Nikita Khrushchev Desired A Resolution To The Conflict Of The Cold War
In 1956 the Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev stated on a visit to Britain: “You do not like Communism. We do not like Capitalism. There is only one way out – peaceful co-existence.” (Clare, J. 2007) Were these words merely an empty gesture to placate the wrath of a potential enemy, or were they an accurate representation of Cold War politics at the time? Undoubtedly the Cold War was an era of tension and apprehension, yet it was also a period of global cooperation, where conflicting ideologies strove to ensure that a nuclear war never transpired. During Khrushchev’s time as leader of the Soviet Union, this cooperation reached its zenith until he was deposed by his more radical colleagues. It is therefore possible to hypothesise that had Khrushchev not been deposed, he would have ceased the conflict of the Cold War far earlier than Gorbachev. This point can be argued based on the record of Khrushchev’s policies, communication, actions and choices towards the West.
Khrushchev’s 1956 foreign policy of peaceful co-existence relieved international tensions and attested to his desire to reconcile the conflict of the Cold War. As Khrushchev challenged the West, “Let us prove to each other the advantages of one’s own system not with fists, not by war, but by peaceful economic competition in conditions of peaceful co-existence.” (Erickson, R. 2003) This statement is indicative of Khrushchev’s desire to alleviate the crisis of the Cold War and so eliminate the prospect of another world war breaking out. He took steps to ensure that these were not merely empty words, when he accepted American President John Kennedy’s invitation to cooperate in a venture to share weather satellite data between the two nations in 1962. Khrushchev stated in response to Kennedy, that precise and timely weather forecast will... open up new prospects for improving the well-being of mankind. Let us cooperate in this field, too. (Heidorn, K. 2000) Although this may seem a rather trivial endeavour, it opened the door for further cooperation in space, as Sergei Khrushchev, the son of the Soviet leader recalled: “Kennedy sent father a proposal about joining Soviet and American forces for a flight to the moon... my father... thought also of the political achievement of all these things, that then they would begin to trust each other much more.” (Hoagland, R. 2008) This statement reflects Khrushchev’s desire to relieve tensions with America, through cooperation in projects of mutual importance to both nations. Unfortunately, Kennedy’s untimely assassination dispelled the prospect of further cooperation in space, and Khrushchev himself would have his position at the head of the Soviet Union usurped within a year. Nevertheless, until his deposal in 1964, these endeavours stood testament to his desire to end the conflict of the Cold War with the West. It has been argued that Khrushchev’s decision in 1956 to use military force to suppress an uprising in Hungary was against his policy of peaceful coexistence and was bound to exacerbate Cold War tensions, yet he was actually keeping in line with the 1947 American doctrine of containment. (Freedman 2001, p24) Khrushchev was not invading new territory, which would undoubtedly have brought him into a direct confrontation with the United States, but maintaining his own Communist satellite states. By adhering to this American policy until his deposal in 1964, Khrushchev proved he was willing to work with the West through his policy of peaceful coexistence to resolve the conflict of the Cold War.
The lines of communication that Khrushchev established with the United States verify that he was attempting to negotiate an end to Cold War hostilities. Khrushchev’s era of Soviet leadership was so successful internationally that it was “hailed in the West as the beginning of a thaw in the Cold War.” (Kissinger 1994, p.518) During this period, Soviet emissaries attended numerous international summits where they negotiated global issues, as Kennedy summed up: “Our representatives have met at the summit and at the brink; they have met in Washington and in Moscow; in Geneva and at the United Nations.” (American Rhetoric. 2008) This statement offers a perspective from the American president himself, on the effect that communication had on resolving tensions between these two superpowers. The words “summit” and “brink” are conspicuously present in this proclamation, and emphasise the willingness of both leaders to hold talks in both the best and worst of circumstances. This illustrates Khrushchev’s desire to resolve potential differences with words, which was reflected by the American Secretary of State John Dulles in 1955 after the Geneva Summit. He stated that “Soviet policy is now based on tolerance which includes good relations with everyone.” (Kissinger 1994, p.517) This favourable comment by a statesman from a country ideologically opposed to the Soviet Union, adds weight to the argument that Khrushchev was resolving global tensions through communication until his deposal in 1964. Nevertheless, it has been argued that Khrushchev actually exacerbated global tensions and almost destroyed the lines of communication between the Soviet Union and America by his decision to implement missile installations in Cuba. Yet he was merely defending a vulnerable ally after America had tried to “unsuccessfully invade Cuba at the Bay of Pigs.” (Briggs 2006, p.21) By cooperating with the American’s demand to remove the missiles, he demonstrated how strong his desire for peace actually was, and instead of creating greater tensions between the two nations, this international incident actually led to greater degrees of communication. A direct phone line was established between the Kremlin and the White house to “help reduce the risk of war occurring by accident or miscalculation,” (history.com. 2007) according to a statement issued from the White House at the time. This line of communication would avert many crises between future leaders of both these nations, and is indicative of how Khrushchev established lines of communication with the West to alleviate the tensions of the Cold War.
