FINAL EDIT - USHistory - U1L1

Grade 11 | Unit 1 | Lesson 1
U.S. History
TITLE: Cold War Realities Duration: 2 days
Lesson Overview
Students will be introduced to the impacts of the Cold War Era on indigenous people in this lesson. This
building background knowledge workshop model lesson is designed to generate student engagement and
empathy for the people impacted through the nuclear procurement process from mining raw materials, to
producing and testing weapons, and then managing the waste products. The lesson also involves learning
about the major events during the Cold War Era.
Learning Targets Assessed How We Will Know Students Met Learning Targets
NM State Standards Events in the Cold War Era note-catcher
NM Social Studies Standards Potential Hazards of Nuclear Detonation Note-Catcher
● I can analyze the impact of the Cold War on Classroom Similes Anchor Chart (optional)
Indigenous peoples in the U.S. and around
the world.
● I can explain the Cold War Era in U.S. history.
CCSS ELA
Reading
● I can craft accurate summaries of primary
and/or secondary source texts.
● I can integrate key ideas from different types
of media.
● I can determine important information in
text.
Grade 11 Unit1 Lesson1 U.S. History

Advance Preparation Teacher Notes
● Send the letter to families home with ● The imagery and subject matter presented in
students in advance of beginning this lesson this unit may be disturbing for some students.
or unit. The teacher may want to take a few minutes to
● Post the images around the classroom for prepare students for some of the images that
the Gallery Walk before students enter the will be presented.
classroom. ● The lesson begins with a mystery Gallery Walk.
● Be prepared to hand out the colored entry Refrain from revealing the topic of the unit to
tickets of four different colors to students as students prior to the introduction activity in
they enter the room so that they can form which students view graphic images from the
their groups. Cold War Era.
● Cue the video, Every nuclear bomb explosion ● If you need to review the timeline of events
in history. during the Cold War Era, a relatively
● Be prepared to project the Cold War Maps comprehensive timeline can be found at
side-by-side, if possible. History on the Net at
● Create the folders with the jigsaw articles for https://www.historyonthenet.com/the-cold-
each group. war-timeline-2/.
Agenda Materials
I. Introduction Letter to families
A. Cold War Realities Color entry ticket
B. Unpacking the learning targets Gallery Walk images
II. Work Time Chart paper
A. The Cold War Era Markers
B. Potential Hazards of Nuclear Detonation Projector
III. Synthesis Cold War
A. Similes Events in Cold War Era note-catcher
Cold War Map 1959
Cold War Map 1980
Cold War Texts
Large index cards
Potential Hazards of Nuclear Detonation note Catcher
Jigsaw Texts 1-7
Vocabulary
Tier II Tier III
Describe Warsaw Pact
Discuss Marshall Plan
Integrate Containment
Key Idea Iron Curtain
Types of Media Domino Theory
Simile Truman Doctrine
Potential McCarthyism
Hazard

Introduction Differentiation Strategies
A. Cold War Realities (17 min)
1. As students enter the classroom, distribute a color entry ticket to each
and ask them to sit with peers who have the same color ticket. Groups
should contain four students each if possible.
2. Ask students to silently walk around the room to view the Gallery Walk
images.
3. Students are not told anything about the topic and are instructed to
notice and wonder as they view the images.
4. After three to five minutes, invite students to return to their groups
where they will find chart paper and markers.
5. Tell groups to discuss the images while they record what they noticed
and wondered with blue marker on chart paper poster.
6. Project the video, Every nuclear bomb explosion in history. Ensure that
they know the country represented by each flag prior to viewing the
video.
7. Ask students to work with their group to add new information to their
chart with the blue marker.
B. Unpacking the Learning Targets (8 min)
1. Invite student to read the learning targets.
2. Invite students to turn and talk with a partner about the meaning of
following words or phrases: describe, discuss, integrate, and key idea.
3. Ask for volunteers to share their definitions for each term.
4. Ask students to again work with a partner to give examples of different
types of media.
5. Cold call on students to give examples of types of media. Listen for
references to print media (books, magazines, newspapers), television,
movies, video games, music, cell phones, various kinds of software, and
the Internet.
6. Invite students to add a title to their posters that they think best reflects
what they will be learning in this lesson.
Work Time Differentiation Strategies
A. The Cold War Era (20 min) The Cold War Texts vary in
1. Distribute copies of Cold War and the Events in Cold War Era note- terms of difficulty and
catcher. length. Providing students
2. Tell students to read the article and write the summary of it on the top with just right text is
portion of the note-catcher. possible with this type of
3. Project the Cold War Map 1959 and Cold War Map 1980. jigsaw.
4. Tell students to Turn and Talk with a partner to share what they notice
about the changes in 21 years and any questions they might have and to The jigsaw of articles
catch notes in the summary section of the note-catcher. differentiates by interest
5. Read the definition of Domino Theory on the note-catcher. Explain to and reading level.
students that they are to keep in mind the Domino Theory perspective
as they analyze the events during the Cold War Era.
6. Distribute a Cold War Text and a large index card to each students. Have

colored pencils or markers available.
7. Explain to students that every student has a different event in Cold War
history. They are to read their text and create a timeline entry on the
index card. The timeline entry should contain enough information that
others in the class can learn about the event and its significance. The
entries should also be aesthetically pleasing.
8. When students complete the work and hang the index cards around the
room, invite students to analyze each entry and complete the Events in
the Cold War Era note-catcher.
B. Potential Hazards of Nuclear Detonation (45 min)
1. Invite students to move back into their original groups of four.
2. Distribute the four selected Jigsaw Texts 1-7 in folders and the Potential
Hazards of Nuclear Detonation note Catcher to each student.
3. Tell students that they will each choose a different article to read and
annotate, as well as to catch specific notes on the note-catcher. Instruct
students to also write in note-catcher as they read. If a student is a fast
reader, tell him or her to choose another article to read and annotate.
4. When students finish reading, annotating, and note-taking on the note-
catcher, tell them to share out what they learned from their article with
their group members.
5. Tell the group members not presenting to catch notes on their note-
catchers.
6. Invite students to add any new information to their chart paper posters
in green marker.
7. Invite students to hang posters so that peers can read them.
8. After two to three minutes of students looking at each poster, ask
students to point out patterns they notice on the posters.
9. Invite students to also comment on items that caused them to
experience anger, sadness, fear, disgust, hope, etc.
10. Tell students to return to their groups and add any new conversation
pieces or information to their chart in red marker.
Synthesis Differentiation Strategies

A. Similes (20 min) Provide the Simile Guide to
1. Provide a simple overview of similes to activate student prior students who struggle with
knowledge. this assignment. It provides
2. Model one or two examples of common similes. a give a concrete structure
3. Invite students to share common similes with the class. to complete the task.
4. Write the headings: (1) Potential Hazards of Nuclear Testing and (2)
Effects of Nuclear Testing on Indigenous People on the board and
then ask students to review possible topics gleaned from the chart
paper posters.
5. Invite students to write topics on the board under each of the
headings.
6. Ask students to think of how they could create a simile using a topic
from the lesson.
7. Invite suggestions and write or display exemplar suggestions on the
board.
8. Instruct students to select 3-5 topics from the lesson, create a simile
for each topic, and then formulate an explanation for how the simile
might be true.
9. Ask students to share in pairs, small groups, or a Chalkboard Splash.
OPTIONAL: Students may write their similes on colored paper and post around
the classroom; they may also embellish their simile pages to create an anchor
chart for the unit.

Cold War
The Cold War was a decades-long struggle for global supremacy that pitted the
capitalist United States against the communist Soviet Union. Although there are some
disagreements as to when the Cold War began, it is generally conceded that mid- to
late-1945 marks the time when relations between Moscow and Washington began
deteriorating. This deterioration ignited the early Cold War and set the stage for a
dynamic struggle that often assumed mythological overtones of good versus evil.
At the close of World War II, the Soviet Union stood firmly entrenched in Eastern
Europe, intent upon installing governments there that would pay allegiance to the
Kremlin. It also sought to expand its security zone even further into North Korea,
Central Asia, and the Middle East. Similarly, the United States established a security

zone of its own that comprised Western Europe, Latin America, Southeast Asia,
Australia, New Zealand, and Japan. From the long view of history, it is clear that both
sides were jockeying for a way to secure their futures from the threat of another world
war, but it was the threat that each side perceived from the other that allowed for the
development of mutual suspicion. It was this mutual suspicion, augmented by
profound distrust and misunderstanding that would ultimately fuel the entire conflict.
Interestingly, for the first few years of the early Cold War (between 1945 and 1948),
the conflict was more political than military. Both sides squabbled with each other at
the UN, sought closer relations with nations that were not committed to either side,
and articulated their differing visions of a postwar world. By 1950, however, certain
factors had made the Cold War an increasingly militarized struggle. The communist
takeover in China, the pronouncement of the Truman Doctrine, the advent of a Soviet
nuclear weapon, tensions over occupied Germany, the outbreak of the Korean War,
and the formulation of the Warsaw Pact and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization as
rival alliances had all enhanced the Cold War's military dimension. U.S. foreign policy
reflected this transition when it adopted a position that sought to "contain" the Soviet
Union from further expansion. By and large, through a variety of incarnations, the
containment policy would remain the central strategic vision of U.S. foreign policy
from 1952 until the ultimate demise of the Soviet Union in 1991.
Successive American presidents and successive Soviet premiers tried to manage the
Cold War in different ways, and the history of their interactions reveals the delicate
balance-of-power that needed to be maintained between both superpowers. Dwight
Eisenhower campaigned as a hard-line Cold Warrior and spoke of "rolling back" the
Soviet empire, but when given a chance to dislodge Hungary from the Soviet sphere-
of-influence in 1956, he declined. The death of Stalin in 1953 prefaced a brief thaw in
East-West relations, but Nikita Kruschev also found it more politically expedient to
take a hard line with the United States than to speak of cooperation.
By 1960, both sides had invested huge amounts of money in nuclear weapons, both as
an attempt to maintain parity with each other's stockpiles, but also because the idea
of deterring conflict through "mutually assured destruction" had come to be regarded
as vital to the national interest of both. As nuclear weapons became more prolific,
both nations sought to position missile systems in ever closer proximity to each other's
borders. One such attempt by the Soviet government in 1962 precipitated the Cuban
Missile Crisis, arguably the closest that the world has ever come to a large-scale
nuclear exchange between two countries.
It was also in the early 1960s that American containment policy shifted from heavy
reliance on nuclear weapons to more conventional notions of warfare in pursuit of a
more "flexible response" to the spread of communism. Although originally articulated
by President Kennedy, it was in 1965 that President Johnson showcased the idea of

flexible response when he made the initial decision to commit American combat
troops to South Vietnam. American thinking had come to regard Southeast Asia as
vital to its national security, and President Johnson made clear his intention to insure
South Vietnam's territorial and political integrity "whatever the cost or whatever the
challenge."(1)
The United States ultimately fought a bloody and costly war in Vietnam that poisoned
U.S. politics and wreaked havoc with its economy. The Nixon administration inherited
the conflict in 1969, and although it tried to improve relations with the Soviets through
detente – and even took the unprecedented step of establishing diplomatic relations
with Communist China – neither development was able to bring about decisive change
on the Vietnamese battlefield. The United States abandoned the fight in 1973 under
the guise of a peace agreement that left South Vietnam emasculated and vulnerable.
Although Nixon continued to negotiate with the Soviets and to court Maoist China, the
Soviet Union and the United States continued to subvert one another's interests
around the globe in spite of detente's high-minded rhetoric. Leonid Brezhnev had been
installed as Soviet premier in 1964 as Kruschev's replacement, and while he too
desired friendlier relations with the United States on certain issues (particularly
agriculture), genuinely meaningful cooperation remained elusive.
By the end of the 1970s, however, the chance for an extended thaw had utterly
vanished. Jimmy Carter had been elected president in 1976, and although he was able
to hammer out a second arms limitation agreement with Brezhnev, the 1979 Soviet
invasion of Afghanistan significantly soured U.S.-Soviet relations. Seeking to place a
greater emphasis on human rights in his foreign policy, Carter angrily denounced the
incursion and began to adopt an increasingly hard line with the Soviets. The following
year, Americans overwhelmingly elected a president who spoke of waging the Cold
War with even greater intensity than had any of his predecessors, and Ronald Reagan
made good on his promises by dramatically increasing military budgets in the early
1980s.
Nonetheless, by 1985 Mikhail Gorbachev had replaced Brezhnev in Moscow, and he

quickly perceived that drastic changes to the Soviet system were necessary if the USSR
was to survive as a state. He instituted a series of liberal reforms known as perestroika,
and he seemed genuinely interested in more open relations with the West, known as
glasnost. Although President Reagan continued to use bellicose language with respect
to the Soviet Union (as when he labeled it an "evil empire"(2)), the Gorbachev-Reagan
relationship was personally warm and the two leaders were able to decrease tensions
substantially by the time Reagan left the White House in 1989.
Despite improved East-West relations, however, Gorbachev's reforms were unable to

prevent the collapse of a system that had grown rigid and unworkable. By most
measures, the Soviet economy had failed to grow at all since the late 1970s and much

of the country's populace had grown weary of the aged Communist hierarchy. In 1989,
the spontaneous destruction of the Berlin Wall signaled the end of Soviet domination
in Eastern Europe, and two years later the Soviet government itself fell from power.
The Cold War had lasted for forty-six years, and is regarded by many historians,
politicians, and scholars as the third major war of the twentieth century.
Notes:
1. Lyndon B.Johnson, " Annual Message to the Congress on the State of the
Union," January 12, 1966, Lyndon Baines Johnson Library and Museum.
Internet on-line. Available From
http://www.lbjlib.utexas.edu/johnson/archives.hom/speeches.hom/660112.as
p.
2. Reagan, Ronald, "Address to Members of the British Parliament," June 8, 1982,
Ronald Regean Presidential Library. Internet on-line. Available From
http://www.reagan.utexas.edu/resource/speeches/1982/60882a.htm.
Sources:
Gaddis, John Lewis. The United States and the Origins of the Cold War, 1941-1947.
New York: Columbia University Press, 1972, passim.
Schulzinger, Robert D. American Diplomacy in the 20th Century. New York: Oxford
University Press, 1994, passim.

Name:
Date:
Events in Cold War Era note-catcher
Summary of Cold War article:
Domino Theory = came from the notion of “containment” that governed American foreign
policy from late 1940s until 1980s. It was basically said that if one country came under
communist influence or control, its neighboring countries would soon follow in a domino effect.
U.S. President Eisenhower coined the term during a news conference on April 7, 1954.
Important Points CONCEPTS Further Questions
CIA Wars in
Central & South

America
Berlin Wall
Space Race

Iron Curtain
Korean War
Marshall Plan
McCarthyism
Truman Doctrine

Vietnam
Warsaw Pact
START
Malta Summit
Bay of Pigs

Glasnost &
Perestoika
Fall of the Berlin

Wall
Potsdam
Agreement
NATO
Atomic Bomb
Development

Separation of
Berlin
1st Indochina
War
Khmer Rouge
The CIA
Yalta Conference

Fall of the USSR
Cuban Missile
Crisis
Afghanistan
Crisis

Cold War Map 1959
Cold War Map 1980

Cold War Text
Vietnam War
The roots of the Vietnam War lie in French colonial rule in Southeast Asia during the nineteenth
and twentieth centuries. During World War II, as France fell to the Nazis, French colonies in
Southeast Asia were occupied by Japanese troops. Local Vietnamese forces, led by Ho Chi Minh,
developed a resistance movement to the Japanese occupation. At the end of the war in August
1945, Vietnam declared its independence, but France intended to retain the country as its own
colony. As it became apparent the French were not leaving, the Vietnamese independence
movement grew into a guerrilla struggle against French power. The Viet Minh, Ho Chi Minh’s
guerrilla army, handed the French a series of stunning defeats, culminating in the route of
French forces at Dien Bien Phu in 1954. This led to the effective withdrawal of the French and
the division of the country into North Vietnam, with a Communist government in Hanoi, and
South Vietnam, under the dictatorial rule of Ngo Dinh Diem in Saigon.[2]
American involvement in Vietnam dates back to the early 1950s, when U.S. military advisors
aided the French colonial authorities. The American troop presence in Vietnam escalated
greatly during the John F. Kennedy administration, ballooning from several hundred advisers
under Eisenhower to 16,000 troops by the time of Kennedy’s assassination.[3] In 1964, Lyndon
B. Johnson further escalated troop deployments in Vietnam after the Gulf of Tonkin attacks on
American forces, which declassified documents later revealed may never have actually
occurred.[4] At this point, the Vietnam conflict escalated into full-scale war, as American forces
conducted systematic bombings in North Vietnam; by 1968 there were over 500,000 U.S.
troops on the ground in Vietnam.[5]

