How Significant Was The British Role In The Early Cold War?

How significant was the British role in the early Cold War?

The British role in the Cold War has often been overlooked as ever having any importance in what is primarily described as a bipolar war between America and the Soviet Union. More recently however historians such as Anne Deighton have looked at the role of Britain and concluded that its role in the Cold War was a lot more significant than first thought. Some will go further, like John Kent, and say that they had a big part in actually starting the Cold War. This is hardly surprising seeing as Russia and Britain have a long history of rivalry. This had initially been based on mutual fears of expansionism but after 1917, this was combined with ideological differences too. America was relatively new to this rivalry and so Britain took it upon themselves as being the educator in their Anglo-American relationship. The significance of the British role during the Cold War can be assessed by seeing how much influence they had on certain key events, how much they influenced America and finally by whether or not they can be described as initiators of the aggression at the start of the Cold War. Also when the Cold War started is in itself something that is open to interpretation as it depends on how you judge it but for the purpose of this essay, the early Cold War years will be defined as the period directly after the Second World War until the Suez crisis in 1956 as this event is a good indicator on how significant Britain's role was.

Primarily though it is necessary to look through this historic rivalry between the two powers. They had been rivals for a long time. A lot of the events and issues between Britain and the Soviet Union during the Cold War had been issues for them in the early nineteenth century, for example, Britain had to get involved in Greece twice to counteract Russian power and expansionism just like they had had to in 1944. They had always been against them ideologically, for example, Britain was against the Holy Alliance in 1815 as Britain had felt that Russia was standing in the way of liberalism so there was always this hostility and friction between the two over beliefs. Furthermore the policy of rollback and containment, techniques used by America during the Cold War, were techniques that Britain had been using initially against Russia for centuries. It was only in the Bolshevik revolution in 1917 that the British reason for mistrusting Russia changed slightly as their ideology had but this hostility was still present between them . Communism was a massive threat to the entire Western world but Churchill was a massive opposer of anything communist and he often shared this view with Presidents Roosevelt and Truman whenever he could.

Winston Churchill was Prime Minister during the Second World War and even though he had tried for cooperation with Stalin initially, he still hated communism and would often send messages to Roosevelt warning him of the perils communism could bring and how Stalin could not be trusted. Rasor argues that it was in fact Churchill that started the Cold War with his overly aggressive attitude towards the Soviet Union which was emulated by the new, impressionable President, Harry Truman . Churchill wanted the intensification of the Anglo-American relationship as he felt this was the best way to combat the Soviet threat. Through this intensification, Harbutt argues that Churchill was able to inspire the timing of the reversal of American policy from trying to cooperate with the Soviet Union to being harsher . Churchill was seen by Truman as being more experienced on European affairs than him. Deighton would argue that Britain shaped the Cold War and that Churchill was a massive authority with his 1946 'Iron Curtain' speech , which it has been stated had a massive influence on the creation of the Truman Doctrine which would further cement the two camps (Reynolds) .

Churchill's views were not the only ones that were influential in the shaping of the Cold War though. Kent mentions how Ernest Bevin, Foreign Minister in 1945, unlike Atlee was very concerned with being an imperial power separate from America and the Soviet Union and that this was motivated by economic interests. Bevin wanted to keep their influence in the Mediterranean and the Middle East and it was through this that tensions between the Soviet Union and Britain grew in 1945 . However, this foreign policy had failed in many respects as Britain needed money they did not have so their foreign policy had to be tweaked slightly . Bevin was now more concerned with building up Anglo-American relations, a lot like Churchill was. This would be significant as Bevin's policy would affect how the Cold War would be carried out. Reynolds argues that there was a pattern of Britain proposing policies and America carrying them out which obviously shows how influential Britain was. He says that Bevin's contributions to the Marshall Plan, the Brussels Pact and NATO were invaluable. It was Bevin who requested that discussions were set up to discuss the possibility of an Atlantic pact. Furthermore, if Bevin had not partaken in trying to build up Western Europe so much, Congress in America would not have passed the acts that they did as they needed the evidence that Europe could help itself before agreeing to support them financially.

There is a strong argument for the idea of it being Britain either developing the idea that led to key events in the Cold War or at least having a major influence on them. America had always been isolationist but Bevin saw that American intervention was necessary if they wanted to fight off the Soviet threat. Reynolds comes up with the argument that America had to get more involved in the Cold War due to Britain contracting power in a lot of areas that were susceptible to Soviet influence . Even though this does not show how Britain was actively trying to influence the Cold War, it still shows that they were significant. They did not have the economy to support all of their sphere of influence. They had to pull out of the Greek Civil War due to the lack of funds and they could not financially support their zone of divided Germany. America then had to step in. The Truman Doctrine, and later the Marshall Plan, was introduced to support the Greek fight against communism and Britain and to combat their financial problems in Germany Britain proposed the idea of merging the two German zones and creating Bizonia. This would be breaking the Potsdam Agreement and, combined with the Truman Doctrine, would lead to Stalin being more hostile and exercising tighter control in his sphere of influence in the East (footnote). Frazier explains his view on this argument by saying that this contraction of power in Greece was a conscious decision made by Britain in order to secure American intervention. Frazier says that they were financially in trouble but that they could have managed to stay in Greece if they had wanted to. They knew America would intervene if Britain pulled out of Greece and as mentioned, they knew they would need America if they were to successfully fight communism. This intervention took the form of the Truman Doctrine and the Marshall Plan and Frazier believes this to be the first event in the division of the two camps so he is effectively suggesting that it was Britain that started the Cold War .