Khrushchev’s actions as leader of the Soviet Union stand testament to his aspiration for a cease in the tension and conflict of the Cold War. As he stated to the American Vice-President Richard Nixon in 1959: “We have liquidated our forces and offered to make a peace treaty and eliminate the point of friction in Berlin.” (CNN. n.d.) This statement shows how Khrushchev was trying to make concessions with the West over the Soviet bloc, and in so doing relieve global tensions. In 1963 Khrushchev took cooperation one step further when he agreed to take part in the negotiation of a treaty with the United States which placed restrictions on the use of nuclear weaponry. A global treaty concerning the utilization of nuclear weapons had been first sought after by the United Nations back in 1946, but was never accepted by Khrushchev’s predecessor Stalin. Kennedy announced this joint initiative to the United States, stating: “Negotiations were concluded in Moscow on a treaty to ban all nuclear tests in the atmosphere, in outer space, and under water.” (American Rhetoric. 2008) Khrushchev’s willingness to accept the terms of the 1963 Nuclear Test Ban Treaty demonstrates his desire to prevent a direct confrontation between the two nuclear powers, and to alleviate international tensions and anxieties over the proliferation of nuclear weapons. Despite later Soviet leaders signing more comprehensive nuclear treaties, it is nevertheless obvious that they had a fixation with military programs that Khrushchev never had. This becomes evident in Soviet military spending throughout the Cold War, for by 1964, the year that Khrushchev was deposed; the Soviet Union was spending approximately 70 billion US dollars on military programs. (Appendix A) By the following year, with the more radical Leonid Brezhnev at its head, Soviet Union military program spending had jumped to US$190 billion a year. (Appendix B) Although these statistics are unlikely to be completely accurate, as they are based on the American CIA projections, they nevertheless emphasise the extent to which Khrushchev was attempting to downscale his military, compared to future Soviet leaders. This low expenditure stands testament to Khrushchev’s desire to cooperate with the West and resolve tensions up until his deposal in 1964. As Khrushchev explained at the 20th Communist Party Congress, peaceful coexistence is “not a tactical move, but a fundamental principle of Soviet foreign policy.” (Erickson, R. 2003) By following this doctrine, Khrushchev indicated that he was not interested in wasting resources on an arms race with the West, which would only exacerbate global tension and increase the likelihood of war.
Khrushchev’s choice to cooperate with the West and his attempts to resolve tensions and conflicts with words was his own decision and was not forced upon him by crippling economic problems, such as it was with Gorbachev. In fact it could be argued that Khrushchev “was a forerunner of Gorbachev in that he started the process of change.” (Kissinger 1994, p.520) He endured considerable opposition from powerful political enemies throughout his endeavour to improve Soviet relations with the West, as his son Sergei Khrushchev wrote: “The leaders who replaced Father hurried to “correct his mistakes” by giving new impetus to the arms race and producing tens of thousands of tactical nuclear weapons.” (Hoagland, R. 2008) This statement confirms how Khrushchev’s attempts to resolve tensions in the Cold War and cooperate with America were instrumental in his political enemy’s motives to have him removed from power. Cold War tensions were gradually being eased by the Khrushchev’s policy of peaceful coexistence, until his radical enemies had him deposed to prevent this reconciliation with the West. Nevertheless, Khrushchev remained focussed on his goal to eradicate the vestiges of war and live in peace with the world’s nations. He stated to Nixon: “We want to live in peace and friendship with Americans because we are the two most powerful countries and if we live in friendship then other countries will also live in friendship.” (CNN. n.d.) While some historians have argued that Khrushchev’s “smiles did not mean that he had given up the anti-Capitalist principles of Karl Marx and Lenin,” (Grolier, p.241) this is not to say that he was unwilling to coexist with the nations that followed Capitalist ideology, as his policies clearly showed. Until 1964, when Leonid Brezhnev had him deposed, Khrushchev was working to resolve potentially fatal tensions with the West. Had Khrushchev retained power, this policy would have seen international tensions continue to abate, and the Cold War with them.