Cold War Text
US Enters the Korean Conflict
(Originally published in Social Education, the Journal of the National Council for the Social
Studies).
Background
While the end of World War II brought peace and prosperity to most Americans, it also created
a heightened state of tension between the Soviet Union and the United States. Fearing that the
Soviet Union intended to "export" communism to other nations, America centered its foreign
policy on the "containment" of communism, both at home and abroad. Although formulation of
the Truman Doctrine, Marshall Plan, and the Berlin Airlift suggested that the United States had
a particular concern with the spread of communism in Europe, America's policy of containment
extended to Asia as well. Indeed, Asia proved to be the site of the first major battle waged in
the name of containment: the Korean War.
In 1950 the Korea Peninsula was divided between a Soviet-backed government in the north and
an American-backed government in the south. The division of Korea into two halves had come
at the end of World War II. In August of 1945 the Soviet Union invaded Korea, which had been
under Japan's control since 1910. Fearing that the Soviets intended to seize the entire peninsula
from their position in the north, the United States quickly moved its own troops into southern
Korea. Japanese troops surrendered to the Russians in the north and to the Americans in the
south. In an effort to avoid a long-term decision regarding Korea's future, the United States and
the Soviet Union agreed to divide Korea temporarily along the 38th parallel, a latitudinal line
that bisected the country. This line became more rigid after 1946, when Kim Il Sung organized a
communist government in the north---the Democratic People's Republic. Shortly after,
nationalist exile Syngman Rhee returned to Korea and set up a rival government in the south---
the Republic of Korea (ROK). Each government hoped to reunify the country under its own rule.
War broke out along the 38th parallel on June 25, 1950. On that day, North Korean troops
coordinated an attack at several strategic points along the parallel and headed south toward
Seoul. The United Nations Security Council responded to the attack by adopting (by a 9-0 vote)
a resolution that condemned the invasion as a "breach of the peace." The Council did not have
a Soviet delegate, since 6 months prior, the Soviet Union had left to protest the United Nation's
refusal to seat a delegate from China. President Harry S. Truman quickly committed American
forces to a combined United Nations military effort and named Gen. Douglas MacArthur
Commander of the U.N. forces. Fifteen other nations also sent troops under the U.N. command.
Truman did not seek a formal declaration of war from Congress; officially, America's presence in
Korea amounted to no more than a "police action."
However, the entry of the United States into the conflict signaled a reversal of policy toward
Korea. Although it backed the government of Syngman Rhee, the United States had begun

withdrawing its troops from South Korea in 1948. As late as January of 1950, Secretary of State
Dean Acheson had implied that the Korea Peninsula lay outside the all-important "defense
perimeter" of the United States, a statement that some took to mean that the United States
would not defend the ROK from communist attack.
So why did the United States become involved in the Korean conflict?
The decision to intervene in Korea grew out of the tense atmosphere that characterized Cold
War politics. On the eve of the North Korean invasion, a number of events had made Truman
anxious. The Soviet Union exploded an atomic bomb in 1949, ending the United States'
monopoly on the weapon. In Europe, Soviet intervention in Greece and Turkey had given rise to
the Truman Doctrine and the Marshall Plan, which funneled aid to war-torn Europe in the
hopes of warding off communist political victories. In early 1950, President Truman directed the
National Security Council (NSC) to conduct an analysis of Soviet and American military
capabilities. In its report, known as "NSC 68," the Council recommended heavy increases in
military funding to help contain the Soviets.
Events in Asia also contributed to an increased sense of insecurity. In 1949 China underwent a
revolution that brought Mao Zedong and his Communist party into power. The nationalists, led
by Chiang Kai-Shek, had retreated to the island of Formosa (Taiwan) while they continued their
war with mainland China. Mao quickly moved to ally himself with the Soviet Union, and signed
a treaty with the Soviets in 1950. The Truman administration faced criticism from Republicans
who claimed he had "lost" China. They criticized him for not providing enough aid to the
Chinese nationalists. The suggestion by Secretary of State Dean Acheson that the
administration recognize the communist government of China only gave them more
ammunition for their attacks.
The Truman administration also faced internal criticism regarding its commitment to
anticommunism at home. Republican Senator Joseph McCarthy of Wisconsin had recently
begun his infamous hunt for communists within the U. S. Government. Although McCarthy was
just warming up, the recent trials of Alger Hiss and others for espionage left the Truman
administration apprehensive about its anticommunist credentials. Truman and his advisors
found themselves under increased domestic pressure not to appear "soft" on communism
abroad.
Thus, when North Korean troops invaded the South, the Truman administration seized upon
the opportunity to defend a noncommunist government from invasion by communist troops.
Determined not to "lose" another country to communism, and interested in shoring up its
anticommunist credentials, the Truman administration found itself defending a nation a world
away from U.S. soil. Yet Truman's response was not merely a response to internal pressure. The
invasion of South Korea made Truman genuinely fearful that the Soviet Union and China
intended to expand the sphere of communism throughout Asia.
Truman's statement of June 27 illustrates his concern with communist aggression and
expansion. In it, Truman argues that "communism has passed beyond the use of subversion to

conquer independent nations and will now use armed invasion and war." Truman's statement
suggests that he believed the attack by North Korea had been part of a larger plan by
communist China and, by extension, the Soviet Union. The President believed that the Korean
situation was similar to that of Greece in 1947. He informed his advisors that he believed the
invasion was "very obviously inspired by the Soviet Union." This gave America a moral
imperative to act. "If we don't put up a fight now," Truman observed to his staff, there was "no
telling what they'll do." His concern over the future of anticommunist governments in Asia
showed in his public statement. Truman pledged to defend Formosa (Taiwan) from attack and
to support French forces in Indochina, a conflict that would eventually escalate into the
Vietnam War. Yet Truman had no wish to provoke a full-scale war with the Soviets. By blaming
"communism" in the statement, as opposed to the Soviet Union, Dean Acheson later explained,
the administration sought to give the Soviets a "graceful exit" and not provoke open
confrontation with Russia.
Truman's statement also reflected a new military order. Although the United States took the
lead in the Korean action, it did so under the rubric of the United Nations. Truman made it clear
that his actions fell within the measures recommended by the United Nations, and reminded
"all members of the United Nations" to "consider carefully the consequences of this latest
aggression in Korea" and that America "will continue to uphold the rule of law."
This document is part of the George M. Elsey papers, located at the Harry S. Truman
Presidential Library in Independence, Missouri. Elsey, who had worked under President Franklin
D. Roosevelt during World War II, was a top administrative assistant to the President. Truman
met with Elsey and other advisors on the morning of the 27th to draft and revise the public
statement--his second on the Korean conflict. At 11:30 a.m. the President met with members of
the foreign affairs and foreign relations committees of Congress and, shortly after, the
statement was released to newspaper reporters. That afternoon, Truman attended another
meeting of the United Nations to propose a resolution urging all members of the United
Nations to give assistance to South Korea. The meeting had been originally planned for the
morning but was postponed to accommodate one of its members. Secretary of State Dean
Acheson later reflected that the Soviets liked to point out that since the U.N. meeting occurred
after the President's statement, Truman could not truthfully claim that his decision to commit
forces was influenced by the wishes of the United Nations. When it did meet later that day, the
United Nations passed his resolution, although a handful of dissenting countries abstained.
Cold War Text
Glasnost and Perestoika

In the 1980s, the Soviet Union was engulfed by a multitude of problems. The economy,
especially the agricultural sector, began to fall apart. The country lacked technological
advancements and used inefficient factories, all while consumers were buying low-quality
products and suffered from a shortage of social freedoms. To reform the distraught Soviet
Union, the democratization of the Communist Party was promoted through Party Secretary
Mikhail Gorbachev‘s policies of “perestroika” and “glasnost.”
Perestroika refers to the reconstruction of the political and economic system established by the
Communist Party. Politically, contested elections were introduced to reflect the democratic
practices of Western society and allow citizens to have a slight say in government.
Economically, Perestroika called for de-monopolization and some semi-private businesses to
function, ending the price controls established by the government for the past seven decades.
The goal was to create a semi-free market system, reflecting successful capitalist practices in
the economies of Germany, Japan, and the United States. Unfortunately, such an economy took
time to thrive, and people found themselves stuck in a worn-out economy, which led to long-
lines, strikes, and civil unrest.
The term “Glasnost” means “openness” and was the name for the social and political reforms
to bestow more rights and freedoms upon the Soviet people. Its goals were to include more
people in the political process through freedom of expression. This led to a decreased censoring
of the media, which in effect allowed writers and journalists to expose news of government
corruption and the depressed condition of the Soviet people. Glasnost also permitted criticism
of government officials, encouraging more social freedoms like those that Western societies
had already provided. Yet, the totalitarian state present since 1917 was difficult to dismantle,
and when it fell apart, citizens were not accustomed to the lack of regulation and command.
The outburst of information about escalating crime and crimes by the government caused panic
in the people. This caused an increase in social protests in a nation used to living under the
strictest government control, and went against the goals of Gorbachev.
These policies were in effect from 1985 to 1991, when Boris Yeltsin became Russia’s first
popularly elected president. He then formed the Commonwealth of Independent States.
Reconstructing the organization of the Soviet Union proved difficult and the effects were
mixed; while more social freedoms were permitted, the economy was in deterioration and
social unrest was growing among the people. Glasnost and Perestroika eventually helped cause
the fall of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War, which had lasted from 1945 to 1991.
Researched by Sasha Gitomirski

Volunteer for the Cold War Museum
Cosby High School
Sources:

"Perestroika." Ibiblio.org - Travel and the Outdoors. Web. 4 May 2010.
<http://www.ibiblio.org/expo/soviet.exhibit/perest.html>.
"Russia :: The Gorbachev Era: Perestroika and Glasnost -- Britannica Online Encyclopedia."
Encyclopedia - Britannica Online Encyclopedia. Web. 04 May 2010.
<http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/513251/Russia/38564/The-Gorbachev-era-
perestroika-and-glasnost>.
Siegelbaum, Lewis. "Perestroika and Glasnost." Seventeen Moments in Soviet History. Web. 14
May 2010.
<http://www.soviethistory.org/index.php?page=subject&SubjectID=1985perestroika&Year=19
85>.

Cold War Text
FALL OF THE BERLIN WALL
In the year 1989, there were dramatic events such as a massive flight of inhabitants of the GDR
(East Germany) via Hungary and big demonstrations in Leipzig on Mondays. After weeks of
discussion about a new travel law, the leader of East Berlin's communist party (SED), Gьnter
Schabowski, said on November 9, 1989 at about 7 p.m. in somewhat unclear words that the
border would be opened for “private trips abroad”. Soon thereafter, an onrush of East Berliners
towards West Berlin began, and there were celebrations at the Brandenburg Gate and at the
Kurfьrstendamm in West Berlin. On November 10, demolition work began with the aim of
creating new border crossings. On November 12, a checkpoint at the Potsdamer Platz was
opened, and on December 22, a checkpoint for pedestrians was opened at the Brandenburg
Gate. So-called “wall woodpeckers” hammered pieces out of the wall, many of which were sold
as souvenirs. A few larger segments were officially donated or sold.
On July 1, 1990, an economic, monetary and social union between East and West Germany was
formed, and all restrictions concerning travels were dropped. The wall vanished almost
completely until 1991; there are a few remainders at the Bernauer StraЯe, the
NiederkirchnerstraЯe (near the building of the former Prussian parliament, now housing the
parliament of Berlin) and as the 1.3 km long “East-Side-Gallery” near the railway station
“Hauptbahnhof”.
On February 1997, a red line was painted on the pavement at the former “Checkpoint Charlie”
to mark the course of the former Berlin Wall. This line reached a length of 20 km and shall be
replaced by two rows of paving stones.

Cold War Text
POTSDAM AGREEMENT
The originally U.S. reparation plan of July 23-25, which formed the basis ot the Potsdam
Agreement, specifically authorized removals of capital equipment and deliveries from “current
production.”
When the Soviets accepted the principle of the Byrnes plan, they agreed that both forms of
reparation, annual deliveries as well as one-time-only removals, would be organized on a zonal
basis. When their draft was discussed on July 31, neither Byrnes nor Bevin raised the slightest
objection to the idea of deliveries from current production.
This attitude was, of course, perfectly consistent with Byrnes’s basic idea that the “Soviet Union
would take what it wished from its zone.”
Since there had been no dispute about what the Soviets could take from eastern Germany, the
issue was dealt with elliptically in the final Protocol, which stated simply that Soviet claims
would be met by “removals” from the Soviet zone.
But given the drafting history, this phrasing cannot be interpreted as a surrender of the
principle that the Soviets had the right to extract reparation from their zone in any form they
chose. It is sometimes argued that paragraph 19 of Part II of the Potsdam Agreement ruled out
reparation from current production, at any rate until Germany was able to earn enough from
exports to finance necessary imports. But as the drafting history of this article shows, the first
charge principle was to be applied to Germany as a whole only if the Control Council could
agree on an import program for the country as a unit. If, as was expected, there was no
agreement, the assumption was that the zonal authorities would be free to do whatever they
wanted. If the Soviets took reparations from current production from their zone and that
aggravated that zone’s deficit, financing it would be their problem and their problem alone, so
the western allies felt no need to try to prevent them from doing so.
The American government was thus mistaken when it later claimed that the USSR had no right
under the Potsdam Agreement to take current output reparations from the eastern zone.

Cold War Text
ATOMIC BOMB DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY (I)
In 1938 German physicist Otto Hahn discovered how to split the uranium atom. Even though
published accounts of the scientific breakthrough prevented keeping this knowledge secret,
many scientists feared the Nazis might attempt to manipulate such an advancement to further
their attack on the nations of Europe. Hungarian scientist and refugee Leo Szilard shared this
apprehension — believing the nuclear energy released during fission could be harnessed to
produce bombs capable of severe destruction. Convinced he must act quickly, Szilard
persuaded world-renowned physicist Albert Einstein to sign a letter (which Szilard wrote)
addressed to President Franklin Delano Roosevelt describing the possible military implications
of the German discovery and the urgent need for American research on the subject. Possibly in
response to this plea, in addition to the advice of his advisers, FDR appointed the Briggs
Committee in October of 1939 to investigate nuclear fission.
The government nonetheless gave little priority to the development of an atomic bomb until
the fall of 1941. Sparked by positive results from British scientists studying the feasibility of
atomic weapons as well as intelligence reports that the Nazis already had begun tests of their
own, FDR authorized an intensive research effort in the United States. The shock of Pearl
Harbor and the continued success of the Nazi military campaign in Europe served as
reaffirmation that the American government must proceed at full speed to discover the secrets
of atomic energy before the Axis Powers.
In June of 1942 the War Department’s Army Corps of Engineers took charge of the effort to
develop an atomic bomb. The subsequent top-secret project (code named Manhattan)
cultivated a complex, but cooperative relationship between science, industry, the government,
and the army. Although research took place across the nation, an obscure lab in Los Alamos,
New Mexico became the central site in the effort to produce an atomic weapon. By 1944 both
the United States and Great Britain realized Germany no longer had any realistic chance to
develop an atomic bomb. Yet instead of slowing the momentum of the Manhattan Project, FDR
stressed the need for the continuation of research and development; although Germany failed
to pose a viable threat, Japan’s reluctance to surrender signaled the possibility of a long and
costly battle in the Pacific. Therefore, the government no longer viewed the bomb as a
defensive weapon to protect the world from the Nazis, but as a way to save American lives and
money by shortening the war against Japan.
Unaware of the intricacies surrounding the atomic bomb development in the United States,
Harry Truman was briefed by presidential advisers concerning the confidential Manhattan
Project two weeks after FDR’s death. While at the Potsdam Conference in Germany only a few
months later (July 1945) Truman received word of the successful test of an atomic bomb in the
New Mexico desert. Until this meeting of the Allied nations, American and British officials failed
to disclose any information to Soviet leader Josef Stalin regarding their attempts to build a new
weapon. Resentful of the belligerent Soviet foreign policy in Eastern Europe, Truman and

Churchill hoped their military secret would provide them with a post-war diplomatic advantage
against Stalin. So, although originally conceived as a short-term solution in a military conflict,
the atomic bomb eventually evolved into a vital tool of the political maneuvering between the
two superpowers that emerged following the Second World War.
Research by Kathleen Johnson,
Works Cited: Bundy, McGeorge. Danger and Survival. New York: Random House, 1988.
Hershberg, James C. James C. Conant. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1993.
Stoff, Michael B., Fanton, Jonathan F., Williams, R. Hal, eds. The Manhattan Project.
Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1991.
Nobile, Philip, ed. Judgment at the Smithsonian. New York: Marlowe & Company, 1995.

Cold War Text
SEPARATION OF BERLIN
The separation of Berlin began in 1945 after the collapse of Germany. The country was divided
into four zones, where each superpower controlled a zone. In 1946, reparation agreements
broke down between the Soviet and Western zones. Response of the West was to merge
French, British, and American zones in 1947.
The West wanted to revive the German economy and combine the three western zones into
one area. Soviet Union feared this union because it gave the one combined zone more power
than its zone. On June 23, 1948, the western powers introduced a new form of currency into
the western zones, which caused the Soviet Union to impose the Berlin Blockade one day later.
After Germany was divided into two parts, East Germany built the Berlin Wall to prevent its
citizens from fleeing to the west. The wall physically divided the country into eastern
communism and western democracy. Many East Germans tried to escape to the west because
it was economically prosperous and granted its citizens more freedoms.
The Berlin Wall is the climax to the separation of Berlin. It was built on the night of August 12
with barbed wire entanglements that stretched along the thirty mile line that divided Berlin.

Cold War Text
FIRST INDOCHINA WAR
During the era of conquest in East Asia, France focused on the fortune withheld in Indochina.
The French had been in the area for centuries, yet policies changed when other Western
European nations began to colonize and claim their own pieces of Asia. The French corrupted
the Vietnamese sovereignty by colonizing and dividing the nation. It became known as a French
“protectorate” from 1883-1939 and remained a colonial empire or “possession” until about
1945. The Vietnamese people strongly resented the tyrannical rule and political and social
implementations of the French. Thus, a guerrilla-type revolutionary organization, the Viet Minh,
formed to drive out the French. They were led by Ho Chi Minh, the recently elected leader of
the Democratic Republic of Vietnam (currently known as North Vietnam). The First Indochina
War was virtually a stalemate between the French and the Viet Minh from 1946 – 1950; then
towards the end in 1954, the Viet Minh gained significant advances in driving out the French.
In 1949, France set up the State of Vietnam (currently known as South Vietnam) as an
“associated statehood” under Bao Dai because he had been cooperative with France in the
past. But this government clashed with Ho’s Democratic Republic of Vietnam in its political and
social ideals as well as his nationalistic goals. The Vietnamese and other nations felt that this
attempt was not a significant step towards Vietnamese independence, but rather just a cover
up of the fact that Vietnam was to remain a “puppet nation.” The Viet Minh, supporters of
communism, also focused heavily on the ideas of nationalism in their fight for freedom from
France; this broadened their pool of allies within Vietnam. Although the French had superior
weapon technology and financial aid from the United States, they were greatly outnumbered
by the Viet Minh in manpower. The French also suffered from unfamiliarity with fighting in a
jungle environment against a guerrilla soldier waiting in the tall grass. Enemies were hard to
identify, for they looked no different than civilians; in fact, some were, during the day. The Viet
Minh easily recruited local fighters, and because of the Vietnamese hatred of the French
occupation, the Viet Minh also benefited from the intelligence information the civilians
provided them. When the Chinese Communist Party won control of China in 1949, the
advanced weapons gap between the two opposing sides slowly closed because China, along
with the communist Soviet Union, began to supply the Viet Minh with artillery. Yet, the most
impressive feat of the Viet Minh guerilla fighters was that they overtook the Red River Delta
without any major battle. Their guerrilla tactics and civilian intelligence allowed the Viet Minh
to defeat the French.
At Dien Bien Phu, in 1954, the French made their final stand in this long, grueling battle. The
siege and battle took a toll on the French military from when, they could not recover. In the
same year, the Geneva Accords were signed, and the French left their colonies in Indochina.
These accords split Vietnam in half, North and South, but did not end the fighting. South
Vietnam now quaked in fear of the communist North overtaking them. The U.S. soon came to
the aid of South Vietnam and the War which ensued would greatly stir up American politics and
cost a massive amount of American lives.

