the non-proliferation agenda has not worked sufficiently after the 1990s \u2014 Iran and North Korea continue to pursue capability; a universal, verifiable and non-discriminatory process is needed for non-proliferation in the short term and disarmament in the long term.<\/em><\/p>\n

                        The contemporary nuclear order<\/span><\/p>\n