It is evident that Nikita Khrushchev was working to reconcile the USSR’s position in regard the West during his time as leader of the Soviet Union. His policies, communication, actions and choices towards the West emphasise how strongly Khrushchev desired peace, and his removal from power is proof of how revolutionary his policies were. Had Khrushchev remained in power, is highly likely he would have continued to cooperate and improve global relations and tensions, marking an end to the trepidation felt throughout the world during the Cold War. When “Khrushchev was removed from power in 1964... the Soviet people were better off than they had been before.” (Grolier, p.241) Yet not even this was enough to save him from his power-hungry rivals, who would ensure the continuation of Cold War tensions for another 25 years.
Appendices
Appendix A: Noren, J. (2007). CIA’s Analysis of the Soviet Economy. Retrieved 2008,
from Source
Appendix B: Noren, J. (2007). CIA’s Analysis of the Soviet Economy. Retrieved 2008,
from Source
Annotated Bibliography
American Rhetoric. (2008). John F. Kennedy. Retrieved 2008,
from Source
The organisation that published this speech by the American president John Kennedy in 1963; American Rhetoric had its name clearly visible at the top of the website. This organisation’s authority is well known, as it hosts a wealth of complete speeches by famous Americans. The text of this speech on the website was accurate, as accompanying the words of this speech was its recording which was true to the websites annotation. As this speech was the only text on the webpage, no bias was evident, except in this primary source towards American ideals. The website was updated this year and I found it to be an extremely useful primary source which enabled me to understand American feelings towards the Soviet Union at the time better.
Briggs, J. (2006). Contested Spaces. North Ryde : McGraw Hill
This book was written by Justin Briggs; who name was very clearly displayed on the front page, for the NSW modern history syllabus. This text had a very comprehensive bibliography, and although at times the book seemed to portray the Americans in a more favourable light than the Soviets, on wthe whole I found this to be a very accurate source. The book is relatively recent, only being published in 2006 which attests to the currency of this source. The whole of the Cold War was covered in great detail from 1945 to 1991 and I found this information to be a useful starting point for my research process.
Clare, J. (2007). The Cold War. Retrieved 2008,
from Source
This website was created as a teacher’s guide to teaching the Cold War, and while the author of this site’s name was clearly visible I was unable to determine the veracity of this individual. Nevertheless the website was based around a series of questions relating to Cold War primary sources and I could find no bias evident in the text. The information that I gleaned from this site, I double checked against other sources and I concluded that the information in this source was genuine. I could no ulterior motive or bias within the text, and its currency marked it an accurate source. I found that the author of this site utilized a great deal of primary sources of information to create this website which I found to be extremely useful during my research process where I was searching for primary quotes on the Cold War.
CNN. (n.d.). Moscow ‘Kitchen Debate.’ Retrieved 2008,
from Source
This is the official website of the news group CNN, and this organisation is well known for its media coverage. The information presented on this site was the transcript of the debate between Nikita Khrushchev and Richard Nixon in 1959. No other information was present on this webpage, as the publishing company did not offer an opinion on this primary source. Therefore no bias was present except that of the individuals in the primary source itself. The website is very current as it is updated every year and the topic was covered in great detail as there was a full transcript of the conversation on the webpage – it had not been edited. I found this primary source to be very useful in helping me form an opinion about Khrushchev’s attitude to the West in response to one of its leaders.
Erickson, R. (2003). Development of the Strategy of Peaceful Coexisting During the Khrushchev Era. Retrieved 2008,
from Source
The author of this website had his name clearly visible and he was an expert on the topic, with a degree from the University of Virginia. The webpage is structured around a series of quotes from Khrushchev which describe his policy of peaceful coexistence with the West. A bibliography at the bottom of the page attested to the accuracy of this website. Although the author of this site was an American, which historically has detested Communism and may harbour some bias against a Soviet leader, I found this webpage to be a very factual description of Khrushchev’s policies with a wealth of primary quotes to back up its statements. The webpage is only five years old so the validity of its contents is still current. The author covered this topic in great detail and I found this source extremely useful when I was trying to attain some idea of Khrushchev’s policies during the research process.
