Chinese Involvement in the Cold War

In America, the Cold War efforts were partially fueled by an increase in anti- Communist rhetoric and propaganda.  Due to this, China was seen as an intrinsic threat to national security and the general over- all safety and comfort of day to day life.  The same year that the Soviet Union first tested an atomic bomb also just so happened to coincide with the incipit of Communist control of China, lead by Mao Zedong.  Even though Mao Zedong lead Communist revolutionary forces in China from 1927, it was not until 1949 that he managed to completely take over the government.  This coincidence did not bode well for the United States, who at the time was overly concerned with the appearance of power and control.  Chinese ‘success’ as a Communist nation only served to ignite more unrest in the United States (Mao Zedong).

Mao Zedong once said:

Not just in China, but everywhere in the world without exception, one either leans to the side of imperialism or the side of socialism. Neutrality is mere camouflage; a third road does not exist.

 

China aided Communist North Korea while the United States provided support for South Korea, in a conflict known as the Korean War.  The “Red Scare” swept across the United States and ran rampant through the media.  Almost indirectly, the Chinese managed to amp up already growing unrest within the United States.  The “Red Scare” was a time full of espionage and sabotage.  Brother would turn against brother, spouse against spouse.  People were accusing people of being Communist or Communist- sympathizers left and right.  China managed to wreak havoc on the United States without either nation having to visit the other (Red Scare).

President Harry Truman once remarked:

The attack upon Korea makes it plain beyond all doubt that communism has passed beyond the use of subversion to conquer independent nations and will now use armed invasion and war. It has defied the orders of the Security Council of the United Nations issued to preserve international peace and security. In these circumstances the occupation of Formosa by Communist forces would be a direct threat to the security of the Pacific area and to United States forces performing their lawful and necessary functions in that area.

People genuinely believed that this foe was unable to be reasoned with, therefore political leaders were able to justify the war that they waged (Red Scare).

Ironically, even though the United States swore to stand against communism and all that fell under its parasitic flag, by the early 1970s, relations between the United States of America and China were on the rise.  This occurred as a direct result of the split between the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) and China.  In the mind’s of the fear- mongering United State’s politicians, any enemy of the Soviet Union was a friend of theirs.  This mentality serves to highlight the corruption of the time because the allegiance of a country was so easily swayed.  Ideally, if the United States wanted to consider herself a true powerhouse, she should have been held to a higher, more objective standard.  Sadly this was not the case.  The United States saw an opportunity and took it, seemingly disregarding the implications of such an action (Red Scare) (Soviet Union and Chinese armed forces clash).

China and the USSR had wavering relations due to a matter of semantics.  The extremely profound split was catalyzed by a series of seemingly insignificant actions.  The Chinese felt as though Soviet forces invaded their territory so they retaliated.  It was also rumored that the Chinese forces did not appreciate the manner in which the Soviet Union drifted away from pure Marxism.  This dissent began around the early 1960s and not even a decade later, the United States had swept in.  They utilized the discord to their advantage, arguably one of the best moves the nation made during this entire ordeal.  Even though Chinese involvement in the Cold War may appeared scattered, it was nonetheless important, thus securing them a spot in the top four main stakeholders of this era.  (Soviet Union and Chinese armed forces clash).

Works Referenced

“Mao Zedong.” History.com. A&E Television Networks, 2009. Web. 04 Apr. 2017. <http://www.history.com/topics/cold-war/mao-zedong>.

“Red Scare.” History.com. A&E Television Networks, 2010. Web. 04 Apr. 2017. <http://www.history.com/topics/cold-war/red-scare>.

“Soviet Union and Chinese armed forces clash.” History.com. A&E Television Networks, n.d. Web. 04 Apr. 2017. <http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/soviet-union-and-chinese-armed-forces-clash>.

8 Responses

  1. Connor Passarella at |

    It seems that for quite some time, the United States and China have been pitted against each other in many aspects. The biggest of these aspects is obviously the fact that the United States is out to destroy communism and China is out to preserve it. It seems as if the United States and China are almost the same countries economically, but very different in political and social beliefs. They are both on the rise, but are in different postions and are growing different ways.

    Reply
    1. mackenzie cohen at |

      Liv,

      Your blogs are always so educational. We were talking about the Cold War the other day in class and I thought of you right away. It is crazy to see how much work goes into each aspect of the war and all the resources that have to be implemented in order for a war to take place. It is so clear after reading your blog that you have so much passion for this topic.

      Keep it up

      Kenz

      Reply
  2. tjm6191 at |

    Really interesting post! I know you said that our patching of relations with China by the 1970s (after their break with the Soviet Union) was characteristic of the corruption of the time, but I think its characteristic of the realism that exists in international relations. As a state seeking to maximize power, we do what we need to do to counter other threats that could disrupt the balance of power (Soviet Union). In a similar situation, we would probably make the same decision again today.

    Reply
  3. mackenzie cohen at |

    Liv,

    Your blogs are always so educational. We were talking about the Cold War the other day in class and I thought of you right away. It is crazy to see how much work goes into each aspect of the war and all the resources that have to be implemented in order for a war to take place. It is so clear after reading your blog that you have so much passion for this topic.

    Keep it up

    Kenz

    Reply
  4. akl5439 at |

    Informative post, Liv. I appreciate the history you discussed, especially since in my own CI blog I’m always focusing on current events and never thought to discuss past ones. The history of China and the States is definitely an interesting one. As, I read in Taylor’s most recent post, there are some things that still aren’t resolved between us and them. Hopefully Trump doesn’t screw it up.

    Reply
  5. jpa5378 at |

    It is interesting to think of this, because it seemed they were having their own problems and the US did not really care about them at first. I think it is amazing at how the United States can make us fear anything just because we do not understand it. It made it look like communism was completely evil and people literally thought that it would be better to be anything than a communist. I just think it is interesting since we were able to work with them during WWII and win. Also, I noted how you talked about the disagreements between China and the USSR because their idea of marxism and how to lead a revolution was different, and that is something that is not very highlighted.

    Reply
  6. Jarius at |

    I think this source is very interesting and I found it very interesting. I just a school student but I figured I would leave a comment on it to be nice and this source is pretty great. I actually citing this source for an essay I working on about the cold war. I don’t normally find China interesting but this source gave a lot of interesting info on it and was simple enough to understand what the article was talking about. Anyway, keep up the hard work.

    Reply
  7. Anna at |

    What is the name of the author?

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Skip to toolbar