Truman's Policy of Containment Essay Example

Following the fall of South Vietnam to communism in 1975, longtime State Department official Paul Nitze announced his verdict on the policy of containment, the policy that saw American involvement in the prevention of the spread of communism. He declared that “containment was, on balance, a stunningly successful policy. Even our defeat in Vietnam cannot obscure the overall success of containment.” Though the United States most definitely did not perfect the policy of containment as evidenced by certain events in Southeast Asia, Latin America, and the Middle East, they did see success through both a military-related and economical viewpoint in their efforts to contain the spread of communism.

Following the conclusion of World War II, President Truman declared in his address to Congress that the United States must enact a policy of containment of the Soviet Union and that the policy must “support free peoples who are resisting attempted subjugation by armed minorities or by outside pressures” (Little 123). At this time in Germany, the Soviets had implemented blockades in West Berlin that blocked road and water access to allied areas. This became known as the Berlin Airlift, which was paramount in the formation and foundation of allies for the United States, those with which the United States could aid and entrust with their foreign policy methods. The strength of bonds between the United States and their allies proved to be effective as they delivered daily necessities to those who had been cut off by the Soviets. This air support would soon turn into ground support as the start of true military involvement in the Cold War began when the United States deployed troops to Korea, the first time this had happened under the new containment policy. The United States had observed the intentions of the communist North Koreans as they sought to implement their tactics in South Korea. When they finally crossed the 38th Parallel, it led the Truman administration to raise the “annual defense expenditures from some $11 billion in 1950 to more than $50 billion by the war’s end” (Merrill and Paterson 236). Eventually, a ceasefire was agreed upon and the two sides remained divided politically. Here, the containment policy was shown to be effective and successful over the course of this campaign as the two sides of Korea remained separate through 1975 and are even still divided today as we know it.

Nitze obviously concedes the fact that Vietnam served to be a failure for the United States’ foreign policy, however, there is still reason to believe that the United States’ involvement could have limited the spread to an extent. Policymakers in the United States feared what the domino effect entailed, the idea that if one nation fell to communism, then the other nations around it would continue to fall like a chain of dominos. The formation of coups in several countries across the world led the United States to intervene in order to ensure they would push for an anti-communist governing style. For example, Brazil saw the formation of a coup that would lead to the overthrowing of their president with support from the United States. Even though leaders in Brazil consistently violated the basic rights of the Brazilian people, “the U.S. government, in the name of backing a solid ally in the Cold War, used the Alliance for Progress to funnel aid to them.” (Taffet 8) In other attempts to contain, the United States’ policy saw success with the prevention of a communist government in Greece, the preservation of the non-communist government in South Korea, and the promotion of reform and peace in Brazil. Military engagement also increased as officials enacted plans “in the Middle East and Asia” where military aid was sent to “French forces in Indochina” and the deployment of “U.S. naval power to block the Taiwan Strait” (Merrill and Paterson 236).

While military involvement had lasting impacts on the Soviet Union’s worldwide spread of communism, economic policies under the policy of containment essentially halted the Soviet's influence on neighboring nations. Economic success first sprouted from the Marshall Plan as it allowed for the further strengthening of allies. Prior to the start of World War II, the United States implemented the Marshall Plan in order to combat the potential spread of communism due to Europe’s vulnerable economic nature. The launch took place with the thought that economic aid would allow the democratic institutions to survive. Over the course of the period leading up to 1975, the US foreign policy had given billions of dollars to the recovery program. This economic policy under the containment policy allowed Europe to stabilize its economy and thus prevented the spread of communism. While certain uproars and movements attempted to make strides in Africa and the Middle East, this aid saw and helped these developing countries steer clear of communism.

While the Marshall Plan surely showed its effectiveness in restructuring Europe, it didn’t directly impact the countries that the United States was attempting to contain. To do this, the United States focused its endeavors on placing embargos on the Soviets and their communist allies. Doing this loosened and deteriorated ties between the Soviets and other nations including Vietnam, North Korea, and Cuba. In February of 1962, “the Kennedy administration banned most imports of Cuban products” which forced Cuba “to pay higher freight costs, enlarge its foreign debt, and suffer innumerable factory shut-downs due to the lack of spare parts once brought in the United States” (Merrill and Paterson 397).

The United States' economic and military presence both proved to be effective in containing the spread of communism, however, a large amount of the success resulted from the US agencies that were engaging and inserting themselves into other nations’ policies. Although the CIA experienced flaws in trying to prevent communism, they still played a crucial role in rigging elections, bugging communication lines, and supporting other espionage acts. By eliminating key instigators in movements forming in Greece and Iran for example, the United States was able to effectively contain communist action without mass violence. In other nations, however, the US targeted established power figures like Fidel Castro in Cuba by sabotaging his speeches. Although the CIA had several failed assassination attempts on Castro, it still highlighted their ambition for the operations. Despite questionable methods, the funding allowed the US to win the favor of and support anti-communist movements and organizations worldwide, hence enhancing the goal of the Truman Doctrine.

Despite Paul Nitze’s characterization of the United States' policy of containment as being balanced and successful, a counterargument could be examined through the conflicts and flaws that arose in areas such as Iran and China. While Western Europe was certainly a place of the utmost importance to the United States from an economic and military standpoint, it’s essentially just a small plot of land when compared to the most populous country of China, which fell to communism in 1949. While the accomplishments in Europe could be looked at as a victory in and of itself, it was not as much when looking at the containment policy globally. Additionally, the containment efforts in Iran in 1953 created a great amount of resentment on the part of the Iranian people towards the United States.

In looking at the policy as a whole, it would be foolish to expect that the policy of containment would work effectively in every location the Americans intervened. Thus, Nitze is for the most part correct in saying that the United States was successful in its policy as backed by its military presence, economic relief, and political engagement.