Freedman, Lawrence. (2001). The Cold War. London : Cassell & Co
The author of this book has worked at the Department of War Studies at Kings College in London for many years, so he is an expert in his subject area. His name was clearly visible on the front page of this text. I could find no bias in the information presented, and the author listed a comprehensive bibliography at the back of the book. The purpose of this book was to describe the issues of the Cold War for educational processes, and in that regard it has been a success as I found it very useful for my assignment. The book was published in 2001 so the information presented in it is still relatively recent and it covers the entire Cold War utilizing primary sources to back up the author’s ideas. It provided me with an excellent overview of the Cold War which helped me form my hypothesis and then eventually my entire essay.
Heidorn, K. (2000). Weather Cooperation During the Cold War. Retrieved 2008,
from Source
The webpage discussed historical events concerning weather in history, and the author’s name was clearly visible on the site. The webpage presented a series of letters between Khrushchev and Kennedy and I could find no bias in the author’s analysis of their meaning. The purpose of this webpage was to provide information about meteorology and I found the primary quotes that it presented to be extremely useful for my proving point about Khrushchev’s cooperation during the Cold War. The webpage is eight years old, but the primary sources were extremely useful towards my proving points. The author covered a great deal of information about this topic which was all referenced to the primary quotes utilized in the text.
Hoagland, R. (2008). The New Frontier of Hope. Retrieved 2008,
from Source
The author of this website had his name clearly displayed and he was offering an opinion on the space race between the Soviet Union and the United States of America. Despite this I could not discern any bias in this source as the author was commenting on valid primary sources. The purpose of this website was to highlight cooperation between East and West during the Cold War and the information on this site was very current as it was updated just this year. The webpage looks at the changing relations between the two nations during the space race which I found very in-depth. This website was useful to me as I could use some of its primary sources as quotes to prove my point in my essay about Cold War Cooperation.
Noren, J. (2007). CIA’s Analysis of the Soviet Economy. Retrieved 2008,
from Source
The author of this webpage has written several books about the Soviet Union and gains his expertise from being a senior economic analyst for the American Central Intelligence Agency. I felt that I could have confidence in the information presented in this source, as it was published on the Central Intelligence Agency’s website. Although obviously this could indicate that the information is biased towards American ideals, I found the information to be presented in a factual and neutral tone without prejudice. The information on this webpage is quite current, as it was last updated only a year ago and the author covered a great deal of information on economic espionage. I found this website extremely useful because it provided me with two graphs detailing the military expenditure of the United States and Soviet Union throughout the Cold War which I used to prove my point about the actions of Khrushchev helping resolve tensions in the Cold War.
Kissinger, H. (1994). Diplomacy. New York : Simon & Schuster
This book was written by the 56th Secretary of State of the United States of America so the author’s expertise is verified by his first hand experience during the Cold War. The author of this text utilized numerous primary quotes, as well as his own first hand experiences to construct an accurate representation of the Cold War. The book was written as a factual sequence of events, and I could find no bias in the text, not even in the author’s speculations. The currency of this source is assured as it is a work based on primary sources, despite being 14 years old. A great deal of information about the Cold War was covered in this book and I found it to be a very useful source for my assignment.
The New Book of Knowledge (Vol O). (2001).New York : Groliers,
The organisation that wrote this encyclopaedia was selling it as a reference for educational purposes. This source of information had an extensive bibliography where all of its sources were referenced and I could find no bias in the text, merely a factual account of Khrushchev’s era of Soviet leadership. The encyclopaedia was published seven years ago, but the information in it was still valid according to the checks that I performed. I found this source to offer a succinct and factual view into the Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev, and it was useful during the research process as it enabled me to understand this character in more detail.
History.com. (2007). Hotline Established Between Moscow and Washington. Retrieved 2008,
from Source
The website was created by an organisation known as History.com which is the group that runs the history channel on television; so it is evident from this organisation’s credentials that this is a reputable source of information. By cross referencing I was able to determine that the information presented on this website was accurate and that its function was purely for educational purposes. The information is presented in a factual and unbiased manner and the source utilized primary quotes from the time to back up its conclusions. The website was only a year old and I found that its coverage of the topic of the Cold War Hotline was excellent. It was very useful for my essay, and the primary quotes were essential to my proving point about communication during the Cold War.