There is also the argument that America needed Britain as well. American strength was not enough to beat the Soviet Union so it was essential to them to cooperate with Britain . Furthermore, America was so far away from the Soviet Union that they needed a power in the middle to help bridge this gap. Moreover, America had adopted the policy of defence in depth and so relied on Britain to provide air bases that they had accumulated across their empire .

Now that the argument for why their role was significant has been outlined, it is necessary to see what other historians think. Firstly, it has been argued that it was due to Britain that a lot of key events took place, for example, Bizonia. The problem is that it places too much influence on Britain. Bizonia came into creation based on more than just British suggestion. American initiative and want for integration in the first place was just as important and that maybe Britain suggesting it acted as a trigger for its creation. Britain was just a middle ranking power who depended a lot on America. There is a reason that a lot of historians describe the war as being a bipolar affair. This is because of the amount of power that America and the Soviet Union had compared to Britain and the rest of Europe. If they did have any significance, it was because America allowed them to have it. America introduced a lot of other programmes that perhaps influenced the Cold War more and they were also happy to exclude Britain when they wanted to, for example the Manhattan Project and the development of nuclear weapons.

There is one massive event that happened in 1956 that effectively shows how insignificant the British role was during the Cold War and this was the Suez Crisis. Eden, the Prime Minister at the time, was very concerned about Nasser's intentions for the Middle East after he had nationalised the canal. Doing this restricted British access to the Mediterranean Sea and there was the worry that Nasser was acting alongside Stalin who Eden feared was trying to dislodge the West from the Middle East and gain territory in Africa . Instead of trying to resolve the issue peacefully, Eden, along with France who were certain that Nasser was helping the rebels fight for independence in Algeria, wanted to exert force. Eisenhower was against this idea from the start and remained this way throughout the whole crisis. Eden still wanted to go ahead with his plan and so held secret meetings and basically colluded against Egypt and America. They would get Israel to attack Egypt and then Britain and France would have to get involved by occupying the canal under the pretence that they were trying to separate the two opposing forces . Once Eisenhower heard about this, he was angry and wanted Eden to explain himself. Eden said that appeasement had not worked against Hitler and they had had to basically wait until he acted before they could react, he did not want this to happen again so was acting before it was too late . After calls for peace and continuous attempts from Eisenhower to convince Eden to call a ceasefire, he had to put pressure on Britain to pull them out of Egypt. This took various forms, one of them being that he stopped exports of oil entering the Western hemisphere to make up for the loss they were receiving from the Middle East. This led to Eden surrendering in Egypt and giving into Eisenhower's wishes straight away .

The Suez Crisis is the best example for a point previously made about how if Britain did have any significance in the Cold War; it was because America let them. It shows Britain trying to protect their interests and pretending to be the great world superpower it thought it was but then getting denied this by America. They wanted to stop expansionism happening from both Nasser and Stalin and affecting their interests in the Middle East but because America did not agree with their method, they had to stop. They had no real choice in the matter. Baylis elaborates on this idea by saying that there would be no future for Britain without close collaboration with America The British see their role in the Cold War as crucial because without them America would not have got involved. They are under the impression that US foreign policy after the war did not involve the Soviet Union but Leffler shows us how this assumption is untrue. America had been against the Soviet Union as well since the 1917 Bolshevik revolution so it is wrong to assume that it was British rhetoric that brought them into the Cold War alone.

Another important point to make is the fact that there are not many sources that say that Britain had a key role in the Cold War and those that do argue this point are British so are bound to have biased opinions that contrast what the majority of historians say about the origins of the Cold War. Deighton's article, where she says that Britain carried the same responsibility for starting the Cold War as America and the Soviet Union, is based on British archives but this does not necessarily mean that what is written is true . Moreover, Frazier's article which states that Britain deliberately pulled out of Greece in order to bring America into the war but this is based on nothing more than opinion. There is no real factual evidence to support this and Frazier himself admits to this. His article is based around a biography written about Bevin which Frazier admits was based on little fact. In conclusion, it seems fair to say that Britain did have some role in the shaping of the Cold War but that this was very minimal. Britain was in very bad times economically and so this led to greater American involvement which may not necessarily have happened if this had not have been the case. For example, it is difficult to say if the Truman Doctrine, which is often described as the starting point for the Cold War, would have happened if Britain had not have pulled out of Greece and Turkey. It does seem to be reasonable to argue that, when looking at certain events during the early Cold War, Britain did value the 'special relationship' they had with America and that through this they were able to perhaps manipulate what happened, for example, the creation of Bizonia as this had once again been done to combat Britain's poor financial circumstances. However, America would not have done anything that they did not agree with or they saw as beneficial to them as well as the Suez Crisis shows. If anything, it can be debated that America only intervened in what they did because it protected them and their interests. The creation of Bizonia was not done just because of Britain, it was done because it would help their economic markets as well. This conclusion is hardly surprising as America have ever only acted when it has affected them as they have a history of isolationism.