Researched by Rachel Disselkamp
Cosby High School
Sources:
Allen, Joe . “Vietnam: The war that the U.S. lost.” International Socialist Review Issue 29May-
June 2003 22 May 2008 .
“Indochina wars.” Encyclopedia Britannica Article 22 May 2008 .
Joyce, C. Alan. “Vietnam War.” The World Almanac for Kids 2008. 2007. World Almanac for
Kids. 22 May 2008
Moise, Edwin E.. “The First Indochina War.” The Vietnam Wars. 1998. 22 May 2008 .
“Vietnam : First Indochina War 1946-1954.” Wars. 2008. War Crimes Limited (UK) . 22 May
2008 .
“Vietnam: Timeline of Events to 1974 .” Vietnam - 1945 and before. 22 May 2008

Cold War Text
THE CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY
With mystery, deception, espionage, secrecy and assassinations, the Central Intelligence
Agency (CIA) began to slowly surface and these words trailed its discovery with haste. As
America entered World War II, a secret intelligence agency known as the Office of Strategic
Services (OSS) emerged as America’s “ace of spades” allowing them to control the flow of the
war. Not only did the O.S.S. contain some of America’s best World War II soldiers, but it
definitely foreshadowed the new age of espionage that was about to consume the world.
Franklin D. Roosevelt believed that America’s intelligence agencies were poorly skilled and ill-
mannered, and this allowed William J. Donovan to step in as the leader of the O.S.S. In 1942,
Roosevelt reinforced the poor intelligence agencies of America and funded them, generally
without limit. The O.S.S.’s job was to collect foreign intelligence which allowed for America’s
strategic troop deployment and supply deployment all over Europe and the Pacific, but since
the O.S.S. was not “permitted” to control all foreign affairs it remained as secretive as possible.
As America and its allies successfully ended the war, Roosevelt dismantled the O.S.S., dividing it
among the State and War Departments. Donovan would not stand for his America to be run
solely by politicians, so he proposed a new plan, stating “A powerful, centralized civilian agency
would coordinate all the intelligence services and we will engage in subversive operations
abroad, but no police or law enforcement functions, either at home or abroad." Even though a
strong intelligence agency was a great idea, it was shot down by the (FBI) Federal Bureau of
Investigation, who believed it breached their “civilian territory,” and the military completely
opposed the two forces coming together. Eventually Harry S. Truman created the Central
Intelligence Group and the National Intelligence Authority in 1946, but twenty months later the
decision was made to “pull the plug” on both operations. Finally by 1947, the Central
Intelligence Agency and the National Security Council were both generated under the National
Security Act of 1947, allowing the Central Intelligence Agency to be responsible for discovering
intelligence, securing its validity, and deciding the level of national security.
Once the Central Intelligence Agency was established, it proved to be a great source of
America’s information during the Cold War with the Soviet Union. The Central Intelligence
Agency was given 46 million dollars by President Eisenhower in 1955 to have the CIA
Headquarters built in Langley, Virginia. By 1961 the CIA supported the invasion of Cuba at the
Bay of Pigs by providing the Cuban exiles with weapons and training. Later, the Central
Intelligence Agency discovered that Cuba had Soviet missiles pointed at the United States on
nuclear missile carriers; this created the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962. During the Cold War the
CIA played the biggest role in counter-espionage ever, but once the Cold War began thaw the
focus fell on the CIA control. In 1977, Jimmy Carter finally made the decision to give the
Director of Central Intelligence full control of the budget and operations the CIA performed, but
he also stated that anything that goes wrong is the director’s fault, not the “little man.” The CIA
always remained as secretive as possible and hid themselves well for almost 25 years,
supported by President Reagan and the Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982, which

gave criminal penalties to those who named covert operative specialists. The CIA has controlled
the underground of America for almost half a century and they will continue to keep America
safe with any means necessary. The Central Intelligence Agency played one of the biggest roles
in how America would be shaped throughout the Cold War and played an even bigger role in
the world’s affairs to come.
Researched by Derek Rhule
Cosby High School
Sources:
“Key Events in CIA’s History”. CIA. June 03, 2008 .
”. CIA. June 03, 2008 .
“Operation History”. CIA. June 03, 2008 .
Paley, A.L.. “Finnish-Russian War”. infoplease.. June 03, 2008 .
“Finnish-Russian War”. Oxford University Press 2000. June 03, 2008 .
Ilo, Juha . “The Finnish Winter War 1939-1940”. June 03, 2008 .
“Rudolf Ivanovich Abel, or Emil R. Goldfus, or William August Fisher (Soviet spy)”. Brittannica
Online. June 2, 2008 .
Friedman , Richard. “A STONE FOR WILLY FISHER”. CIA June 2, 2008 .
“Famous CasesRudolph Ivanovich Abel (Hollow Nickel Case)”. FBI. June 2, 2008 .

Cold War Text
Marshall Plan, 1948
In the immediate post-World War II period, Europe remained ravaged by war and thus
susceptible to exploitation by an internal and external Communist threat. In a June 5, 1947,
speech to the graduating class at Harvard University, Secretary of State George C. Marshall
issued a call for a comprehensive program to rebuild Europe. Fanned by the fear of Communist
expansion and the rapid deterioration of European economies in the winter of 1946–1947,
Congress passed the Economic Cooperation Act in March 1948 and approved funding that
would eventually rise to over $12 billion for the rebuilding of Western Europe.
The Marshall Plan generated a resurgence of European industrialization and brought extensive
investment into the region. It was also a stimulant to the U.S. economy by establishing markets
for American goods. Although the participation of the Soviet Union and East European nations
was an initial possibility, Soviet concern over potential U.S. economic domination of its Eastern
European satellites and Stalin’s unwillingness to open up his secret society to westerners
doomed the idea. Furthermore, it is unlikely that the U.S. Congress would have been willing to
fund the plan as generously as it did if aid also went to Soviet Bloc Communist nations.
Thus the Marshall Plan was applied solely to Western Europe, precluding any measure of Soviet
Bloc cooperation. Increasingly, the economic revival of Western Europe, especially West
Germany, was viewed suspiciously in Moscow. Economic historians have debated the precise
impact of the Marshall Plan on Western Europe, but these differing opinions do not detract
from the fact that the Marshall Plan has been recognized as a great humanitarian effort.
Secretary of State Marshall became the only general ever to receive a Nobel Prize for peace.
The Marshall Plan also institutionalized and legitimized the concept of U.S. foreign aid
programs, which have become a integral part of U.S. foreign policy.

Cold War Text
THE NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY ORGANIZATION (NATO)
The Cold War was in full swing, as the Soviet Union was rising to power, capturing satellite
countries. Using their strong dynamic forces, the Soviet Union captured surrounding countries
first to help protect them from any invasion. This tactic was used to imprison civilians and force
them to join the Soviet military. As their armed forces greatly increased in numbers, other
countries and nations feared that the Soviet Union would expand their control and take over
other countries.
In response to this, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization was formed. NATO is a formal
alliance between the territories of North American and Europe. From its inception, its main
purpose was to defend each other from the possibility of communist Soviet Union taking
control of their nation. Many powerful countries joined NATO by the signing of the official
document in 1949: Belgium, Great Britain, Italy, Iceland, Luxembourg, United States, Canada,
Netherlands, Denmark, Norway and Portugal. In 1950, General Dwight D. Eisenhower was
nominated and appointed as the first supreme allied commander. Since Eisenhower was from
the United States, this allowed the U.S. to be a strong force in the organization. West Germany,
Turkey and Greece joined by 1955.
Today, NATO is ideally an outstanding way for the twenty-six different countries and nations to
come together. As an organization, the leaders meet with one another to make decisions about
security issues and defensive issues against allied attacks. Also, NATO has armed forces, made
up of civilians of all twenty-six countries. They defend and aid countries in crisis, just like Darfur.
The North Atlantic Council is made up on knowledgeable political and military leaders
represented by each country. This council comes to a consensus on making important decisions
on what political and military tactics to use, for daily activity.
Many people believe that NATO is pointless and a waste of government money. These people
may not realize exactly what NATO does and all the hard work that goes into it. NATO has
helped and currently is helping a lot of countries. This organization has helped end extremely
bloody and deadly conflicts in Bosnia, Iraq, and Afghanistan. NATO is still up and running in this
century. Any threat brought to the table can be well thought through and these unified
countries can try to resolve the conflict. NATO has been around for fifty-nine years and as long
as there are problems in the world, NATO will be there to seek world peace.
Researched by Kacie Lake
Cosby High School
Sources:
“Cold War.” The Columbia Encyclopedia. 2006. Columbia University Press. 23 May 2008. .

Peters, Gerhard. “Cold War.” Issues: Understanding Controversies and Society. 2008. ABC-CLIO.
29 May 2008 .
Pierpaoli, Paul. “Cold War (Overview).” United States at War: Understanding Conflict and
Society. 2008. ABC-CLIO. 29 May 2008 .
Veve, Thomas D. “The Space Race: Cold War.” United States at War: Understanding Conflict and
Society. 2008. ABC-CLIO. 29 May 2008 .

Cold War Text
SENATOR JOSEPH MCCARTHY, MCCARTHYISM, AND THE WITCH HUNT
On November 14, 1908, Joseph McCarthy was born into a Roman Catholic family as the fifth of
nine children in Appleton, Wisconsin. Although McCarthy dropped out of grade school at the
age fourteen, he returned to diligently finish his studies in 1928, permitting him to attend
Marquette University. Once accepted, he began his journey to become what many historians
consider to be one of the least qualified, most corrupt politicians of his time. After receiving his
law diploma at Marquette University, McCarthy dabbled in unsuccessful law practices, and
indulged in gambling along the way for extra financing. Despite being a Democrat early in his
political years, he quickly switched into the Republican Party after being overlooked as a
candidate in the Democratic Party for district attorney. His dirty campaign to win the position as
circuit court judge proved to be an ominous foreshadowing to his later era of “McCarthyism.”
To stimulate his political career, McCarthy quit his job as circuit court judge and joined the
Marines during World War II. After his short military career McCarthy then ran as the
Republican candidate for the Wisconsin Senate seat, where he used propaganda and erroneous
accusations against his opponent, Robert La Follette, to promote his own campaign. Damaging
La Follete’s reputation by claiming he hadn’t enlisted in the military during the war, McCarthy
won the election and became Senator.
As re-election began to loom closer, McCarthy, whose first term was unimpressive, searched for
ways to ensure his political success, resorting even to corruption. Edmund Walsh, a close fellow
Roman Catholic and anti-communist suggested a crusade against so-called communist
subversives. McCarthy enthusiastically agreed and took advantage of the nation’s wave of
fanatic terror against communism, and emerged on February 9, 1950, claiming he had a list of
205 people in the State Department who were known members of the American Communist
Party. The American public went crazy with the thought of seditious communists living within
the United States, and roared for the investigation of the underground agitators. These people
on the list were in fact not all communists; some had proven merely to be alcoholics or sexual
deviants. Regardless, McCarthy relentlessly pushed through and became the chairman of the
Government Committee on Operations of the Senate, widening his scope to “investigate”
dissenters. He continued to investigate for over two years, relentlessly questioning numerous
government departments and the panic arising from the witch-hunts and fear of communism
became know as McCarthyism.
Joseph McCarthy then accused several innocent citizens, most notably Owen Lattimore, of
being associated with communism. Along the way, he had Louis Budenz, the former editor of
The Daily Worker, back his accusations with evidence that was circumstantial at best, for
Budenz was only using information he had heard from other people as much as 13 years prior.
Another victim of McCarthy’s spurious communist accusations was Drew Pearson, a critic who
discredited McCarthy’s accusations regularly through columns and radio broadcasts. McCarthy
made seven speeches to the Senate on Pearson, which resulted in the loss of sponsors to

Pearson’s show. Also, money was then raised to help numerous men sue Pearson, all charges of
which he was found innocent and not liable.
McCarthy’s downfall finally began in October of 1953, when he started to investigate
“communist infiltration into the military.” This was the final straw for then president Dwight D.
Eisenhower, who realized that McCarthy’s movement needed to be stopped. The Army fired
back at the accusations, sending information about McCarthy and advisors abusing
congressional privileges to known critics of McCarthy. Reporters, Drew Pearson included, and
other critics soon hopped on board, publishing unflattering articles about Joseph McCarthy and
his methods of seeking out the supposed communists in America.
Through the televised investigations into the United States Army and the reporters’ attack, the
nation grew to realize that McCarthy was “evil and unmatched in malice.” He lost his position
as chairmanship on the Government Committee on Operations of the Senate and in December
of 1954, a censure motion, which is a formal reprimand from a powerful body, was issued
condemning his conduct with the vote count at 67 to 22. The media subsequently became
disinterested in his communist allegations and McCarthy was virtually stripped of his power. He
died in May of 1957 after being diagnosed with cirrhosis of the liver due to heavy drinking. The
resounding effects of McCarthy’s era symbolized the pure terror of communism during the time
due to the Cold War. Although it came to an end in a few short years, it attributed to the
growing dissension between the Soviets and United States.
Research by Joyce Oh and Amanda Latham
Volunteers for the Cold War Museum
Cosby High School
Sources:“Joseph McCarthy.” 2008. NNDB Tracking the Entire World. 2 Jun 2008 .
“Joseph McCarthy (1908-1957).” Biography. 21 Apr 2003. Appleton History. 2 Jun 2008 .
Simkin, John. “Joseph McCarthy.” Spartacus Educational. 30 May 2008 .
Truman, Harry S. Telegram to Joseph McCarthy. Feb 1950.

Cold War Text
THE WARSAW PACT
In May 1955, the “treaty of mutual friendship, co-operation and mutual assistance” was signed
between the People’s Republic of Albania, the People’s Republic of Bulgaria, the Hungarian
People’s Republic, the German Democratic Republic, the Polish People’s Republic, the
Rumanian People’s Republic, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, and the Czechoslovak
Republic. It was the Communist counteraction to NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization).
The Warsaw Pact came to be seen as quite a potential militaristic threat, as a sign of
Communist dominance, and a definite opponent to American capitalism. The signing of the pact
became a symbol of Soviet dominance in Eastern Europe. The pact was used more as a means
to keep the Soviet allies under a watchful eye than to actually make and enforce decisions.
Eventually, the alliance grew to become a way to build and strengthen military forces
throughout the Eastern European countries involved. Conditions of the treaty included “total
equality, mutual noninterference in internal affairs, and respect for national sovereignty and
independence.” The treaty was originally set at twenty years for the pact and another ten years
following that, under the condition that none of the members dropped out of the alliance;
however, in 1962, Albania stopped participating in the actions of the treaty and formally
dropped out of the alliance in 1968.
The majority of the actions performed by the Warsaw Pact were run by the Political
Consultative Committee and the Unified Command of Pact Armed forces; both were centered
in Moscow. The latter was in charge of all military activities of the alliance, while the first
controlled everything else. One of the presiding conditions was that the leaders of both of
these committees would be Soviet, so that Communist dominance would remain prevalent.
Speculation about Khrushchev’s ambition towards the power of the Communist party may
explain the formation of the Warsaw pact – he wanted global domination for Communism.
Khrushchev considered his plans of “de-Stalinization” to be completely justified and necessary
for Soviet prosperity. Additionally, the Communist Soviet Union was finding it increasingly
difficult to fulfill its monetary needs and thought that the Warsaw Pact would resolve this
problem. One of Khrushchev’s main goals was to stimulate the development of the involved
Eastern European nations so that they may function on their own.
The power and control of the Soviets in the pact sharply fell in 1989 and 1990 as a result of
global Communist losses. In 1990, Hungary stated that it would no longer participate in the
military functions of the pact, and that it had plans to ultimately leave the pact in 1991, along
with Czechoslovakia and Poland. East Germany also resigned from the alliance in 1990 as it was
reunified into one, united Germany. Ultimately, in 1991, the remaining six countries decided to
formally end their alliance and the Warsaw Pact was disbanded.
Researched By Nicholas Dambacher
Volunteer For The Cold War Museum

Cosby High School
Sources:
“APPENDIX C: THE WARSAW PACT -- Soviet Union.” Library of Congress. 12 May 2008 .
“Foreign Affairs Warsaw Pact 1955-1970.” NWtravel Magazine. 12 May 2008 .
Goldman, Stuart D. “Warsaw Pact.” World Book. 21st ed.
Halsall, Paul. Modern History Sourcebook. 1998. The Warsaw Pact, 1955. 12 May 2008

Cold War Text
THE KHMER ROUGE AND CAMBODIA
In the 1960’s and 1970’s Cambodia was being pulled in many different directions. They were in
the middle of a civil war and, at the same time were being drawn into the conflict in Vietnam.
Cambodia is a small country, made up of mostly Buddhists. Prince Sihanouk was in the middle
of a military coup, and was being overthrown by General Lon Nol, the president of the Khmer
Republic. Prince Sihanouk eventually joined forces with a communist organization called the
Khmer Rouge. Civil war began wreaking havoc across the country. While this civil war was going
on, the Vietnam War was happening right next door. Americans killed over 750,000
Cambodians in the effort to destroy the North Vietnamese. It is estimated that over 150,000
Cambodians died in the civil war, most of them civilians.
In 1975 the Khmer Rouge won the civil war and gained power in Cambodia. The organization
was headed by a man name Pol Pot. Pol Pot was educated in France and deeply admired
Chinese communism. He and his party believed that all intellectuals and anything that could
threaten communism needed to be abolished. The first part of the Cambodian genocide began
with the Exodus. Everyone was forced to leave the cities, including the sick, elderly, and
children. People who were too slow or refused to leave were killed on the spot. Pol Pot’s plan
was to make Cambodia into an organization of farms, with the citizens as the laborers. The
country’s name was changed to Kampuchea and all civil rights and liberties were immediately
taken away. Basically everything was shut down; hospitals, colleges, and factories included. The
Khmer Rouge believed that their biggest threats were intellectuals because they had the
intelligence to question authority and possibly overthrow the regime. Thus, teachers, doctors,
lawyers and even members of the army were immediately killed. Even wearing glasses was
enough reason for the Khmer Rouge to murder civilians. They took eliminating intellectuals so
seriously that even extended families were killed; for example, the second cousin of a doctor
could be killed for his relations.
Music and books were banned along with religion. Temples were destroyed and thousands of
monks lost their lives to the regime. Witness accounts have even stated that laughing was a
reason to be killed. Relationships were basically outlawed along with most forms of physical
affection. Most people became forced laborers where the conditions were horrible. Long days,
exhausting work, and little food contributed to many deaths. People were purposely placed in
camps far away from home so they had no where to escape. The Khmer Rouge had power, but
with power comes paranoia. Many members of the Regime were murdered for betrayal and
treason. On December 25th, 1978 the Vietnamese Invaded Cambodia and ended the Khmer
Rouge’s reign of terror. Pol Pot and other members of his party went into hiding in the west,
but fighting continued for twenty years. Pol Pot was imprisoned in 1997, and died in 1998 of
heart failure. Many former members of the Khmer Rouge continue to go on trial for their
crimes against humanities. The total count of those murdered during the Cambodian genocide
came to more than two million.

Researched by Laura Szakmary
Cosby High School
Sources:
"Cambodia 1975." Genocide-Cambodia. P E A C E P L E D G E U N I O N, n.d. Web. 14 May 2010.
<http://www.ppu.org.uk/genocide/g_cambodia4.html>.
"Pol Pot in Cambodia 1975-1979 2,000,000 deaths." The History Place-Genocide in the 20th
century. The History Place™, 1999. Web. 14 May 2010.
<http://www.historyplace.com/worldhistory/genocide/pol-pot.htm>.
Rummel, R.J. "STATISTICS OF DEMOCIDE." Statistics of Cambodia Genocide and Mass Murder.
Hawaii.edu, n.d. Web. 14 May 2010. <http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/SOD.CHAP4.HTM>.

