ABSTRACT

During the Cold War, policymakers and strategic thinkers had it relatively easy. Most strategic choices were defined by a central, apparently enduring cleavage. Led by the Soviet Union and the United States, two camps – East and West – were locked into what was thought to be a perpetual confrontation. This bipolar relationship provided the framework that informed analysis and strategy. International politics and national strategies revolved around this bipolar juxtaposition. What mattered and what did not was largely defined by it. Regardless of issue area, it was the United States vs. the Soviet Union; NATO vs. the Warsaw Pact, West vs. East, liberal democracy vs. communism, free markets vs. central planning. Even the international economic order, a Western order from which the Soviet Union and its clients were largely excluded, was largely defined by the Cold War divide.