New to the Job and Inexperienced, President Truman Was the Person Most Responsible For

Rachel Lee Shi Ying 07A01A HISTORY TERM PAPER

2. ‘New to the job and inexperienced, President Truman was the person most responsible for the outbreak of the Cold War.’ How far do you agree?

The Cold War was one of the longest-lasting feuds in international history – having lasted a total of 44 years. Many people criticised the key leaders involved for failing to come to a consensus; Harry S. Truman took the most flak for his inexperience as the President of the United States. However, the outbreak of war between the two superpowers – the United States (US) and the Soviet Union – was fundamentally based on the fact that both sides supported the starkly different political ideologies of capitalism and communism respectively. It took additional factors other than Truman’s lack of experience to compound the differences to the extent of starting the “Cold” War.

An insensitive comment by Truman made in the week Hitler invaded the Soviet Union in 1941 ignited the suspicion that Truman was not ready to be on good terms with the Soviet Union. He had said that “if we see that Germany is winning we ought to help Russia, and if Russia is winning we ought to help Germany, and that way let them kill as many as possible although I don’t want to see Hitler victorious under any circumstances.” This had made the Soviets highly suspicious that the US was willing to sit aside and watch Germany and Russia fight each other till their resources were spent, leaving the US as the sole global superpower.

Truman was sworn into office as the 33rd President of the United States on April 12, 1945 after Franklin D. Roosevelt’s death, only 82 days after Roosevelt had clinched presidency with Truman as his running mate. He had only met Roosevelt twice since their elections and thus was unable to fully understand his intentions and stand regarding any issues between the US and the Soviet Union. This point clearly questions his ability to handle the political tension arising between both the superpowers at that point in time. Truman’s political career can hardly be considered experience as his first venture as a judge was dogged with rumours of associating with the corrupt political boss Thomas Pendergast and it was due to Pendergast that he was able to become Senator. However, Truman was said to be an honest man with personal integrity despite the rumours. Roosevelt picked him as running mate because of the South Democrats’ approval, although it was also because of increasing demand for previous Vice-President Henry A. Wallace to step down because of his pro-Soviet views. Up till now, Truman had only been involved in national affairs such as the issue of government defense spending – how would he able to stand up to the scrutiny of the international world given that he was thrust into the presidency so suddenly?

Truman’s failure to meet with Roosevelt to discuss opinions about the Soviet Union and subsequent lack of belief in Roosevelt’s peaceful cooperation with Stalin was often labelled as a trigger to increasing tension between the US and the Soviet Union. Roosevelt had done much work in trying to get Stalin to agree to many of the terms at the Yalta Conference in February 1945. He successfully persuaded the Soviet Union’s entry into the United Nations, although at a concession of granting each permanent member of the Security Council the power to veto, which was rather detrimental to the strength of the United Nations. He also tried to persuade Stalin to join the war against Japan after the defeat of Nazi Germany. Roosevelt’s ability to get Stalin to agree to many of the terms proved his eloquence and strong desire to end the anarchy that had gripped the globe with two devastating world wars. However, he died before the 1945 Potsdam Conference, which Truman attended only a month after assuming office. Although many say his legacy of trying to establish goodwill between the US and the Soviet Union died with him, evidence of American demobilisation during Truman’s presidency claim otherwise. The US Army, having numbered 8 million during Japanese surrender had been gradually decreased to 554,030 by 1948. In fact, it was Roosevelt who had failed to stop Stalin from acquiring the Eastern European countries as he had not openly opposed Stalin’s intentions, allowing Stalin to gain the upperhand by claiming no one had expressed any major disagreement towards his move. Stalin was quoted as saying to Yugoslav Milovan Djilas in April 1945 that “whoever occupies territory also imposes his own social systems as far as his army can reach”, showing his failure to honour his agreement to hold free elections in countries like Poland – Stalin occupied Poland a few months later, removing its local government entirely and replacing it with a communist government.

Stalin had appeared cooperative throughout the Potsdam Conference, as Truman was quoted in one of his diary entries that Stalin had said that “he wanted to cooperate with US in peace as we had cooperated in war”, and that he was “grossly misunderstood in US and (Truman) was misunderstood in Russia”. However, there are major doubts in Stalin’s statement, for he was the one who controlled all media in Russia. Therefore, any misunderstanding regarding Truman could not have been something he was unable to factor out. Is it therefore Truman’s fault that anti-American sentiment was building up in Russia? Or was it merely Stalin who was trying to portray the Americans in a negative light? It is to be critically noted that the Potsdam Conference was the last conference between the Big Three of the US, Britain and the Soviet Union, after which, the wartime alliance collapsed.