Cold War Text
FALL OF THE SOVIET UNION
In December of 1991, as the world watched in amazement, the Soviet Union disintegrated into
fifteen separate countries. Its collapse was hailed by the west as a victory for freedom, a
triumph of democracy over totalitarianism, and evidence of the superiority of capitalism over
socialism. The United States rejoiced as its formidable enemy was brought to its knees, thereby
ending the Cold War which had hovered over these two superpowers since the end of World
War II. Indeed, the breakup of the Soviet Union transformed the entire world political situation,
leading to a complete reformulation of political, economic and military alliances all over the
globe.
What led to this monumental historical event? In fact, the answer is a very complex one, and
can only be arrived at with an understanding of the peculiar composition and history of the
Soviet Union. The Soviet Union was built on approximately the same territory as the Russian
Empire which it succeeded. After the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917, the newly-formed
government developed a philosophy of socialism with the eventual and gradual transition to
Communism. The state which the Bolsheviks created was intended to overcome national
differences, and rather to create one monolithic state based on a centralized economical and
political system. This state, which was built on a Communist ideology, was eventually
transformed into a totalitarian state, in which the Communist leadership had complete control
over the country.
However, this project of creating a unified, centralized socialist state proved problematic for
several reasons. First, the Soviets underestimated the degree to which the non-Russian ethnic
groups in the country (which comprised more than fifty percent of the total population of the
Soviet Union) would resist assimilation into a Russianized State. Second, their economic
planning failed to meet the needs of the State, which was caught up in a vicious arms race with
the United States. This led to gradual economic decline, eventually necessitating the need for
reform. Finally, the ideology of Communism, which the Soviet Government worked to instill in
the hearts and minds of its population, never took firm root, and eventually lost whatever
influence it had originally carried.
By the time of the 1985 rise to power of Mikhail Gorbachev, the Soviet Union’s last leader, the
country was in a situation of severe stagnation, with deep economic and political problems
which sorely needed to be addressed and overcome. Recognizing this, Gorbachev introduced a
two-tiered policy of reform. On one level, he initiated a policy of glasnost, or freedom of
speech. On the other level, he began a program of economic reform known as perestroika, or
rebuilding. What Gorbachev did not realize was that by giving people complete freedom of
expression, he was unwittingly unleashing emotions and political feelings that had been pent
up for decades, and which proved to be extremely powerful when brought out into the open.
Moreover, his policy of economic reform did not have the immediate results he had hoped for

and had publicly predicted. The Soviet people consequently used their newly allotted freedom
of speech to criticize Gorbachev for his failure to improve the economy.
The disintegration of the Soviet Union began on the peripheries, in the non-Russian areas. The
first region to produce mass, organized dissent was the Baltic region, where, in 1987, the
government of Estonia demanded autonomy. This move was later followed by similar moves in
Lithuania and Latvia, the other two Baltic republics. The nationalist movements in the Baltics
constituted a strong challenge to Gorbachev’s policy of glasnost. He did not want to crack down
too severely on the participants in these movements, yet at the same time, it became
increasingly evident that allowing them to run their course would spell disaster for the Soviet
Union, which would completely collapse if all of the periphery republics were to demand
independence.
After the initiative from Estonia, similar movements sprang up all over the former Soviet Union.
In the Transcaucasus region (in the South of the Soviet Union), a movement developed inside
the Armenian-populated autonomous region of Nagorno-Karabagh, in the Republic of
Azerbaijan. The Armenian population of this region demanded that they be granted the right to
secede and join the Republic of Armenia, with whose population they were ethnically linked.
Massive demonstrations were held in Armenia in solidarity with the secessionists in Nagorno-
Karabagh. The Gorbachev government refused to allow the population of Nagorno-Karabagh to
secede, and the situation developed into a violent territorial dispute, eventually degenerating
into an all-out war which continues unabated until the present day.
Once this “Pandora’s box” had been opened, nationalist movements emerged in Georgia,
Ukraine, Moldova, Byelorussia, and the Central Asian republics. The power of the Central
Government was considerably weakened by these movements; they could no longer rely on the
cooperation of Government figures in the republics.
Finally, the situation came to a head in August of 1991. In a last-ditch effort to save the Soviet
Union, which was floundering under the impact of the political movements which had emerged
since the implementation of Gorbachev’s glasnost, a group of “hard-line” Communists
organized a coup d’etat. They kidnapped Gorbachev, and then, on August 19 of 1991, they
announced on state television that Gorbachev was very ill and would no longer be able to
govern. The country went into an uproar. Massive protests were staged in Moscow, Leningrad,
and many of the other major cities of the Soviet Union. When the coup organizers tried to bring
in the military to quell the protestors, the soldiers themselves rebelled, saying that they could
not fire on their fellow countrymen. After three days of massive protest, the coup organizers
surrendered, realizing that without the cooperation of the military, they did not have the power
to overcome the power of the entire population of the country.
After the failed coup attempt, it was only a few months until the Soviet Union completely
collapsed. Both the government and the people realized that there was no way to turn back the
clock; the massive demonstrations of the “August days” had demonstrated that the population
would accept nothing less than democracy. Gorbachev conceded power, realizing that he could
no longer contain the power of the population. On December 25, 1991, he resigned. By January

of 1992, by popular demand, the Soviet Union ceased to exist. In its place, a new entity was
formed. It was called the “Commonwealth of Independent Republics,” and was composed of
most of the independent countries of the former Soviet Union. While the member countries
had complete political independence, they were linked to other Commonwealth countries by
economic, and, in some cases, military ties.
Now that the Soviet Union, with its centralized political and economic system, has ceased to
exist, the fifteen newly formed independent countries which emerged in its aftermath are faced
with an overwhelming task. They must develop their economies, reorganize their political
systems, and, in many cases, settle bitter territorial disputes. A number of wars have developed
on the peripheries of the former Soviet Union. Additionally, the entire region is suffering a
period of severe economic hardship. However, despite the many hardships facing the region,
bold steps are being taken toward democratization, reorganization, and rebuilding in most of
the countries of the former Soviet Union.

Cold War Text
Cuban Missile Crisis
In October 1962, an American U-2 spy plane secretly photographed nuclear missile sites being
built by the Soviet Union on the island of Cuba. President Kennedy did not want the Soviet
Union and Cuba to know that he had discovered the missiles. He met in secret with his advisors
for several days to discuss the problem.
After many long and difficult meetings, Kennedy decided to place a naval blockade, or a ring of
ships, around Cuba. The aim of this "quarantine," as he called it, was to prevent the Soviets
from bringing in more military supplies. He demanded the removal of the missiles already there
and the destruction of the sites. On October 22, President Kennedy spoke to the nation about
the crisis in a televised address.
Now one was sure how Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev would respond to the naval blockade
and US demands. But the leaders of both superpowers recognized the devastating possibility of
a nuclear war and publicly agreed to a deal in which the Soviets would dismantle the weapon
sites in exchange for a pledge from the United States not to invade Cuba. In a separate deal,
which remained secret for more than twenty-five years, the United States also agreed to
remove its nuclear missiles from Turkey. Although the Soviets removed their missiles from
Cuba, they escalated the building of their military arsenal; the missile crisis was over, the arms
race was not.
In 1963, there were signs of a lessening of tensions between the Soviet Union and the United
States. In his commencement address at American University, President Kennedy urged
Americans to reexamine Cold War stereotypes and myths and called for a strategy of peace
that would make the world safe for diversity. Two actions also signaled a warming in relations
between the superpowers: the establishment of a teletype "Hotline" between the Kremlin and
the White House and the signing of the Limited Nuclear Test Ban Treaty on July 25, 1963.
In language very different from his inaugural address, President Kennedy told Americans in June
1963, "For, in the final analysis, our most basic common link is that we all inhabit this small
planet. We all breathe the same air. We all cherish our children's future. And we are all mortal."

Cold War Text
The Soviet Invasion of Afghanistan and the U.S. Response, 1978–1980
At the end of December 1979, the Soviet Union sent thousands of troops into Afghanistan and
immediately assumed complete military and political control of Kabul and large portions of the
country. This event began a brutal, decade-long attempt by Moscow to subdue the Afghan civil
war and maintain a friendly and socialist government on its border. It was a watershed event of
the Cold War, marking the only time the Soviet Union invaded a country outside the Eastern
Bloc—a strategic decision met by nearly worldwide condemnation. While the massive,
lightning-fast military maneuvers and brazenness of Soviet political objectives constituted an
“invasion” of Afghanistan, the word “intervention” more accurately describes these events as
the culmination of growing Soviet domination going back to 1973. Undoubtedly, leaders in the
Kremlin had hoped that a rapid and complete military takeover would secure Afghanistan’s
place as an exemplar of the Brezhnev Doctrine, which held that once a country became socialist
Moscow would never permit it to return to the capitalist camp. The United States and its
European allies, guided by their own doctrine of containment, sharply criticized the Soviet
move into Afghanistan and devised numerous measures to compel Moscow to withdraw.
In the summer of 1973, Mohammed Daoud, the former Afghan Prime Minister, launched a
successful coup against King Zahir. Although Daoud himself was more nationalist than socialist,
his coup was dependent on pro-Soviet military and political factions. Since 1955 Moscow had
provided military training and materiel to Afghanistan; by 1973, a third of active troops had
trained on Soviet soil. Additionally, Daoud enjoyed the support of the People’s Democratic
Party of Afghanistan (PDPA), founded in 1965 upon Marxist ideology and allegiance to Moscow.
In 1967 the PDPA split into two factions: the Parchamists, led by Babrak Karmal (who supported
Daoud), and the “Khalqis” led by Noor Taraki. For the next five years, Daoud attempted the
impossible task of governing Afganistan’s Islamic tribal regions, while also struggling to
reconcile the PDPA split. But the more radical Khalq faction never fully recognized Daoud’s
leadership, while Karmal viewed the coup largely as a means to consolidate his own power. In
response, Daoud hoped to mitigate both of these threats by steering Afghanistan away from
Soviet influence and improving U.S. relations, while decreasing the influence of radical
elements in the government and military.
Daoud’s middle course ended in disaster. On April 28, 1978, soldiers aligned with Taraki’s
“Khalq” faction assaulted the presidential palace, where troops executed Daoud and his family.
In the following days Taraki became the Prime Minister, and, in an attempt to end the PDPA’s
divisions, Karmal became Deputy Prime Minister. In Washington, this Communist revolution
was met with alarm. The Carter administration recognized that Taraki would undo Daoud’s
attempt to steer Afghanistan away from Moscow, and it debated whether to cut ties with
Afghanistan or recognize Taraki in the hopes that Soviet influence could be contained. Although
the President’s Assistant for National Security Affairs Zbigniew Brzezinski advocated the former
course, Carter supported the Department of State’s advocacy of recognition. Shortly after the
revolution, Washington recognized the new government and soon named Adolph Dubs its

Ambassador to Afghanistan. Until his kidnapping and death at the hands of Afghan Shia
dissidents in February 1979, Dubs strongly pursued good relations with the Taraki regime in the
hopes that U.S. support would keep Soviet influence at bay.
Once again, the tumult of internal Afghan politics complicated both U.S. and Soviet jockeying. In
the summer of 1979, Hafizullah Amin, a longtime ally of Taraki who became Deputy Prime
Minister following the April Revolution, received word that Babrak Karmal (Daoud’s early
supporter) was leading a Parcham plot to overthrow the Taraki regime. Amin took the
opportunity to purge and execute many Parchamists and consolidate his own power.
Complicating matters further, this internal strife damaged the Kabul Government’s major
national program, namely, to bring the Communist revolution to the Islamic tribal areas beyond
Kabul. By the winter of 1978, this program was met by armed revolt throughout the country. In
response, Amin and Taraki traveled to Moscow to sign a friendship treaty which included a
provision that would allow direct Soviet military assistance should the Islamic insurgency
threaten the regime. This insurrection intensified over the next year and it became increasingly
obvious to the Soviets that Taraki could not prevent all-out civil war and the prospect of a
hostile Islamic government taking control. By mid-1979 Moscow was searching to replace
Taraki and Amin, and dispatched combat troops to Bagram Air Base outside of Kabul. This move
prompted the Carter administration to begin supplying non-lethal aid to Afghan mujahedeen, or
Islamic insurgents. In August, a high-ranking Soviet military delegation arrived in Kabul to assess
the situation. U.S. officials interpreted this mission as one last Soviet attempt to shore up the
Taraki regime, and also an opportunity to devise a military takeover. Regarding the latter, most
analysts in Washington believed that such a move remained possible but unlikely.
But this calculus was bound to change. Amin sensed the Soviet mission was designed to
strengthen Taraki at his expense. In response, forces loyal to Amin executed Taraki in
October—a move that infuriated Moscow, which began amassing combat units along its
border. At this juncture Washington was still unsure how to interpret the Soviet maneuvers:
was the Soviet Union planning a full takeover or did it remain committed to preserving the April
Revolution? Analysts remained skeptical that Moscow would occupy the country given the
political and economic costs. By the winter of 1979, faced with mutinies and an uncertain
leadership, the Afghan Army was unable to provide basic security to the government against
the onslaught of Islamic fighters nearing Kabul. By that point the Soviets were sending in
motorized divisions and Special Forces. Washington demanded an explanation, which the
Soviets ignored. Finally, on Christmas Eve, the invasion began. Soviet troops killed Amin and
installed Babrak Karmal as the Soviet’s puppet head of government.
Although the Carter administration had closely watched this buildup from the outset, its
reaction following the invasion revealed that, until the end, it clung to the hope that the Soviets
would not invade, based on the unjustified assumption that Moscow would conclude that the
costs of invasion were too high. In response, Carter wrote a sharply-worded letter to Brezhnev
denouncing Soviet aggression, and during his State of the Union address he announced his own
doctrine vowing to protect Middle Eastern oil supplies from encroaching Soviet power. The
administration also enacted economic sanctions and trade embargoes against the Soviet Union,

called for a boycott of the 1980 Moscow Olympics, and stepped up its aid to the Afghan
insurgents. In sum, these actions were Washington’s collective attempt to make the Soviets’
“adventure” in Afghanistan as painful and brief as possible. Instead, it took ten years of grinding
insurgency before Moscow finally withdrew, at the cost of millions of lives and billions of
dollars. In their wake, the Soviets left a shattered country in which the Taliban, an Islamic
fundamentalist group, seized control, later providing Osama bin Laden with a training base
from which to launch terrorist operations worldwide.

Cold War Text
The Yalta Conference, 1945
The Yalta Conference took place in a Russian resort town in the Crimea from February 4–11,
1945, during World War Two. At Yalta, U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt, British Prime
Minister Winston Churchill, and Soviet Premier Joseph Stalin made important decisions
regarding the future progress of the war and the postwar world.
The Allied leaders came to Yalta knowing that an Allied victory in Europe was practically
inevitable but less convinced that the Pacific war was nearing an end. Recognizing that a victory
over Japan might require a protracted fight, the United States and Great Britain saw a major
strategic advantage to Soviet participation in the Pacific theater. At Yalta, Roosevelt and
Churchill discussed with Stalin the conditions under which the Soviet Union would enter the
war against Japan and all three agreed that, in exchange for potentially crucial Soviet
participation in the Pacific theater, the Soviets would be granted a sphere of influence in
Manchuria following Japan’s surrender. This included the southern portion of Sakhalin, a lease
at Port Arthur (now Lüshunkou), a share in the operation of the Manchurian railroads, and the
Kurile Islands. This agreement was the major concrete accomplishment of the Yalta Conference.
The Allied leaders also discussed the future of Germany, Eastern Europe and the United
Nations. Roosevelt, Churchill, and Stalin agreed not only to include France in the postwar
governing of Germany, but also that Germany should assume some, but not all, responsibility
for reparations following the war. The Americans and the British generally agreed that future
governments of the Eastern European nations bordering the Soviet Union should be “friendly”
to the Soviet regime while the Soviets pledged to allow free elections in all territories liberated
from Nazi Germany. Negotiators also released a declaration on Poland, providing for the
inclusion of Communists in the postwar national government. In discussions regarding the
future of the United Nations, all parties agreed to an American plan concerning voting
procedures in the Security Council, which had been expanded to five permanent members
following the inclusion of France. Each of these permanent members was to hold a veto on
decisions before the Security Council.
Initial reaction to the Yalta agreements was celebratory. Roosevelt and many other Americans
viewed it as proof that the spirit of U.S.-Soviet wartime cooperation would carry over into the
postwar period. This sentiment, however, was short lived. With the death of Franklin D.
Roosevelt on April 12, 1945, Harry S. Truman became the thirty-third president of the United
States. By the end of April, the new administration clashed with the Soviets over their influence
in Eastern Europe, and over the United Nations. Alarmed at the perceived lack of cooperation
on the part of the Soviets, many Americans began to criticize Roosevelt’s handling of the Yalta
negotiations. To this day, many of Roosevelt’s most vehement detractors accuse him of
“handing over” Eastern Europe and Northeast Asia to the Soviet Union at Yalta despite the fact
that the Soviets did make many substantial concessions.

Cold War Text
The Truman Doctrine, 1947
With the Truman Doctrine, President Harry S. Truman established that the United States would
provide political, military and economic assistance to all democratic nations under threat from
external or internal authoritarian forces. The Truman Doctrine effectively reoriented U.S.
foreign policy, away from its usual stance of withdrawal from regional conflicts not directly
involving the United States, to one of possible intervention in far away conflicts.
The Truman Doctrine arose from a speech delivered by President Truman before a joint session
of Congress on March 12, 1947. The immediate cause for the speech was a recent
announcement by the British Government that, as of March 31, it would no longer provide
military and economic assistance to the Greek Government in its civil war against the Greek
Communist Party. Truman asked Congress to support the Greek Government against the
Communists. He also asked Congress to provide assistance for Turkey, since that nation, too,
had previously been dependent on British aid.
At the time, the U.S. Government believed that the Soviet Union supported the Greek
Communist war effort and worried that if the Communists prevailed in the Greek civil war, the
Soviets would ultimately influence Greek policy. In fact, Soviet leader Joseph Stalin had
deliberately refrained from providing any support to the Greek Communists and had forced
Yugoslav Prime Minister Josip Tito to follow suit, much to the detriment of Soviet-Yugoslav
relations. However, a number of other foreign policy problems also influenced President
Truman’s decision to actively aid Greece and Turkey. In 1946, four setbacks, in particular, had
served to effectively torpedo any chance of achieving a durable post-war rapprochement with
the Soviet Union: the Soviets’ failure to withdraw their troops from northern Iran in early 1946
(as per the terms of the Tehran Declaration of 1943); Soviet attempts to pressure the Iranian
Government into granting them oil concessions while supposedly fomenting irredentism by
Azerbaijani separatists in northern Iran; Soviet efforts to force the Turkish Government into
granting them base and transit rights through the Turkish Straits; and, the Soviet Government’s
rejection of the Baruch plan for international control over nuclear energy and weapons in June
1946.
In light of the deteriorating relationship with the Soviet Union and the appearance of Soviet
meddling in Greek and Turkish affairs, the withdrawal of British assistance to Greece provided
the necessary catalyst for the Truman Administration to reorient American foreign policy.
Accordingly, in his speech, President Truman requested that Congress provide $400,000,000
worth of aid to both the Greek and Turkish Governments and support the dispatch of American
civilian and military personnel and equipment to the region.
Truman justified his request on two grounds. He argued that a Communist victory in the Greek
Civil War would endanger the political stability of Turkey, which would undermine the political
stability of the Middle East. This could not be allowed in light of the region’s immense strategic
importance to U.S. national security. Truman also argued that the United States was compelled

to assist “free peoples” in their struggles against “totalitarian regimes,” because the spread of
authoritarianism would “undermine the foundations of international peace and hence the
security of the United States.” In the words of the Truman Doctrine, it became “the policy of
the United States to support free peoples who are resisting attempted subjugation by armed
minorities or by outside pressures.”
Truman argued that the United States could no longer stand by and allow the forcible
expansion of Soviet totalitarianism into free, independent nations, because American national
security now depended upon more than just the physical security of American territory. Rather,
in a sharp break with its traditional avoidance of extensive foreign commitments beyond the
Western Hemisphere during peacetime, the Truman Doctrine committed the United States to
actively offering assistance to preserve the political integrity of democratic nations when such
an offer was deemed to be in the best interest of the United States.

