Comparative Analysis of American and Soviet Perspectives on the 1962 Essay

Comparative Analysis of American and Soviet Perspectives on the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis - Essay Example The two nations have some valid grounds for assigning different relevance to different truths, and even to similar truths. Apparently, the truths themselves, regardless how popular, understood, or overlooked, are similar for both (Fursenko & Naftali 1997). Furthermore, as claimed by Fursenko and Naftali (1997), even nowadays, the crisis is not accurately known. Scholars on both sides have concentrated on how the events of the crisis have made subsequent leaders more cautious and more keenly sensitive to the importance of preventing decisions that could provoke another war. However, there is insufficient knowledge in the United States as to the reason that incident is referred to by the Soviet as the ‘Caribbean crisis’, and how it may be critically considered as originating even partly from the U.S. decisions (Hirschbein 1997, 137). There is insufficient knowledge in the Soviet as to the reason it is appropriately viewed in the U.S. as a crisis caused by the covert entran ce of Soviet medium-range missiles into Cuba. And in these two nations there is inadequate focus on and knowledge of the entire interaction process, including not just conflicting points of view but conflicting paradigms of significant truth, or distinct groups of realities (Garthoff 1989). As stated by Nathan (1992), especially dissimilar base levels of transparency of documents or source materials in both nations complicate the issue of trying to attain some kind of consolidated historical and political point of view. The Cuban Missile Crisis: Comparing the Perspectives of U.S. and the Soviet Union The Soviet Union and the United States are superpowers with global ambitions, and at times those ambitions come to blows. Crisis management is needed if conflicts... This research aims to evaluate and present the Soviet Union and the United States as superpowers with global ambitions, and at times those ambitions come to blows. Crisis management is needed if conflicts occur; but crisis avoidance rooted in political control and recognition of dissimilarities is much to be desired. Reductions and regulations of arms control are vital in themselves and since they can positively influence political affairs. Nuclear war avoidance, and thus avoidance of any war implicating the Soviet Union and the United States, is of the greatest concern. Analyzing the experience and understanding the importance of the missile crisis of 1962 can help both nations to ascertain not only that this problem never happens again, but also that a bigger crisis never arises. The United States focused on crisis management. This inclination is true generally, and with regard to analysis of the Cuban missile crisis. In contrast, in the Soviet Union the common tendency and utmost attention paid to the 1962 Caribbean crisis has been aimed at improving crisis avoidance and political acceptance, instead of crisis management. Strangely invalidating the common stereotypes, the Americans have been moderate, cynical pragmatists, believing that, unfortunately, conflicts will arise and should be cautiously handled, whereas the Soviets have seemed to be hopeful, if not totally unrealistic, in claiming that crises can and should be avoided by political co-operation.