Another major criticism towards Truman would be his controversial endorsement of the dropping of the atomic bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945. Although Stalin had reportedly expressed approval with the plan, it was obvious that the United States was now far ahead of the Soviet Union with the discovery of nuclear technology. This would have been a possible source of tension as well, as Stalin was alleged to have pressured chief Russian nuclear scientist Kurchatov to step up work on the Soviet bomb project. Many argue that as an inexperienced leader, Truman should not have undertaken the responsibility of deciding the fate of hundreds and thousands of Japanese lives under the pretext of allegedly creating a superiority complex. However, irregardless of Truman’s inexperience, it was clear that Truman was aware of the professional advice sent to Roosevelt prior to his death regarding the consequences of the atomic bombs by its inventor, Dr L. Szilard, as well as renowned scientist Albert Einstein who had recommended him. Truman had also experimented with the atomic bombs in the New Mexican beforehand, acknowledging it was the “most terrible thing ever”. In fact, Truman had specifically mentioned that the target was to be “purely military” and “not women and children”; however the proposal was rejected because the bombing aircraft could potentially miss small targets not surrounded by a large urban area. Furthermore, it was proven that the atomic bombs were the final blow to the Japanese, who surrendered almost immediately after the impact, putting an end to the war in the Pacific as well as the increasing loss of lives involved in the war. Therefore, his decision to drop the atomic bombs was not one merely based on pure intuition on his part, but with great prudence and thought given to the idea. It was also an immediate solution to make the Japanese surrender, rather than a display of technological superiority towards the Soviet Union.

In 1946, domestic support for Truman was waning because of accusations directed at the American government for taking control of the national economy in terms of prices, wages and productions. Truman was also advocating the continuation of the government’s prime role in the economy as well as adopting an expansive liberal agenda called the Fair Deal. There was high inflation and consumer shortages, and the fact that the Democrats eventually lost control of Congress in the 1946 midterm elections compounded the urgent call for Truman to step down. It seemed almost ridiculous for a leader who could barely handle domestic pressures to be called upon to bear the responsibility of international politics. Desperate to win back the voters’ approval – since they mostly supported the Truman Doctrine and Marshall Plan, Truman reportedly exaggerated the aggressive nature of the Soviet Union to gain funding for the Marshall Plan from Congress. He mentioned that “Communism flourishes in deprived areas” and later admitted to exaggerating the threat to “scare the hell out of Congress”. He finally garnered support from the rural areas as well as the blacks, the trade unions, and those who wanted greater welfare legislation – and was re-elected with majority of the votes. It is interesting to note that discontent towards Truman still remained and escalated in the 1950s to to such an extent that only 32% of the public approved of him; thereafter, Truman refused to run for a second term as president.

However, Truman was the not the only man who had stirred up controversy with his speech. It can also be said that Winston Churchill was the one who fired the catalysing words with his famous ‘Iron Curtain’ address in 1946. He alienated the Soviets by announcing that the US “stands at this time at the pinnacle of world power” and accused them of desiring “the fruits of war and the indefinite expansion of their power and doctrines”. Britain’s obvious alliance with the US, with Churchill’s support of the “establishment of conditions of freedom and democracy as rapidly as possible in all countries”, made Stalin livid and even more determined to spread communist ideologies. Truman could still be acquitted on grounds that his inexperience had led to his unstable policy-making, and subsequent lack of support. However, Churchill was a major figure in politics over the last decade or so; his words would have sparked a greater impact on the masses and thus, would take on a heavier responsibility as well.

Many critics believe that the Truman Doctrine was the key policy that ultimately sparked the Cold War – and the criticisms were directed at the man who issued it, Harry Truman. However, it is unfair to blame Truman completely for the doctrine. The person who drafted the first few ideas of the Truman Doctrine was actually George Kennan, the US ambassador to Moscow and Soviet chargé d’affaires. He coined the idea of containment, in which he expressed his views that communism was a “malignant parasite” and therefore needed to be contained. He had accused the Soviets of “(sacrificing) every single ethical value in their methods and tactics” and labelled Russian rulers as “cruel and wasteful”. He also felt that the methods and goals of the United States and Soviet Union were “irreconciliable”. Given his experience in Soviet affairs, Kennan would be taken very seriously in his critique of the Soviet Union. His ideas were embossed in the form of the Long Telegram sent to Washington in February 1947, where they were officially put into words in terms of the Truman doctrine. The policy of containment was to be the fundamental principle of US foreign policy in the years to come.