Cold War Text
TREATY BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND THE UNION OF SOVIET SOCIALIST
REPUBLICS ON STRATEGIC OFFENSIVE REDUCTIONS (START I)
Background
The U.S.-Soviet Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, known as START I, was signed on July 31, 1991
by U.S. President George H.W. Bush and Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev.
START I was the first treaty to provide for deep reductions of U.S. and Soviet/Russian strategic
nuclear weapons. It played an indispensable role in ensuring the predictability and stability of
the strategic balance and serving as a framework for even deeper reductions. Even though
many elements of START I — first and foremost the limits on the number of warheads and
delivery vehicles — quickly became outdated, its verification and transparency provisions
maintained their value until the treaty's last days. At the same time, START I proved to be
excessively complicated, cumbersome and expensive to continue, which eventually led the
United States and Russia to replace it with a new treaty in 2010.
Negotiations that led to the signing of START I began in May 1982. In November 1983, the
Soviet Union "discontinued" talks after the United States began deploying intermediate-range
missiles in Europe. In January 1985, U.S. Secretary of State George Schultz and Soviet Foreign
Minister Andrey Gromyko agreed on a new formula for three-part negotiations that
encompassed strategic weapons, intermediate-range forces and missile defense. These talks
received a significant boost at the Reykjavik summit between Presidents Ronald Reagan and
Mikhail Gorbachev. In December 1987, the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty was
signed. Negotiations subsequently turned to the reduction of strategic weapons.
START I entered into force on December 5, 1994. The break-up of the Soviet Union in December
1991 and the need to make arrangements with regard to its nuclear inheritance contributed to
a three-year delay between the signing of the treaty and its entry into force. Principles for
adapting START I to new political realities were agreed upon in May 1992 in the Lisbon
Protocol. According to that agreement, four post-Soviet states — Russia, Belarus, Kazakhstan,
and Ukraine — were recognized as parties to START I in place of the Soviet Union, but only
Russia was designated a nuclear weapon state, while the other three assumed an obligation to
join the NPT as non-nuclear states and eliminate all START I accountable weapons and
associated facilities within seven years (the period of reductions mandated by the treaty).
Whereas Belarus and Kazakhstan quickly joined the NPT and ratified START I "as is," Ukraine
experienced intense domestic debates over how to deal with its nuclear inheritance that
dragged on for more than two years; its first START I ratification resolution was rejected by the
United States and Russia.

Although the entry into force of START I took more than three years, some important activities
were conducted shortly after its signing, most notably exchange of data on strategic weapons
and associated facilities, as well as inspections to verify data on technical characteristics of
strategic missiles and implementation of provisions on test launches and telemetry exchanges.
START I had a duration of 15 years. Reductions mandated by the treaty were to be completed
no later than seven years after its entry into force. Parties were then obligated to maintain
those limits during the next eight years. In fact, both the United States and Russia continued
reductions after reaching START I mandated limits. By the time of the treaty's expiration, their
strategic nuclear arsenals were significantly below those stipulated in the treaty.
During the 1990s, the United States and Russia undertook several attempts to replace START I
with a new treaty that would have provided for deeper reductions. The 1993 START II treaty
never entered into force due to what Russia perceived as serious deficiencies of that treaty.
Consultations on another treaty, sometimes referred to as START III, were conducted from
1997-2000 but ended without result. The Moscow Treaty provided for significantly lower limits
on strategic weapons, but lacked verification and transparency provisions.
START I remained in force until December 5, 2009. It contained the option of extending the
treaty for five-year periods, but Washington and Moscow decided against extension —
negotiations were already underway on a new, replacement treaty, and START I was allowed to
expire.
Treaty Obligations
START I established an aggregate limit of 1,600 delivery vehicles and 6,000 warheads for each
party (a reduction from 10-12,000 warheads in 1991). Within that limit, the Treaty established
three sub-limits: 4,900 warheads for ICBMs (land-based intercontinental ballistic missiles) and
SLBMs (submarine-launched ballistic missiles), 154 heavy ICBMs (defined as having a launch
weight greater than 106t or a throw-weight greater than 4,350kg), 1,540 warheads for these
heavy ICBMs (Only the Soviet Union possessed this type of missile), and 1,100 warheads for
mobile ICBMs (de facto applied only to the Soviet Union and Russia because the United States,
shortly after the signing of START I, decided to forego deployment of such missiles). The Treaty
also established a limit of 3,600 metric tons (t) for the throw-weight of ballistic missiles.
The construction of new types of heavy ICBMs and SLBMs is banned, although modernization
programs and, in exceptional cases, new silo construction, are permitted.
The treaty bans the testing of missiles equipped with a greater number of warheads than
established in the treaty, and bans any new ballistic missiles with more than 10 warheads.
Parties to the treaty may also reduce the number of warheads attributed to a specific missile.
However, no more than three existing missile types may have the number of warheads
reduced, and the total reduction may not exceed 1,250 warheads.
While the treaty counts each ICBM and SLBM reentry vehicle as a single warhead, counting
rules for warheads attributed to heavy bombers are more complicated. Each Russian heavy

bomber equipped to carry long-range nuclear ALCMs (defined as having maximum range of
600km or more), up to a total of 180 bombers, counts as eight warheads toward the 6,000
warhead limit, even though existing Russian heavy bomber types can carry between six and 16
ALCMs. Each Russian heavy bomber above the level of 180 has its actual number of ALCMs
counted toward the 6,000 warhead limit. Similarly, each U.S. long-range nuclear ALCM-carrying
heavy bomber, up to a total of 150 bombers, counts as 10 warheads toward the 6,000 warhead
limit, and each bomber in excess of 150 has the actual number of ALCMs it can carry counted
toward the warhead limit. Bombers not equipped to carry long-range nuclear ALCMs are
counted as one warhead.

Cold War Text
December 3, 1989: Gorbachev and Bush declare Cold War over at Malta summit
Almost 50 years of political and ideological tension came to an end when the US and Soviet
leaders met on the Mediterranean island to call an end to the Cold War.
On December 3, 1989, the Cold War – which had held the Western bloc of the USA and its
NATO allies in confrontation with the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact countries since 1945 –
was declared to be over.
As recalled in the video above, President Bush of the USA and Soviet General Secretary Mikhail
Gorbachev had convened the day before on the Russian cruise ship Maxim Gorky, in
Marsaxlokk Bay harbour on the coast of Malta –only their second face-to-face meeting.
At a joint news conference on December 3, after eight hours of talks, the two superpower
leaders confirmed the new détente, promising “a lasting peace” and “enduring co-operation”.
President Bush was also quick to praise – and offer support to – his counterpart’s policies of
glasnost and perestroika which were helping to lift the ‘Iron Curtain’ around Eastern Europe.
Their summit took place against a backdrop of tumultuous change in that region. Within the
previous few weeks communist governments had been dissolved in Czechoslovakia and East
Germany, and the Berlin Wall had fallen.
Bush and Gorbachev would sign a treaty regarding Conventional Forces in Europe in November
1990, and the first of the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaties (Start) in December 1991.

Cold War Text
The Rise and Fall of the Berlin Wall

Erected in the dead of night on August 13, 1961, the Berlin Wall (known as Berliner Mauer in
German) was a physical division between West Berlin and East Germany. Its purpose was to
keep disaffected East Germans from fleeing to the West.
When the Berlin Wall fell on November 9, 1989, its destruction was nearly as instantaneous as
its creation. For 28 years, the Berlin Wall had been a symbol of the Cold War and the Iron
Curtain between Soviet-led Communism and the democracies of the West.
When it fell, it was celebrated around the world.
A Divided Germany and Berlin
At the end of World War II, the Allied powers divided conquered Germany into four zones. As
agreed at the Potsdam Conference, each was occupied by either the United States, Great
Britain, France, or the Soviet Union. The same was done in Germany's capital city, Berlin.
The relationship between the Soviet Union and the other three Allied powers quickly
disintegrated. As a result, the cooperative atmosphere of the occupation of Germany turned
competitive and aggressive. One of the best-known incidents was the Berlin Blockade in June of
1948 during which the Soviet Union stopped all supplies from reaching West Berlin.
Although an eventual reunification of Germany had been intended, the new relationship
between the Allied powers turned Germany into West versus East and democracy versus
Communism.
In 1949, this new organization of Germany became official when the three zones occupied by
the United States, Great Britain, and France combined to form West Germany (the Federal
Republic of Germany, or FRG).
The zone occupied by the Soviet Union quickly followed by forming East Germany (the German
Democratic Republic, or GDR).
This same division into West and East occurred in Berlin. Since the city of Berlin had been
situated entirely within the Soviet Zone of Occupation, West Berlin became an island of
democracy within Communist East Germany.
The Economic Differences
Within a short period of time after the war, living conditions in West Germany and East
Germany became distinctly different.
With the help and support of its occupying powers, West Germany set up a capitalist society.
The economy experienced such a rapid growth that it became known as the "economic

miracle." With hard work, individuals living in West Germany were able to live well, buy gadgets
and appliances, and travel as they wished.
Nearly the opposite was true in East Germany. The Soviet Union had viewed their zone as a
spoil of war. They had pilfered factory equipment and other valuable assets from their zone and
shipped them back to the Soviet Union.
When East Germany became its own country in 1949, it was under the direct influence of the
Soviet Union and a Communist society was established. The economy of East Germany dragged
and individual freedoms were severely restricted.
Mass Emigration From the East
Outside of Berlin, East Germany had been fortified in 1952. By the late 1950s, many people
living in East Germany wanted out. No longer able to stand the repressive living conditions,
they would head to West Berlin. Although some of them would be stopped on their way,
hundreds of thousands made it across the border.
Once across, these refugees were housed in warehouses and then flown to West Germany.
Many of those who escaped were young, trained professionals. By the early 1960s, East
Germany was rapidly losing both its labor force and its population.
Between 1949 and 1961, it's estimated that nearly 2.7 million people fled East Germany.
The government was desperate to stop this mass exodus. The obvious leak was the easy access
East Germans had to West Berlin.
With the support of the Soviet Union, there had been several attempts to simply take over
West Berlin. Although the Soviet Union even threatened the United States with the use of
nuclear weapons over this issue, the United States and other Western countries were
committed to defending West Berlin.
Desperate to keep its citizens, East Germany knew that something needed to be done.
Famously, two months before the Berlin Wall appeared, Walter Ulbricht, Head of the State
Council of the GDR (1960–1973) said, "Niemand hat die Absicht, eine Mauer zu errichten."
These iconic words mean, No one intended to build a wall."
After this statement, the exodus of East Germans only increased. Over those next two months
of 1961, nearly 20,000 people fled to the West.
The Berlin Wall Goes Up
Rumors had spread that something might happen to tighten the border of East and West Berlin.
No one was expecting the speed -- nor the absoluteness -- of the Berlin Wall.
Just past midnight on the night of August 12-13, 1961, trucks with soldiers and construction
workers rumbled through East Berlin. While most Berliners were sleeping, these crews began
tearing up streets that entered into West Berlin. They dug holes to put up concrete posts and

strung barbed wire all across the border between East and West Berlin. Telephone wires
between East and West Berlin were also cut and railroad lines were blocked.
Berliners were shocked when they woke up that morning. What had once been a very fluid
border was now rigid. No longer could East Berliners cross the border for operas, plays, soccer
games, or any other activity. No longer could the approximately 60,000 commuters head to
West Berlin for well-paying jobs. No longer could families, friends, and lovers cross the border
to meet their loved ones.
Whichever side of the border one went to sleep on during the night of August 12, they were
stuck on that side for decades.
The Size and Scope of the Berlin Wall
The total length of the Berlin Wall was 91 miles (155 kilometers). It ran not only through the
center of Berlin, but also wrapped around West Berlin, entirely cutting it off from the rest of
East Germany.
The wall itself went through four major transformations during its 28-year history. It started out
as a barbed-wire fence with concrete posts. Just days later, on August 15, it was quickly
replaced with a sturdier, more permanent structure. This one was made out of concrete blocks
and topped with barbed wire.
The first two versions of the wall were replaced by the third version in 1965. This consisted of a
concrete wall supported by steel girders.
The fourth version of the Berlin Wall, constructed from 1975 to 1980, was the most
complicated and thorough. It consisted of concrete slabs reaching nearly 12-feet high (3.6
meters) and 4-feet wide (1.2 meters). It also had a smooth pipe running across the top to
hinder people from scaling it.
By the time the Berlin Wall fell in 1989, there was a 300-foot No Man's Land and an additional
inner wall. Soldiers patrolled with dogs and a raked ground showed footprints. The East
Germans also installed anti-vehicle trenches, electric fences, massive light systems, 302
watchtowers, 20 bunkers, and even minefields.
Over the years, propaganda from the East German government would say that the people of
East Germany welcomed the Wall. In reality, the oppression they suffered and the potential
consequences they faced kept many from speaking out to the contrary.
The Checkpoints of the Wall
Although most of the border between East and West consisted of layers of preventative
measures, there were little more than a handful of official openings along the Berlin Wall.
These checkpoints were for the infrequent use of officials and others with special permission to
cross the border.

The most famous of these was Checkpoint Charlie, located on the border between East and
West Berlin at Friedrichstrasse. Checkpoint Charlie was the main access point for Allied
personnel and Westerners to cross the border. Soon after the Berlin Wall was built, Checkpoint
Charlie became an icon of the Cold War. It has frequently been featured in movies and books
set during this time period.
Escape Attempts and the Death Line
The Berlin Wall did prevent the majority of East Germans from emigrating to the West, but it
did not deter everyone. During the history of the Berlin Wall, it is estimated that about 5,000
people made it safely across.
Some early successful attempts were simple, like throwing a rope over the Berlin Wall and
climbing up. Others were brash, like ramming a truck or bus into the Berlin Wall and making a
run for it. Still, others were suicidal as some people jumped from the upper-story windows of
apartment buildings that bordered the Berlin Wall.
In September 1961, the windows of these buildings were boarded up and the sewers
connecting East and West were shut off. Other buildings were torn down to clear space for
what would become known as the Todeslinie, the "Death Line" or "Death Strip." This open area
allowed a direct line of fire so East German soldiers could carry out Shiessbefehl, a 1960 order
that they were to shoot anyone trying escape. Twenty-nine people were killed within the first
year.
As the Berlin Wall became stronger and larger, the escape attempts became more elaborately
planned. Some people dug tunnels from the basements of buildings in East Berlin, under the
Berlin Wall, and into West Berlin. Another group saved scraps of cloth and built a hot air
balloon and flew over the Wall.
Unfortunately, not all escape attempts were successful. Since the East German guards were
allowed to shoot anyone nearing the eastern side without warning, there was always a chance
of death in any and all escape plots. It is estimated that somewhere between 192 and 239
people died at the Berlin Wall.
The 50th Victim of the Berlin Wall
One of the most infamous cases of a failed attempt occurred on August 17, 1962. In the early
afternoon, two 18-year-old men ran toward the Wall with the intention of scaling it. The first of
the young men to reach it was successful. The second one, Peter Fechter, was not.
As he was about to scale the Wall, a border guard opened fire. Fechter continued to climb but
ran out of energy just as he reached the top. He then tumbled back onto the East German side.
To the shock of the world, Fechter was just left there. The East German guards did not shoot
him again nor did they go to his aid.

Fechter shouted in agony for nearly an hour. Once he had bled to death, East German guards
carried off his body. He became the 50th person to die at the Berlin Wall and a permanent
symbol of the struggle for freedom.
Communism Is Dismantled
The fall of the Berlin Wall happened nearly as suddenly as its rise. There had been signs that the
Communist bloc was weakening, but the East German Communist leaders insisted that East
Germany just needed a moderate change rather than a drastic revolution. East German citizens
did not agree.
Russian leader Mikhail Gorbachev (1985–1991) was attempting to save his country and decided
to break off from many of its satellites. As Communism began to falter in Poland, Hungary, and
Czechoslovakia in 1988 and 1989, new exodus points were opened to East Germans who
wanted to flee to the West.
In East Germany, protests against the government were countered by threats of violence from
its leader, Erich Honecker. In October 1989, Honecker was forced to resign after losing support
from Gorbachev. He was replaced by Egon Krenz who decided that violence was not going to
solve the country's problems. Krenz also loosened travel restrictions from East Germany.
The Fall of the Berlin Wall
Suddenly, on the evening of November 9, 1989, East German government official Günter
Schabowski blundered by stating in an announcement, "Permanent relocations can be done
through all border checkpoints between the GDR [East Germany] into the FRG [West Germany]
or West Berlin."
People were in shock. Were the borders really open? East Germans tentatively approached the
border and indeed found that the border guards were letting people cross.
Very quickly, the Berlin Wall was inundated with people from both sides. Some began chipping
at the Berlin Wall with hammers and chisels. There was an impromptu and massive celebration
along the Berlin Wall, with people hugging, kissing, singing, cheering, and crying.
The Berlin Wall was eventually chipped away into smaller pieces (some the size of a coin and
others in big slabs). The pieces have become collectibles and are stored in both homes and
museums. There is also now a Berlin Wall Memorial at the site on Bernauer Strasse.
After the Berlin Wall came down, East and West Germany reunified into a single German state
on October 3, 1990.

Cold War Text
United States-Soviet Space Cooperation during the Cold War
Russian space scientist Roald Z. Sagdeev spent a large part of his career viewing NASA
from the Soviet Union’s side of the Cold War divide. Sagdeev, the former head of the
Russian Space Research Institute, now is the director of the University of Maryland’s East-
West Space Science Center. He wrote this essay with his wife, Susan Eisenhower
(President Dwight D. Eisenhower’s granddaughter) that traces the long, hard path to
space cooperation until the Soviet Union’s dissolution in 1991.
The Space Age spawned two outstanding space programs as a result of the hot
competition between the United States and the Soviet Union. Both countries gave
primary emphasis in their space efforts to a combination of national security and foreign
policy objectives, turning space into an area of active competition for political and military
advantage. At first, this charged political environment accommodated nothing more than
symbolic gestures of collaboration. Only in the late 1980s, with warming political
relations, did momentum for major space cooperation begin to build. As the Soviet Union
neared collapse, with its ideological underpinnings evaporating, the impetus for the arms
race and competition in space declined, allowing both countries to seriously pursue
strategic partnerships in space.
The bumpy U.S.-U.S.S.R. relationship in the years between 1957 and 1991 often was
characterized by periods of mistrust and overt hostility (e.g., the U-2 incident, Cuban
Missile Crisis, Vietnam War, Soviet invasion of Afghanistan and President Ronald Reagan’s
depiction of the Soviet Union as an “evil empire”). Periods of détente, in contrast, led to
the Limited Test-Ban Treaty in 1963, the Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty in 1972, and an
emerging U.S.-Soviet rapprochement during 1985-1991. Throughout this political roller-
coaster period of history, both countries increased areas of coop-eration, including space,
as a symbol of warmer relations while cutting cooperation off when ties worsened.
The birth of the Space Age following the Soviet launch of Sputnik came out of the
confluence of two seemingly incompatible developments. From the end of World War II,
the Soviets made rockets their most important military asset. By the mid-1950s, they were
ready to test their first intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM). In 1957, the International
Geophysical Year was launched, a multinational effort to study Earth on a comprehensive,
coordinated basis. To highlight the effort, organizers had urged the United States and the
Soviet Union to consider launching a scientific satellite. On Oct. 4, 1957, a seemingly
routine test launch of a Soviet ICBM (now known as the R-7 rocket) carried the first
artificial satellite to orbit.
Sputnik’s launch had dramatic repercussions for the Cold War rivals. After reaping the first
political dividends from military rocket technology, the Soviets continued to pursue a
highly classified military-industrial approach in developing its space program. Conversely,
the U.S. government decided to make NASA a purely civilian enterprise, while focusing its
military space efforts in the Pentagon and intelligence community.
Early on, President Dwight D. Eisenhower pursued U.S.-Soviet cooperative space
initiatives through a series of letters he sent in 1957 and 1958 to the Soviet leadership,
Cold War Text
The Bay of Pigs
On April 17, 1961, 1400 Cuban exiles launched what became a botched invasion at the Bay of
Pigs on the south coast of Cuba.
In 1959, Fidel Castro came to power in an armed revolt that overthrew Cuban dictator
Fulgencio Batista. The US government distrusted Castro and was wary of his relationship with
Nikita Khrushchev, the leader of the Soviet Union.
Before his inauguration, John F. Kennedy was briefed on a plan by the Central Intelligence
Agency (CIA) developed during the Eisenhower administration to train Cuban exiles for an
invasion of their homeland. The plan anticipated that the Cuban people and elements of the
Cuban military would support the invasion. The ultimate goal was the overthrow of Castro and
the establishment of a non-communist government friendly to the United States.
Training
President Eisenhower approved the program in March 1960. The CIA set up training camps in
Guatemala, and by November the operation had trained a small army for an assault landing and
guerilla warfare.
José Miró Cardona led the anti-Castro Cuban exiles in the United States. A former member of
Castro's government, he was the head of the Cuban Revolutionary Council, an exile committee.
Cardona was poised to take over the provisional presidency of Cuba if the invasion succeeded.
Despite efforts of the government to keep the invasion plans covert, it became common
knowledge among Cuban exiles in Miami. Through Cuban intelligence, Castro learned of the
guerilla training camps in Guatemala as early as October 1960, and the press reported widely
on events as they unfolded.
Shortly after his inauguration, in February 1961, President Kennedy authorized the invasion
plan. But he was determined to disguise U.S. support. The landing point at the Bay of Pigs was
part of the deception. The site was a remote swampy area on the southern coast of Cuba,
where a night landing might bring a force ashore against little resistance and help to hide any
U.S. involvement. Unfortunately, the landing site also left the invading force more than 80 miles
from refuge in Cuba's Escambray Mountains, if anything went wrong.
The Plan
The original invasion plan called for two air strikes against Cuban air bases. A 1,400-man
invasion force would disembark under cover of darkness and launch a surprise attack.
Paratroopers dropped in advance of the invasion would disrupt transportation and repel Cuban
forces. Simultaneously, a smaller force would land on the east coast of Cuba to create
confusion.

