The Foreign Service Journal, February 2005

60 F O R E I G N S E R V I C E J O U R N A L / F E B R U A R Y 2 0 0 5 t the beginning of the 21st century, the United States faces threats of ter- rorism, antagonism in the Muslim world and suspicions of its motives throughout much of Asia, Africa and Latin America. Many of the roots of such problems lie in U.S. actions and policies of the last half-century — in the unintended consequences of the Cold War. Conventional wisdom holds that the United States won the Cold War. With the collapse of the Soviet Union, international communism ceased to be a threat, and the United States became the “world’s only superpower.” But accompanying that “wisdom” is an uncertainty about the global future and, in the United States, ques- tions as to why a nation so powerful and “good” has such difficulty in wielding its worldwide influence. In light of current challenges to U.S. interests, could it be that the presumed success in the Cold War was a Pyrrhic victory? Did the unintended consequences of our anti-Soviet efforts contribute to problems Washington faces today? The confrontation with the Soviet Union was fought actively, not on the plains of Europe, but in the arena of Asian and African states emerging from colonialism and in Latin American countries resisting oligarchs. The greater part of my own diplomatic career and that of many of my Foreign Service colleagues was spent in these regions. American policies pursued much that was positive in these areas in supporting economic develop- ment, human rights, conflict resolution and multilateral cooperation. Nevertheless, in regions important to American interests, the United States was more often perceived as an interventionist instrument of neo-colo- nialism than as a democratic liberator. This view was not helped by perceptions of U.S. involvement in regional issues such as the Israeli-Palestinian dispute and the Indian-Pakistani tensions over Kashmir, however posi- tive Washington’s motives. In regions where emotions are rooted in history and memories are long, the effects of such a view continue. In the immediate post-World War II period, commu- nist parties in Western Europe, backed by a nuclear and ambitious Soviet Union, did represent both a political and military threat. The Soviet takeover of Eastern Europe had a profound effect on public opinion in the United States. No administration could have failed to respond. Actions of the countries of the Atlantic Alliance in initiat- T HE C OLD W AR : A P YRRHIC V ICTORY ? I T HAS BEEN MORE THAN A DECADE SINCE THE U.S. WON THE C OLD W AR . B UT THE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES OF OUR ANTI -S OVIET EFFORTS CONTRIBUTED TO MANY OF THE PROBLEMS WE FACE TODAY . B Y D AVID D. N EWSOM David D. Newsom, an FSO from 1947 to 1981, served as ambassador to Libya, Indonesia and the Philippines, as well as assistant secretary for African affairs, among many other assignments. From 1978 to 1981, he was under secretary of State for political affairs. He received AFSA’s award for Lifetime Contributions to American Diplomacy in 2000. Ambassador Newsom is the author of four books: The Soviet Brigade in Cuba (1987), Diplomacy and the American Democracy (1988), The Public Dimension of Foreign Policy (1996), and The Imperial Mantle (2001). This article is adapted from his contribution to a new edition of Hans Morgenthau’s book, Politics Among Nations , which McGraw-Hill will publish in June. A