Another policy that became another point for contention was the Marshall Plan which followed shortly after the Truman doctrine. The Soviet Union came up with the Cominform to counter the Marshall Plan and this was one of the clear signals that both superpowers were turning on each other. Revisionists believe that the Marshall Plan was executed for the sake of the US’ own self-interest. Their theory was that if Europe’s economy recovered, the US would have found new grounds for another market for their goods. It was true that the US was interested in handing out economic aid to Europe in order to revive its economy, though it could also have been doing so in order to block the spread of communism.

The idea of countering communism brings the debate to a greater level as political ideologies are drawn in. This was the greatest source of tension between both superpowers as the capitalists and communists never saw eye to eye in terms of ideological beliefs, principles and governing methods. With the vast differences between the capitalist world pushing for a free world with the Wilsonian liberalist ideals of a free world governed by democratic principles, and a communist world pushing for equal rights for all in a society with a central governing body (which was supposed to be dissolved once common ownership was established for every individual), conflict between both parties would actually have been inevitable. This was especially due to the fact that it was during the post-war era, where suspicion and tension was present everywhere due to the large-scale impact of World War Two which affected five out of seven continents in the world. Furthermore, each superpower was hoping that they could spread their ideologies to the rest of the world because of their strong belief in the principles governing them. Whether the leaders were Wilson and Lenin, Roosevelt and Stalin, or subsequently Truman, their goal was the same – to advocate their political ideologies to the world. It would only take a more moderate figure, such as Mikhail Gorbachev, to eventually ease the tension. However, this figure only emerged in the 1980s, therefore there could barely be any room for concession during the period of the late 1940s. Harry Truman would therefore only be a minor individual in this embroilment of political ideologies.

It is also important to note that both countries were already in conflict over the post-war situation in Europe. The prime target, Germany, was a source of contention that made it clear that the US’ priority was to ensure European recovery, while the Soviet Union’s fear of Germany’s possible rise in the future, spelt its defensive priorities. Truman was not yet involved in international politics at this point in time.

On the whole, Harry Truman was not without fault in his role as President of the United States at the outbreak of the Cold War. He had stepped into Roosevelt’s shoes only a few months after he was exposed to the international arena of politics as Vice-President. His lack of tact at certain crucial moments led to sparks of suspicion between both superpowers. The growing domestic discontent also cast doubts on his ability to deal with international crises. Yet, despite his lack of experience, he was a man of prudence – which allows more room for criticism as blame cannot be laid wholly upon his inexperience. It was also due to his refusal to further compromise with Stalin that led to greater tensions between the two.

However, many other factors were already in place before Truman had come into the picture. It would be considered a microscopic point of view to put the blame on him majorly for the outbreak of the Cold War. There was the underlying tension of conflicting political ideologies, coupled with different goals of both nations towards the rebuilding of Europe. Even when Truman was in power, it took Stalin’s refusal to comply with the terms of the Potsdam Conference, the United Kingdom’s assertion of its alliance with the US and other political figures such as George Kennan, to eventually materialise the conflict into a Cold War. Truman’s involvement was certainly a catalystic factor, but given his inexperience, should be considered a great risk on his part to deal with international politics then. Perhaps, we should even laud Harry Truman for daring to take the steps he took to lead America during this critical period. He was voted the 8th greatest US President of all time in a Chicago Tribune Poll in 1982, showing that despite the lack of support he had during his term, later, many people viewed his leadership as a strong one during the dark hours of post-war period. Truman may be identified as a primary contributor to the outbreak of the Cold War, but he cannot be considered the most responsible character given the harsh circumstances.

(2654 words)

Bibliography

“World History In The Twentieth Century New Edition”, R.D.Cornwell, 1969, Pages 180-183

“The Cold War 1945-1991”, John W. Mason, 2000, Pages 3-4

“Few Are Chosen – Problems In Presidential Selection”, Robert E. Declerico/Eric M. Uslaner, 1984, Pages 171, 180, 187

“The Cold War: A History”, Martin Walker, 1995, Pages 17-28

(Topics looked at: Harry Truman; Atomic Bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki; Thomas Pendergast)