The main force would advance across the island to Matanzas and set up a defensive position.
The United Revolutionary Front would send leaders from South Florida and establish a
provisional government. The success of the plan depended on the Cuban population joining the
invaders.
The Invasion
The first mishap occurred on April 15, 1961, when eight bombers left Nicaragua to bomb Cuban
airfields. The CIA had used obsolete World War II B-26 bombers, and painted them to look like
Cuban air force planes. The bombers missed many of their targets and left most of Castro's air
force intact. As news broke of the attack, photos of the repainted U.S. planes became public
and revealed American support for the invasion. President Kennedy cancelled a second air
strike.
On April 17, the Cuban-exile invasion force, known as Brigade 2506, landed at beaches along
the Bay of Pigs and immediately came under heavy fire. Cuban planes strafed the invaders, sank
two escort ships, and destroyed half of the exile's air support. Bad weather hampered the
ground force, which had to work with soggy equipment and insufficient ammunition.
The Counterattack
Over the next 24 hours, Castro ordered roughly 20,000 troops to advance toward the beach,
and the Cuban air force continued to control the skies. As the situation grew increasingly grim,
President Kennedy authorized an "air-umbrella" at dawn on April 19—six unmarked American
fighter planes took off to help defend the brigade's B-26 aircraft flying. But the B-26s arrived an
hour late, most likely confused by the change in time zones between Nicaragua and Cuba. They
were shot down by the Cubans, and the invasion was crushed later that day.
Some exiles escaped to the sea, while the rest were killed or rounded up and imprisoned by
Castro's forces. Almost 1,200 members of Brigade 2506 surrendered, and more than 100 were
killed.
The Aftermath
The brigade prisoners remained in captivity for 20 months, as the United States negotiated a
deal with Fidel Castro. Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy made personal pleas for
contributions from pharmaceutical companies and baby food manufacturers, and Castro
eventually settled on $53 million worth of baby food and medicine in exchange for the
prisoners.
On December 23, 1962, just two months after the end of the Cuban Missile Crisis, a plane
containing the first group of freed prisoners landed in the United States. A week later, on
Saturday, December 29, surviving brigade members gathered for a ceremony in Miami's Orange
Bowl, where the brigade's flag was handed over to President Kennedy. "I can assure you," the
president promised, "that this flag will be returned to this brigade in a free Havana."

The disaster at the Bay of Pigs had a lasting impact on the Kennedy administration. Determined
to make up for the failed invasion, the administration initiated Operation Mongoose—a plan to
sabotage and destabilize the Cuban government and economy, which included the possibility of
assassinating Castro.

Cold War Text
"Iron Curtain Speech," 1946

Winston Churchill gave this speech at Westminster College, in Fulton, Missouri, after receiving
an honorary degree. With typical oratorical skills, Church introduced the phrase "Iron Curtain"
to describe the division between Western powers and the area controlled by the Soviet Union.
As such the speech marks the onset of the Cold War. The speech was very long, and here
excerpts are presented.
The United States stands at this time at the pinnacle of world power. It is a solemn moment
for the American democracy. For with this primacy in power is also joined an awe-inspiring
accountability to the future. As you look around you, you must feel not only the sense of duty
done, but also you must feel anxiety lest you fall below the level of achievement.
Opportunity is here now, clear and shining, for both our countries. To reject it or ignore it or
fritter it away will bring upon us all the long reproaches of the aftertime. It is necessary that
constancy of mind, persistency of purpose, and the grand simplicity of decision shall rule and
guide the conduct of the English-speaking peoples in peace as they did in war. We must, and I
believe we shall, prove ourselves equal to this severe requirement. I have a strong admiration
and regard for the valiant Russian people and for my wartime comrade, Marshal Stalin. There
is deep sympathy and goodwill in Britain -- and I doubt not here also -- toward the peoples of
all the Russias and a resolve to persevere through many differences and rebuffs in
establishing lasting friendships. It is my duty, however, to place before you certain facts
about the present position in Europe. From Stettin in the Baltic to Trieste in the Adriatic an
iron curtain has descended across the Continent. Behind that line lie all the capitals of the
ancient states of Central and Eastern Europe. Warsaw, Berlin, Prague, Vienna, Budapest,
Belgrade, Bucharest and Sofia; all these famous cities and the populations around them lie in
what I must call the Soviet sphere, and all are subject, in one form or another, not only to
Soviet influence but to a very high and in some cases increasing measure of control from
Moscow. The safety of the world, ladies and gentlemen, requires a unity in Europe, from
which no nation should be permanently outcast. It is from the quarrels of the strong parent
races in Europe that the world wars we have witnessed, or which occurred in former times,
have sprung. Twice the United States has had to send several millions of its young men across
the Atlantic to fight the wars. But now we all can find any nation, wherever it may dwell,
between dusk and dawn. Surely we should work with conscious purpose for a grand
pacification of Europe within the structure of the United Nations and in accordance with our
Charter. In a great number of countries, far from the Russian frontiers and throughout the
world, Communist fifth columns are established and work in complete unity and absolute
obedience to the directions they receive from the Communist center. Except in the British
Commonwealth and in the United States where Communism is in its infancy, the Communist
parties or fifth columns constitute a growing challenge and peril to Christian civilization. The
outlook is also anxious in the Far East and especially in Manchuria. The agreement which was
made at Yalta, to which I was a party, was extremely favorable to Soviet Russia, but it was
made at a time when no one could say that the German war might not extend all through the

summer and autumn of 1945 and when the Japanese war was expected by the best judges to
last for a further eighteen months from the end of the German war. I repulse the idea that a
new war is inevitable -- still more that it is imminent. It is because I am sure that our fortunes
are still in our own hands and that we hold the power to save the future, that I feel the duty
to speak out now that I have the occasion and the opportunity to do so. I do not believe that
Soviet Russia desires war. What they desire is the fruits of war and the indefinite expansion
of their power and doctrines. But what we have to consider here today while time remains, is
the permanent prevention of war and the establishment of conditions of freedom and
democracy as rapidly as possible in all countries. Our difficulties and dangers will not be
removed by closing our eyes to them. They will not be removed by mere waiting to see what
happens; nor will they be removed by a policy of appeasement. What is needed is a
settlement, and the longer this is delayed, the more difficult it will be and the greater our
dangers will become. From what I have seen of our Russian friends and allies during the war, I
am convinced that there is nothing they admire so much as strength, and there is nothing for
which they have less respect than for weakness, especially military weakness. For that reason
the old doctrine of a balance of power is unsound. We cannot afford, if we can help it, to
work on narrow margins, offering temptations to a trial of strength. Last time I saw it all
coming and I cried aloud to my own fellow countrymen and to the world, but no one paid any
attention. Up till the year 1933 or even 1935, Germany might have been saved from the awful
fate which has overtaken her and we might all have been spared the miseries Hitler let loose
upon mankind. There never was a war in history easier to prevent by timely action than the
one which has just desolated such great areas of the globe. It could have been prevented, in
my belief, without the firing of a single shot, and Germany might be powerful, prosperous
and honored today; but no one would listen and one by one we were all sucked into the
awful whirlpool. We must not let it happen again. This can only be achieved by reaching now,
in 1946, a good understanding on all points with Russia under the general authority of the
United Nations Organization and by the maintenance of that good understanding through
many peaceful years, by the whole strength of the English-speaking world and all its
connections. If the population of the English-speaking Commonwealth be added to that of
the United States, with all that such cooperation implies in the air, on the sea, all over the
globe, and in science and in industry, and in moral force, there will be no quivering,
precarious balance of power to offer its temptation to ambition or adventure. On the
contrary there will be an overwhelming assurance of security. If we adhere faithfully to the
Charter of the United Nations and walk forward in sedate and sober strength, seeking no
one's land or treasure, seeking to lay no arbitrary control upon the thoughts of men, if all
British moral and material forces and convictions are joined with your own in fraternal
association, the high roads of the future will be clear, not only for us but for all, not only for
our time but for a century to come. Winston Churchill - March 5, 1946

Cold War Text
CIA Wars
by Steve Kangas
The following timeline describes just a few of the hundreds of atrocities and crimes committed
by the CIA. (1)
CIA operations follow the same recurring script. First, American business interests abroad are
threatened by a popular or democratically elected leader. The people support their leader
because he intends to conduct land reform, strengthen unions, redistribute wealth, nationalize
foreign-owned industry, and regulate business to protect workers, consumers and the
environment. So, on behalf of American business, and often with their help, the CIA mobilizes
the opposition. First it identifies right-wing groups within the country (usually the military), and
offers them a deal: "We'll put you in power if you maintain a favorable business climate for us."
The Agency then hires, trains and works with them to overthrow the existing government
(usually a democracy). It uses every trick in the book: propaganda, stuffed ballot boxes,
purchased elections, extortion, blackmail, sexual intrigue, false stories about opponents in the
local media, infiltration and disruption of opposing political parties, kidnapping, beating,
torture, intimidation, economic sabotage, death squads and even assassination. These efforts
culminate in a military coup, which installs a right-wing dictator. The CIA trains the dictator’s
security apparatus to crack down on the traditional enemies of big business, using
interrogation, torture and murder. The victims are said to be "communists," but almost always
they are just peasants, liberals, moderates, labor union leaders, political opponents and
advocates of free speech and democracy. Widespread human rights abuses follow.
This scenario has been repeated so many times that the CIA actually teaches it in a special
school, the notorious "School of the Americas." (It opened in Panama but later moved to Fort
Benning, Georgia.) Critics have nicknamed it the "School of the Dictators" and "School of the
Assassins." Here, the CIA trains Latin American military officers how to conduct coups, including
the use of interrogation, torture and murder.
The Association for Responsible Dissent estimates that by 1987, 6 million people had died as a
result of CIA covert operations. (2) Former State Department official William Blum correctly
calls this an "American Holocaust."
The CIA justifies these actions as part of its war against communism. But most coups do not
involve a communist threat. Unlucky nations are targeted for a wide variety of reasons: not only
threats to American business interests abroad, but also liberal or even moderate social reforms,
political instability, the unwillingness of a leader to carry out Washington’s dictates, and
declarations of neutrality in the Cold War. Indeed, nothing has infuriated CIA Directors quite
like a nation’s desire to stay out of the Cold War.

The ironic thing about all this intervention is that it frequently fails to achieve American
objectives. Often the newly installed dictator grows comfortable with the security apparatus
the CIA has built for him. He becomes an expert at running a police state. And because the
dictator knows he cannot be overthrown, he becomes independent and defiant of
Washington's will. The CIA then finds it cannot overthrow him, because the police and military
are under the dictator's control, afraid to cooperate with American spies for fear of torture and
execution. The only two options for the U.S at this point are impotence or war. Examples of this
"boomerang effect" include the Shah of Iran, General Noriega and Saddam Hussein. The
boomerang effect also explains why the CIA has proven highly successful at overthrowing
democracies, but a wretched failure at overthrowing dictatorships.
The following timeline should confirm that the CIA as we know it should be abolished and
replaced by a true information-gathering and analysis organization. The CIA cannot be
reformed — it is institutionally and culturally corrupt.
1929
The culture we lost — Secretary of State Henry Stimson refuses to endorse a code-breaking
operation, saying, "Gentlemen do not read each other’s mail."
1941
COI created — In preparation for World War II, President Roosevelt creates the Office of
Coordinator of Information (COI). General William "Wild Bill" Donovan heads the new
intelligence service.
1942
OSS created — Roosevelt restructures COI into something more suitable for covert action, the
Office of Strategic Services (OSS). Donovan recruits so many of the nation’s rich and powerful
that eventually people joke that "OSS" stands for "Oh, so social!" or "Oh, such snobs!"
1943
Italy — Donovan recruits the Catholic Church in Rome to be the center of Anglo-American spy
operations in Fascist Italy. This would prove to be one of America’s most enduring intelligence
alliances in the Cold War.
1945
OSS is abolished — The remaining American information agencies cease covert actions and
return to harmless information gathering and analysis.
Operation PAPERCLIP – While other American agencies are hunting down Nazi war criminals
for arrest, the U.S. intelligence community is smuggling them into America, unpunished, for
their use against the Soviets. The most important of these is Reinhard Gehlen, Hitler’s master
spy who had built up an intelligence network in the Soviet Union. With full U.S. blessing, he
creates the "Gehlen Organization," a band of refugee Nazi spies who reactivate their networks

in Russia. These include SS intelligence officers Alfred Six and Emil Augsburg (who massacred
Jews in the Holocaust), Klaus Barbie (the "Butcher of Lyon"), Otto von Bolschwing (the
Holocaust mastermind who worked with Eichmann) and SS Colonel Otto Skorzeny (a personal
friend of Hitler’s). The Gehlen Organization supplies the U.S. with its only intelligence on the
Soviet Union for the next ten years, serving as a bridge between the abolishment of the OSS
and the creation of the CIA. However, much of the "intelligence" the former Nazis provide is
bogus. Gehlen inflates Soviet military capabilities at a time when Russia is still rebuilding its
devastated society, in order to inflate his own importance to the Americans (who might
otherwise punish him). In 1948, Gehlen almost convinces the Americans that war is imminent,
and the West should make a preemptive strike. In the 50s he produces a fictitious "missile gap."
To make matters worse, the Russians have thoroughly penetrated the Gehlen Organization with
double agents, undermining the very American security that Gehlen was supposed to protect.
1947
Greece — President Truman requests military aid to Greece to support right-wing forces
fighting communist rebels. For the rest of the Cold War, Washington and the CIA will back
notorious Greek leaders with deplorable human rights records.
CIA created — President Truman signs the National Security Act of 1947, creating the Central
Intelligence Agency and National Security Council. The CIA is accountable to the president
through the NSC — there is no democratic or congressional oversight. Its charter allows the CIA
to "perform such other functions and duties… as the National Security Council may from time to
time direct." This loophole opens the door to covert action and dirty tricks.
1948
Covert-action wing created — The CIA recreates a covert action wing, innocuously called the
Office of Policy Coordination, led by Wall Street lawyer Frank Wisner. According to its secret
charter, its responsibilities include "propaganda, economic warfare, preventive direct action,
including sabotage, antisabotage, demolition and evacuation procedures; subversion against
hostile states, including assistance to underground resistance groups, and support of
indigenous anti-communist elements in threatened countries of the free world."
Italy — The CIA corrupts democratic elections in Italy, where Italian communists threaten to
win the elections. The CIA buys votes, broadcasts propaganda, threatens and beats up
opposition leaders, and infiltrates and disrupts their organizations. It works -- the communists
are defeated.
1949
Radio Free Europe — The CIA creates its first major propaganda outlet, Radio Free Europe.
Over the next several decades, its broadcasts are so blatantly false that for a time it is
considered illegal to publish transcripts of them in the U.S.
Late 40s

Operation MOCKINGBIRD — The CIA begins recruiting American news organizations and
journalists to become spies and disseminators of propaganda. The effort is headed by Frank
Wisner, Allan Dulles, Richard Helms and Philip Graham. Graham is publisher of The Washington
Post, which becomes a major CIA player. Eventually, the CIA’s media assets will include ABC,
NBC, CBS, Time, Newsweek, Associated Press, United Press International, Reuters, Hearst
Newspapers, Scripps-Howard, Copley News Service and more. By the CIA’s own admission, at
least 25 organizations and 400 journalists will become CIA assets.
1953
Iran – CIA overthrows the democratically elected Mohammed Mossadegh in a military coup,
after he threatened to nationalize British oil. The CIA replaces him with a dictator, the Shah of
Iran, whose secret police, SAVAK, is as brutal as the Gestapo.
Operation MK-ULTRA — Inspired by North Korea’s brainwashing program, the CIA begins
experiments on mind control. The most notorious part of this project involves giving LSD and
other drugs to American subjects without their knowledge or against their will, causing several
to commit suicide. However, the operation involves far more than this. Funded in part by the
Rockefeller and Ford foundations, research includes propaganda, brainwashing, public
relations, advertising, hypnosis, and other forms of suggestion.
1954
Guatemala — CIA overthrows the democratically elected Jacob Arbenz in a military coup.
Arbenz has threatened to nationalize the Rockefeller-owned United Fruit Company, in which
CIA Director Allen Dulles also owns stock. Arbenz is replaced with a series of right-wing
dictators whose bloodthirsty policies will kill over 100,000 Guatemalans in the next 40 years.
1954-1958
North Vietnam — CIA officer Edward Lansdale spends four years trying to overthrow the
communist government of North Vietnam, using all the usual dirty tricks. The CIA also attempts
to legitimize a tyrannical puppet regime in South Vietnam, headed by Ngo Dinh Diem. These
efforts fail to win the hearts and minds of the South Vietnamese because the Diem government
is opposed to true democracy, land reform and poverty reduction measures. The CIA’s
continuing failure results in escalating American intervention, culminating in the Vietnam War.
1956
Hungary — Radio Free Europe incites Hungary to revolt by broadcasting Khruschev’s Secret
Speech, in which he denounced Stalin. It also hints that American aid will help the Hungarians
fight. This aid fails to materialize as Hungarians launch a doomed armed revolt, which only
invites a major Soviet invasion. The conflict kills 7,000 Soviets and 30,000 Hungarians.
1957-1973
Laos — The CIA carries out approximately one coup per year trying to nullify Laos’ democratic
elections. The problem is the Pathet Lao, a leftist group with enough popular support to be a

member of any coalition government. In the late 50s, the CIA even creates an "Armee
Clandestine" of Asian mercenaries to attack the Pathet Lao. After the CIA’s army suffers
numerous defeats, the U.S. starts bombing, dropping more bombs on Laos than all the U.S.
bombs dropped in World War II. A quarter of all Laotians will eventually become refugees,
many living in caves.
1959
Haiti — The U.S. military helps "Papa Doc" Duvalier become dictator of Haiti. He creates his
own private police force, the "Tonton Macoutes," who terrorize the population with machetes.
They will kill over 100,000 during the Duvalier family reign. The U.S. does not protest their
dismal human rights record.
1961
The Bay of Pigs — The CIA sends 1,500 Cuban exiles to invade Castro’s Cuba. But "Operation
Mongoose" fails, due to poor planning, security and backing. The planners had imagined that
the invasion will spark a popular uprising against Castro -– which never happens. A promised
American air strike also never occurs. This is the CIA’s first public setback, causing President
Kennedy to fire CIA Director Allen Dulles.
Dominican Republic — The CIA assassinates Rafael Trujillo, a murderous dictator Washington
has supported since 1930. Trujillo’s business interests have grown so large (about 60 percent of
the economy) that they have begun competing with American business interests.
Ecuador — The CIA-backed military forces the democratically elected President Jose Velasco to
resign. Vice President Carlos Arosemana replaces him; the CIA fills the now vacant vice
presidency with its own man.
Congo (Zaire) — The CIA assassinates the democratically elected Patrice Lumumba. However,
public support for Lumumba’s politics runs so high that the CIA cannot clearly install his
opponents in power. Four years of political turmoil follow.
1963
Dominican Republic — The CIA overthrows the democratically elected Juan Bosch in a military
coup. The CIA installs a repressive, right-wing junta.
Ecuador — A CIA-backed military coup overthrows President Arosemana, whose independent
(not socialist) policies have become unacceptable to Washington. A military junta assumes
command, cancels the 1964 elections, and begins abusing human rights.
1964
Brazil — A CIA-backed military coup overthrows the democratically elected government of Joao
Goulart. The junta that replaces it will, in the next two decades, become one of the most
bloodthirsty in history. General Castelo Branco will create Latin America’s first death squads, or
bands of secret police who hunt down "communists" for torture, interrogation and murder.

Often these "communists" are no more than Branco’s political opponents. Later it is revealed
that the CIA trains the death squads.
1965
Indonesia — The CIA overthrows the democratically elected Sukarno with a military coup. The
CIA has been trying to eliminate Sukarno since 1957, using everything from attempted
assassination to sexual intrigue, for nothing more than his declaring neutrality in the Cold War.
His successor, General Suharto, will massacre between 500,000 to 1 million civilians accused of
being "communist." The CIA supplies the names of countless suspects.
Dominican Republic — A popular rebellion breaks out, promising to reinstall Juan Bosch as the
country’s elected leader. The revolution is crushed when U.S. Marines land to uphold the
military regime by force. The CIA directs everything behind the scenes.
Greece — With the CIA’s backing, the king removes George Papandreous as prime minister.
Papandreous has failed to vigorously support U.S. interests in Greece.
Congo (Zaire) — A CIA-backed military coup installs Mobutu Sese Seko as dictator. The hated
and repressive Mobutu exploits his desperately poor country for billions.
1966
The Ramparts Affair — The radical magazine Ramparts begins a series of unprecedented anti-
CIA articles. Among their scoops: the CIA has paid the University of Michigan $25 million dollars
to hire "professors" to train South Vietnamese students in covert police methods. MIT and
other universities have received similar payments. Ramparts also reveals that the National
Students’ Association is a CIA front. Students are sometimes recruited through blackmail and
bribery, including draft deferments.
1967
Greece — A CIA-backed military coup overthrows the government two days before the
elections. The favorite to win was George Papandreous, the liberal candidate. During the next
six years, the "reign of the colonels" — backed by the CIA — will usher in the widespread use of
torture and murder against political opponents. When a Greek ambassador objects to President
Johnson about U.S. plans for Cypress, Johnson tells him: "F___ your parliament and your
constitution."
Operation PHEONIX — The CIA helps South Vietnamese agents identify and then murder
alleged Viet Cong leaders operating in South Vietnamese villages. According to a 1971
congressional report, this operation killed about 20,000 "Viet Cong."
1968
Operation CHAOS — The CIA has been illegally spying on American citizens since 1959, but with
Operation CHAOS, President Johnson dramatically boosts the effort. CIA agents go undercover
as student radicals to spy on and disrupt campus organizations protesting the Vietnam War.

They are searching for Russian instigators, which they never find. CHAOS will eventually spy on
7,000 individuals and 1,000 organizations.
Bolivia — A CIA-organized military operation captures legendary guerilla Che Guevara. The CIA
wants to keep him alive for interrogation, but the Bolivian government executes him to prevent
worldwide calls for clemency.
1969
Uruguay — The notorious CIA torturer Dan Mitrione arrives in Uruguay, a country torn with
political strife. Whereas right-wing forces previously used torture only as a last resort, Mitrione
convinces them to use it as a routine, widespread practice. "The precise pain, in the precise
place, in the precise amount, for the desired effect," is his motto. The torture techniques he
teaches to the death squads rival the Nazis’. He eventually becomes so feared that
revolutionaries will kidnap and murder him a year later.
1970
Cambodia — The CIA overthrows Prince Sahounek, who is highly popular among Cambodians
for keeping them out of the Vietnam War. He is replaced by CIA puppet Lon Nol, who
immediately throws Cambodian troops into battle. This unpopular move strengthens once
minor opposition parties like the Khmer Rouge, which achieves power in 1975 and massacres
millions of its own people.
1971
Bolivia — After half a decade of CIA-inspired political turmoil, a CIA-backed military coup
overthrows the leftist President Juan Torres. In the next two years, dictator Hugo Banzer will
have over 2,000 political opponents arrested without trial, then tortured, raped and executed.
Haiti — "Papa Doc" Duvalier dies, leaving his 19-year old son "Baby Doc" Duvalier the dictator
of Haiti. His son continues his bloody reign with full knowledge of the CIA.
1972
The Case-Zablocki Act — Congress passes an act requiring congressional review of executive
agreements. In theory, this should make CIA operations more accountable. In fact, it is only
marginally effective.
Cambodia — Congress votes to cut off CIA funds for its secret war in Cambodia.
Wagergate Break-in — President Nixon sends in a team of burglars to wiretap Democratic
offices at Watergate. The team members have extensive CIA histories, including James McCord,
E. Howard Hunt and five of the Cuban burglars. They work for the Committee to Reelect the
President (CREEP), which does dirty work like disrupting Democratic campaigns and laundering
Nixon’s illegal campaign contributions. CREEP’s activities are funded and organized by another
CIA front, the Mullen Company.
1973

Chile — The CIA overthrows and assassinates Salvador Allende, Latin America’s first
democratically elected socialist leader. The problems begin when Allende nationalizes
American-owned firms in Chile. ITT offers the CIA $1 million for a coup (reportedly refused). The
CIA replaces Allende with General Augusto Pinochet, who will torture and murder thousands of
his own countrymen in a crackdown on labor leaders and the political left.
CIA begins internal investigations — William Colby, the Deputy Director for Operations, orders
all CIA personnel to report any and all illegal activities they know about. This information is later
reported to Congress.
Watergate Scandal — The CIA’s main collaborating newspaper in America, The Washington
Post, reports Nixon’s crimes long before any other newspaper takes up the subject. The two
reporters, Woodward and Bernstein, make almost no mention of the CIA’s many fingerprints all
over the scandal. It is later revealed that Woodward was a Naval intelligence briefer to the
White House, and knows many important intelligence figures, including General Alexander
Haig. His main source, "Deep Throat," is probably one of those.
CIA Director Helms Fired — President Nixon fires CIA Director Richard Helms for failing to help
cover up the Watergate scandal. Helms and Nixon have always disliked each other. The new CIA
director is William Colby, who is relatively more open to CIA reform.
1974
CHAOS exposed — Pulitzer prize winning journalist Seymour Hersh publishes a story about
Operation CHAOS, the domestic surveillance and infiltration of anti-war and civil rights groups
in the U.S. The story sparks national outrage.
Angleton fired — Congress holds hearings on the illegal domestic spying efforts of James Jesus
Angleton, the CIA’s chief of counterintelligence. His efforts included mail-opening campaigns
and secret surveillance of war protesters. The hearings result in his dismissal from the CIA.
House clears CIA in Watergate — The House of Representatives clears the CIA of any complicity
in Nixon’s Watergate break-in.
The Hughes Ryan Act — Congress passes an amendment requiring the president to report
nonintelligence CIA operations to the relevant congressional committees in a timely fashion.
1975
Australia — The CIA helps topple the democratically elected, left-leaning government of Prime
Minister Edward Whitlam. The CIA does this by giving an ultimatum to its Governor-General,
John Kerr. Kerr, a longtime CIA collaborator, exercises his constitutional right to dissolve the
Whitlam government. The Governor-General is a largely ceremonial position appointed by the
Queen; the Prime Minister is democratically elected. The use of this archaic and never-used law
stuns the nation.
Angola — Eager to demonstrate American military resolve after its defeat in Vietnam, Henry
Kissinger launches a CIA-backed war in Angola. Contrary to Kissinger’s assertions, Angola is a

country of little strategic importance and not seriously threatened by communism. The CIA
backs the brutal leader of UNITAS, Jonas Savimbi. This polarizes Angolan politics and drives his
opponents into the arms of Cuba and the Soviet Union for survival. Congress will cut off funds
in 1976, but the CIA is able to run the war off the books until 1984, when funding is legalized
again. This entirely pointless war kills over 300,000 Angolans.
"The CIA and the Cult of Intelligence" — Victor Marchetti and John Marks publish this whistle-
blowing history of CIA crimes and abuses. Marchetti has spent 14 years in the CIA, eventually
becoming an executive assistant to the Deputy Director of Intelligence. Marks has spent five
years as an intelligence official in the State Department.
"Inside the Company" — Philip Agee publishes a diary of his life inside the CIA. Agee has
worked in covert operations in Latin America during the 60s, and details the crimes in which he
took part.
Congress investigates CIA wrong-doing — Public outrage compels Congress to hold hearings on
CIA crimes. Senator Frank Church heads the Senate investigation ("The Church Committee"),
and Representative Otis Pike heads the House investigation. (Despite a 98 percent incumbency
reelection rate, both Church and Pike are defeated in the next elections.) The investigations
lead to a number of reforms intended to increase the CIA’s accountability to Congress, including
the creation of a standing Senate committee on intelligence. However, the reforms prove
ineffective, as the Iran/Contra scandal will show. It turns out the CIA can control, deal with or
sidestep Congress with ease.
The Rockefeller Commission — In an attempt to reduce the damage done by the Church
Committee, President Ford creates the "Rockefeller Commission" to whitewash CIA history and
propose toothless reforms. The commission’s namesake, Vice President Nelson Rockefeller, is
himself a major CIA figure. Five of the commission’s eight members are also members of the
Council on Foreign Relations, a CIA-dominated organization.
1979
Iran — The CIA fails to predict the fall of the Shah of Iran, a longtime CIA puppet, and the rise of
Muslim fundamentalists who are furious at the CIA’s backing of SAVAK, the Shah’s bloodthirsty
secret police. In revenge, the Muslims take 52 Americans hostage in the U.S. embassy in
Tehran.
Afghanistan — The Soviets invade Afghanistan. The CIA immediately begins supplying arms to
any faction willing to fight the occupying Soviets. Such indiscriminate arming means that when
the Soviets leave Afghanistan, civil war will erupt. Also, fanatical Muslim extremists now
possess state-of-the-art weaponry. One of these is Sheik Abdel Rahman, who will become
involved in the World Trade Center bombing in New York.
El Salvador — An idealistic group of young military officers, repulsed by the massacre of the
poor, overthrows the right-wing government. However, the U.S. compels the inexperienced
officers to include many of the old guard in key positions in their new government. Soon, things

are back to "normal" — the military government is repressing and killing poor civilian
protesters. Many of the young military and civilian reformers, finding themselves powerless,
resign in disgust.
Nicaragua — Anastasios Samoza II, the CIA-backed dictator, falls. The Marxist Sandinistas take
over government, and they are initially popular because of their commitment to land and anti-
poverty reform. Samoza had a murderous and hated personal army called the National Guard.
Remnants of the Guard will become the Contras, who fight a CIA-backed guerilla war against
the Sandinista government throughout the 1980s.
1980
El Salvador — The Archbishop of San Salvador, Oscar Romero, pleads with President Carter
"Christian to Christian" to stop aiding the military government slaughtering his people. Carter
refuses. Shortly afterwards, right-wing leader Roberto D’Aubuisson has Romero shot through
the heart while saying Mass. The country soon dissolves into civil war, with the peasants in the
hills fighting against the military government. The CIA and U.S. Armed Forces supply the
government with overwhelming military and intelligence superiority. CIA-trained death squads
roam the countryside, committing atrocities like that of El Mazote in 1982, where they
massacre between 700 and 1000 men, women and children. By 1992, some 63,000 Salvadorans
will be killed.
1981
Iran/Contra Begins — The CIA begins selling arms to Iran at high prices, using the profits to arm
the Contras fighting the Sandinista government in Nicaragua. President Reagan vows that the
Sandinistas will be "pressured" until "they say ‘uncle.’" The CIA’s Freedom Fighter’s Manual
disbursed to the Contras includes instruction on economic sabotage, propaganda, extortion,
bribery, blackmail, interrogation, torture, murder and political assassination.
1983
Honduras — The CIA gives Honduran military officers the Human Resource Exploitation Training
Manual – 1983, which teaches how to torture people. Honduras’ notorious "Battalion 316"
then uses these techniques, with the CIA’s full knowledge, on thousands of leftist dissidents. At
least 184 are murdered.
1984
The Boland Amendment — The last of a series of Boland Amendments is passed. These
amendments have reduced CIA aid to the Contras; the last one cuts it off completely. However,
CIA Director William Casey is already prepared to "hand off" the operation to Colonel Oliver
North, who illegally continues supplying the Contras through the CIA’s informal, secret, and
self-financing network. This includes "humanitarian aid" donated by Adolph Coors and William
Simon, and military aid funded by Iranian arms sales.
1986

Eugene Hasenfus — Nicaragua shoots down a C-123 transport plane carrying military supplies
to the Contras. The lone survivor, Eugene Hasenfus, turns out to be a CIA employee, as are the
two dead pilots. The airplane belongs to Southern Air Transport, a CIA front. The incident
makes a mockery of President Reagan’s claims that the CIA is not illegally arming the Contras.
Iran/Contra Scandal — Although the details have long been known, the Iran/Contra scandal
finally captures the media’s attention in 1986. Congress holds hearings, and several key figures
(like Oliver North) lie under oath to protect the intelligence community. CIA Director William
Casey dies of brain cancer before Congress can question him. All reforms enacted by Congress
after the scandal are purely cosmetic.
Haiti — Rising popular revolt in Haiti means that "Baby Doc" Duvalier will remain "President for
Life" only if he has a short one. The U.S., which hates instability in a puppet country, flies the
despotic Duvalier to the South of France for a comfortable retirement. The CIA then rigs the
upcoming elections in favor of another right-wing military strongman. However, violence keeps
the country in political turmoil for another four years. The CIA tries to strengthen the military
by creating the National Intelligence Service (SIN), which suppresses popular revolt through
torture and assassination.
1989
Panama — The U.S. invades Panama to overthrow a dictator of its own making, General
Manuel Noriega. Noriega has been on the CIA’s payroll since 1966, and has been transporting
drugs with the CIA’s knowledge since 1972. By the late 80s, Noriega’s growing independence
and intransigence have angered Washington… so out he goes.
1990
Haiti — Competing against 10 comparatively wealthy candidates, leftist priest Jean-Bertrand
Aristide captures 68 percent of the vote. After only eight months in power, however, the CIA-
backed military deposes him. More military dictators brutalize the country, as thousands of
Haitian refugees escape the turmoil in barely seaworthy boats. As popular opinion calls for
Aristide’s return, the CIA begins a disinformation campaign painting the courageous priest as
mentally unstable.
1991
The Gulf War — The U.S. liberates Kuwait from Iraq. But Iraq’s dictator, Saddam Hussein, is
another creature of the CIA. With U.S. encouragement, Hussein invaded Iran in 1980. During
this costly eight-year war, the CIA built up Hussein’s forces with sophisticated arms,
intelligence, training and financial backing. This cemented Hussein’s power at home, allowing
him to crush the many internal rebellions that erupted from time to time, sometimes with
poison gas. It also gave him all the military might he needed to conduct further adventurism —
in Kuwait, for example.
The Fall of the Soviet Union — The CIA fails to predict this most important event of the Cold
War. This suggests that it has been so busy undermining governments that it hasn’t been doing

its primary job: gathering and analyzing information. The fall of the Soviet Union also robs the
CIA of its reason for existence: fighting communism. This leads some to accuse the CIA of
intentionally failing to predict the downfall of the Soviet Union. Curiously, the intelligence
community’s budget is not significantly reduced after the demise of communism.
1992
Economic Espionage — In the years following the end of the Cold War, the CIA is increasingly
used for economic espionage. This involves stealing the technological secrets of competing
foreign companies and giving them to American ones. Given the CIA’s clear preference for dirty
tricks over mere information gathering, the possibility of serious criminal behavior is very great
indeed.
1993
Haiti — The chaos in Haiti grows so bad that President Clinton has no choice but to remove the
Haitian military dictator, Raoul Cedras, on threat of U.S. invasion. The U.S. occupiers do not
arrest Haiti’s military leaders for crimes against humanity, but instead ensure their safety and
rich retirements. Aristide is returned to power only after being forced to accept an agenda
favorable to the country’s ruling class.
Endnotes:
1. All history concerning CIA intervention in foreign countries is summarized from William
Blum’s encyclopedic work, Killing Hope: U.S. Military and CIA Interventions since World War II
(Monroe, Maine: Common Courage Press, 1995). Sources for domestic CIA operations come
from Jonathan Vankin and John Whalen’s The 60 Greatest Conspiracies of All Time (Secaucus,
N.J.: Citadel Press, 1997).
2. Coleman McCarthy, "The Consequences of Covert Tactics" Washington Post, December 13,
1987.

Name:
Date:
Potential Hazards of Nuclear Detonation Note Catcher
Health Hazards Environmental Hazards
Jigsaw Text #1

Jellyfish babies
WISE Amsterdam - Though US officials have long denied any link between their bombs and the
alarming increase in health problems among Micronesians, they have yet to offer a satisfactory
explanation as to why hundreds of jellyfish babies are born to Micronesian mothers. Literally,
these babies look like blobs of jelly. These babies are born with no eyes, no heads and do not
resemble human beings at all. They are twisted things that breathe for only a few hours. After
death, they are buried right away. Mothers are not shown their mutated bodies; it would be
too inhumane.
In light of the recent controversy over US plans to dump lethal chemical weapons in
Micronesia's Johnston Atoll - it is perhaps an appropriate time to reflect on the cost of US
paternalism through the tragic experience of the Micronesians.
Micronesia is a large island grouping in the Pacific Ocean, located east of the Philippines. It is
home to a population of around 150,000. Its 2,100 islands and coral atolls cover an area of
approximately 3 million square miles - more then the entire continental US - yet its land mass
totals only 700 square miles.
In many ways, Micronesia's history resembles that of other Third World countries, its past
marked by the bloody and ruthless exploitation of colonial powers. Successive foreign invaders
have attempted to strip the Micronesians of their language, land and culture; yet such efforts
have only strengthened Micronesian resolve and desire for freedom.
The United States was assigned administrative jurisdiction over the region which it later
subdivided into four arbitrary political sectors - the Republic of the Marshall Islands, the
Federated States of Micronesia, the Northern Marianas and the Republic of Belau, more
commonly known as Palau.
According to article 76 of the United Nations trusteeship charter, the US was obliged to further
international peace and security, protect the islanders' physical well-being, promote their social
and economic advancement, and aid in their progressive development towards self-
government or independence. The US also had the designated right to use the islands'
infrastructure, facilities, and territory in any way it desired without ever having to consult the
local people. Far from fulfilling its obligations, the US chose Micronesia as a site to develop and
test its nuclear technology, and as a base to expand its strategic presence and military
capabilities throughout the Pacific region.
Only when the first of 42,000 military and scientific personnel began arriving did the US
governor observe protocol and seek consent from the paramount chief to relocate Bikini's 167
inhabitants. "We are testing these bombs," lied the governor, "for the good of [hu]mankind and
to end all wars." The chief understood little English but knew of the word "mankind" from the
Bible. "If it is in the name of God," he replied, "I am willing to let my people go."

The local inhabitants were transferred to Rongerik, an island with few natural resources 125
miles east of Bikini. They spent a year close to starvation on this sandbar, all the while
expecting to go home.
On March 1st, 1954, the US exploded a hydrogen bomb, code-named Bravo, on Bikini. It spread
radioactive fallout across the northern Marshall islands reaching as far as the Marianas, nearly
3,000 miles to the west. Fallout also drifted eastward, contaminating several hundred
Marshallese people on Rongelap and Utirik Atolls.
More than a decade of being moved from one island to another passed before President
Johnson declared the island safe for rehabilitation. Gradually the original inhabitants began to
return home. But, by the mid-'70s, follow-up medical examinations showed an 11-fold increase
in the body levels of Cesium in most Bikinians while additional tests found radiation in the
surrounding waters and soil still far exceeded acceptable limits. In spite of these results, the
inhabitants were not re-evacuated for another three years.
BIKINI SWIMSUIT
In all, 23 nuclear bombs were tested on Bikini. No one has lived there since 1978, and
today the island is off-limits for 30,000 years. It does the plight of Bikinians no justice
that their home is better remembered as the name of a two-piece swimming
costume which, according to the 1964 edition of the Webster's Dictionary, was
derived from the comparison of the effects wrought by a scantily clad woman to the
effects of an atomic bomb. The atoll, like the swimsuit, had its middle blown away.
-Student Union of Hannover University (GreenNet, gn: gn.nuclear, 5 May 1992)
For 30 years, the truth behind these shameful acts was concealed until the release of an official
US report in the mid-'80s, confirming the suspicions of many: that the Micronesians had been
deliberately exposed in order to further knowledge about the effects of radiation on the human
body. Sadly, the Micronesians and their homelands are still being used as a source of medical
data gathering.
The people of Rongelap and Utirik fared much worse than the hapless Bikinians. Though US
military and scientific personnel were well aware of prevailing wind patterns and that those
islands were in danger of contamination, the local inhabitants were not evacuated until two
days after testing commenced.
The people of Rongelap and Utirik were eventually transferred to Kwajalein for medical checks.
Due to a shortage of landing craft many of the sick and elderly had no other alternative but to
swim to their rescue ship. Once on board, families with as many as ten children were given just
one blanket to share.
Following three months of medical observation, those from Utirik were allowed to return to
their contaminated home while the Rongelapese were relocated to Majuro in the Marshall

group of islands. The US Atomic Energy Commission declared Rongelap safe for rehabilitation in
1957, and the first illnesses appeared soon thereafter.
US response to this has been to silence the Rongelapese, and as much as possible, to stop any
report from filtering out. Although the US Department of Energy (DOE) sends regular inspection
teams, these only visit the two islands that the US officially recognizes as affected by fallout
from Bravo - Rongelap and Utirik - and even then, they only check people alive at the time of
testing (a means of avoiding expensive compensation claims relating to genetic abnormalities in
children).
When suspected tumors are diagnosed, islanders are taken to the US, Hawaii, or Guam for
surgery, all the while under very close supervision by DOE officials. Victims are not permitted to
see their medical records.
Over many years, the people of Rongelap watched helplessly as relatives died from mysterious
tumors and as babies were born with grossly disfigured limbs. Finally in 1978, they petitioned
the Marshall Islands government and US authorities to help them to relocate. Assistance was
refused. Seven years later, aided by Greenpeace, the people of Rongelap fled their homeland.
The original population of Rongelap is now scattered among three islands in Kwajalein Atoll -
Mejato, Majuro, and Ebeye.
The 350 people of Mejato are extremely dependent on Rongelaps living elsewhere. Lacking
sufficient coconuts and fish to sustain the population, supplies must be brought in from Ebeye
twice a month - a journey which takes 11 hours and costs a considerable amount of money.
The situation on Ebeye is no better. Known locally as "the slum of the Pacific", 8,500 people
exist in overcrowded shacks on 78 acres. The majority of its inhabitants were relocated there by
force after the US Army decided in 1959 to take over parts of Kwajalein, the world's largest
atoll, as a range for testing Inter-continental Ballistic Missiles (ICBMs).
The inhabitants of Ebeye survive on canned foods, rice and bread. The disruption to their
traditional diet has resulted in widespread malnutrition among children. As reported by
successive UN Trusteeship Council missions, housing and basic services are sub-standard, there
are no job opportunities, and medical facilities consist of one small dilapidated, understaffed,
and under equipped hospital.
Many other islands were also affected by US testing. Aside from experiments in Bikini, a second
series of 43 bombs were exploded in neighbouring Eniwetok Atoll. These caused varying
degrees of contamination of most islands within a 10-mile radius of Eniwetok. Five entire
islands in this Atoll were actually vaporized.

Unlike other nuclear nomads, the Eniwetok islanders were able to return home on a permanent
basis in 1982, following a costly yet half-hearted $200 million effort by the US to clean up its
waste.
Nuclear debris was collected and then dumped into a concrete crater build on Runit, a tiny
island located in Eniwetok Atoll. The island is off-limits, forever. A few years ago there was
leakage into the Runit Lagoon. Poisoned tidal currents have since washed the shores of several
inhabited islands less than four miles away. US officials did not bother to order repairs,
explaining that the lagoon under threat was already radioactive.
The US government has never bothered to conduct a comprehensive epidemiological study of

Micronesia.
Under growing pressure from the UN to end the trusteeships, the US began negotiating new
political agreements with the four areas in the late '60s. While the Northern Marianas accepted
the original US offer of common-wealth status, the others continued negotiations until 1975
when they settled upon a renewable Compact of Free Association (CFA). Its terms vary for each
of the three sectors, but essentially it ensures the US future control over the region's military
and foreign affairs in exchange for economic aid and limited autonomy.
Of the three remaining sectors, only Belau has refused to accept the compact, which conflicts
with a nuclear-free clause in its 1979 constitution banning the storage, transport and testing of
nuclear materials on Belau island and waters. Approved by 92% of the electorate at the time of
its adoption, it is the world's first nuclear-free constitution.
For 10 years now, the US has exerted considerable financial and political leverage in trying to
resolve this impasse with Belau. The compact has undergone several revisions. Local politicians
have been courted by State Department officials, and President Remeliik of Belau - an anti-
nuclear president - was assassinated in 1985. Repeated referenda have been forced on the
Belauan people. Yet in spite of all the money, all the pressure, and all the unscrupulous tactics,
the US has still not been able to produce a favorable outcome. In February 1990, voters went to
the polls for an astounding seventh time, again rejecting the CFA and upholding their
constitutional sovereignty.
It can be safely assumed that the US will not cease in its attempts to protect its defense and
foreign policy interests. These efforts, however, are under increasing challenge, not just from
the people of Belau, but many other anti - nuclear activists across Micronesia who oppose their
government's acquiescence to the CFA. Indeed, growing anti-nuclear sentiments throughout
the entire Pacific have caused much consternation in Washington circles.
Micronesia is just one of many regions in the Pacific marred by the effects of brutal colonialism,
but its story is sadder than most. As one writer has aptly stated, "Over the past 40 years the
Micronesians have been helpless victims of the US military, human guinea pigs ? on whose

persons and on whose soils, America's nuclear technologies could be tested while the United
Nations and the world looked the other way".
This is the tragic, little-known reality of US "benign neglect".

Jigsaw Text #2
Effects of the Semipalatinsk Test Site in an Independent Kazakhstan

Nuclear weapons testing has been put into practice by the United States, Soviet Union, United
Kingdom, France, China, Pakistan, India, and North Korea (Takada 2004: 3). Although these
countries all have different intentions in why they are testing these nuclear weapons, such
testing has had grave affects to the region and the people that inhabit it. For example, the
environment is destroyed and made uninhabitable. Radiation that is produced by the nuclear
weapons causes illness and/or death within days after the weapon has been detonated (Lewis
2001). During the Cold War, the Soviet Union conducted multiple nuclear tests within the Soviet
republics, including present-day Kazakhstan. The Semipalatinsk Test Site changed the outlook of
the significance of nuclear weapons within the region. The aftermath of nuclear testing in
Semipalatinsk, Kazakh SSR, left a toll on the humans in the region, for instance, such as long-
term health problems, as well as on the environment, which prompted a specific agenda of
becoming nuclear weapons-free in newly independent Kazakhstan through the formation of
allies, creation of treaties, and new domestic policies.
Nuclear Tests Held in Kazakh SSR
The nuclear testing in the region determined the future for Kazakhstan. Between 1949 and
1989, the Soviet Union held up to 459 nuclear tests in Semipalatinsk (Takada 2004: 29). 87 of
those were atmospheric, 26 were ground, and 346 were held underground. All of these
methods ultimately had drastic effects on both the land and its people. The first nuclear test for
the USSR was held at the Semipalatinsk Test Site on August 29, 1949. Two hours after this test,
a large radioactive contamination occurred and inhabitants were exposed to the radiation
(Takada 2004: 29). The second nuclear test at the Semipalatinsk Test Site, also known as the
“Polygon”, was held on August 12, 1953 (Gray 2011). Residents were evacuated for three days
after the explosion due to a radioactive cloud that passed at a wind speed higher than
expected. The 191 residents who did not evacuate in time were exposed to radiation (Takada
2004: 30). The third nuclear test was held on January 15, 1965. It was exploded underground
under the pretense that the USSR was constructing a dam for peaceful use. The explosive
power was 30 times that of Hiroshima (Takada 2004: 30). The result is a lake known to the
inhabitants as “Atomic Lake”. Three of the first nuclear tests already had severe consequences
on the region and it only continued. In the late 1980’s, before the collapse of the Soviet Union,
American scientists arrived in Semipalatinsk to monitor the underground testing of nuclear
weapons. The aim of this was to show that even very small explosions can be detected by
sensitive instruments and created a confidence that a ban on nuclear explosions could be
policed (Broad 1987). Following the collapse of the Soviet Union and the birth of new nations,
the Semipalatinsk Test Site in newfound Kazakhstan was repeatedly ransacked with only
specialized electronic equipment being stolen. Semipalatinsk is a dangerous area. It stores 3.5
tons of spent fuel, which it is unable to send back to Russia. This fuel includes a significant
proportion of potential weapons-grade plutonium (Barletta 1998: 137). This is dangerous for

the country as the thieves could use this nuclear fuel to their advantage. The United States sees
this as a risk not only domestically, but internationally due to Semipalatinsk’s location 200 miles
from Iran’s border (Barletta 1998: 137). Paired with the United States, Kazakhstan pursued its
nuclear-weapons free agenda.
Effects on Humans and the Environment
The testing of nuclear weapons performed by the Soviet Union had a negative toll on the
people of Semipalatinsk that the domestic politics after independence would be solely focused
on nuclear weapons testing. Since the first nuclear test to present-day, they are dealing with
the consequences of all of the nuclear testing radiation that has been embedded into their DNA
and passed on into future generations. Natalya Zhdanova, who lived in the region from 1968 to
2000, recounted that announcements would be made about the tests, along with movie show
times and weather forecasts (Kassenova 2009). It is evident that the nuclear tests were a casual
occurrence and no precautions were taken. Suakysh Iskakova expressed, “When I was blinded
from the blast, my uncle took me to see the doctor and the doctor said it was my own fault that
I looked at the bright light from the explosion” (Taipei Times 2011). These issues resulting from
testing nuclear weapons were not addressed and treated correctly, as they continued on into
later generations. A 2008 study by Kazakh and Japanese doctors concluded that the population
in Semipalatinsk and surrounding areas received more than 500 millisieverts of radiation in one
exposure. In comparison to the USA, where the average American is exposed to about 3
millisieverts of background radiation each year (Kassovnoa 2009). With the advancement of
technology there are signs of radiation, however, the amount of radiation emitted from the
nuclear testing supersedes that of a laptop or other electronic device. Radiation has had a
profound effect on the people of the region in that it has altered the way they live. A majority
of the 220,000 affected people were exposed to an estimated dose between 7 millisieverts and
350 millisieverts (Kassenova 2009). The Kazakh and Japanese doctors noted that the rate of
cancer of those living in the region remains 25-30 percent higher than elsewhere in the country
(Kassenova 2009). In fact, cancer rates in the area of Semipalatinsk are twice as high as the
national average, and it is estimated that birth defects are up to ten times higher (Gray 2011).
There is a higher chance of mental deficiencies in children born to parents who were exposed
to radioactive fallout from the testing. This includes nightmares, depression, frustration,
agitation, and more while the physical toll includes hemorrhaging of respiratory tracts, mouths,
genitals, and changes in mucous and skin (Kassenova 2009). These tests also impacted the
environment negatively by altering the land. Crops could no longer grow as they did before and
water was now polluted with radiation. The nuclear weapons tests at Semipalatinsk inflicted
serious damage to the area around the test site as it left large pieces of agricultural lands in
Kazakhstan radioactively contaminated (Abden 2014: 51). Lake Chagan, or “Atomic Lake” as it is
known to the residents, is a direct result of a consequence stemming from nuclear testing. The
lake was produced by an underground explosion that formed a reservoir. However, the water is
radioactive, about 100 times more than the permitted level of radionuclides in drinking water
(Aben 2014: 51). This proved to be hazardous for the civilians who needed the water for

everyday life. Concerns of Soviet citizens of the blasts contaminating the environment
prompted the Soviet Union to scale back its nuclear testing program (Gordon 1989).

Jigsaw Text #3
Kazakhstan Claims 'Moral Right' to Push for Banning Nukes text article
The fact that President Nursultan Nazarbayev shut down the Semipalatinsk test site "against
the interests of the Soviet military authorities" even before the Central Asian republic of
Kazakhstan became "fully independent", is not widely known.
The decision reflected a strong political will, the courage to translate it into reality, and put a
series of follow-up measures in place which, as Foreign Minister Erlan Idrissov says, give
Kazakhstan "the moral right to push for nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation, both
globally and regionally".
The huge site, in the east of the country, was the centre of the Soviet Union’s nuclear weapon
testing programme. Its first-ever nuclear test took place there on August 29, 1949. Over the
next 40 years, 455 additional nuclear explosions followed, says Idrissov, Foreign Minister in the
Government of Kazakhstan since September 2012, a post he also held from 1999 to 2002.
When those first nuclear devices were exploded, the potential effects of radiation or
contamination, even when known, were seen as far less important than the arms race. "Elderly
residents tell of being encouraged out of their homes to witness the first explosions and
mushroom clouds," recalls Idrissov.
As a result of this ignorance and failure, according to United Nations estimates, up to 1.5 million
people in Kazakhstan were exposed to high radiation levels. Not long before, many began to
suffer from ill health, early deaths and birth defects.
This dreadful impact remained hidden for many years from the wider public. But as the health
and environmental damage became better known, it fuelled fierce opposition at every level
across the country to nuclear testing. This led President Nazarbayev to issue a decree closing
the nuclear weapon testing site.
As a follow-up, Kazakhstan renounced voluntarily the world’s fourth biggest nuclear arsenal,
which it inherited on the break-up of the Soviet Union, says Idrissov, briefing foreign journalists
in Astana on the occasion of the International Day against Nuclear Tests, commemorated each
year on August 29. This year it coincided with the 25th anniversary of the closure of the
Semipalatinsk nuclear test site.
It was at the initiative of the Republic of Kazakhstan, together with a large number of sponsors
and co-sponsors that the 64th session of the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) on
December 2, 2009 unanimously adopted resolution 64/35 declaring August 29 the International
Day against Nuclear Tests.
Closing the testing site and ridding Kazakhstan of nuclear weapons, working "meticulously" with
the Soviet Union was only a first step. Both soft- and hardware were involved in ensuring the
safe disposal of the weapons and materials.

The persistent need to prevent nuclear material from falling into the hands of terrorists called
for unprecedented – and at the time secret – cooperation between Kazakhstan, Russia and the
United States, as well as other countries and organizations, over several years.
Kazakhstan's foreign policy, emphasizing peace, dialogue and international cooperation has
been guided by the recognition of the "immorality" of nuclear weapons, "the vision of security",
and "ensuring a healthy environment", says Idrissov.
It is with this in view that the Central Asian republic has been in the forefront of the global
campaign to end nuclear testing and to warn against the dangers of nuclear weapons.
"We have also shown that international influence and stature do not depend on nuclear
firepower," Idrissov adds. Kazakhstan's election as non-permanent member of the UN Security
Council for 2017-2018 – and good relations with a wide range of countries – is evidence of the
country's standing in the world, he says.
"We would bring our perspective to contribute to the work of the Security Council and the UN
for the cause of peace and development." The focus will be on ensuring global nuclear, water,
food and energy security.
Kazakhstan will serve on the Council beginning January 1, 2017 as one of the 10 non-permanent
members along with Sweden, Bolivia and Ethiopia. The newly-elected countries will replace
Spain, Malaysia, New Zealand, Angola and Venezuela.
The Security Council has 15 members, including five permanent members, each with the power
of veto: China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States. Other current non-
permanent members are Japan, Egypt, Senegal, Ukraine and Uruguay.
Together with Japan's Foreign Minister Fumio Kishida, Idrissov chaired the Ministerial-level
Conference on September 29, 2015 in New York for Facilitating the Entry into force of the
Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT), which was adopted by the UNGA in 1996.
Kazakh President Nazarbayev and Prime Miniser Shinzo Abe of Japan reiterated in a statement
issued on October 27, 2015 in Astana the reasons behind their commitment to the
Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT) becoming a law.
“As countries which experienced and are fully aware of the threat of nuclear weapons.
Kazakhstan and Japan share the moral authority and responsibility to raise the awareness of the
people throughout the world about the humanitarian catastrophes nuclear weapons have
brought about. With this special mission in mind, Kazakhstan and Japan are determined to work
together closely pursuing a world free of nuclear weapons,” the joint statement said.
This objective remains valid, says Idrissiv, adding that concerted efforts would be undertaken to
enable the coming into force of the CTBT, which is crucial for ushering in a world free of nuclear
weapons. "It's a shame" that the treaty has not yet entered into force.
Altogether 183 member states of the UN have signed the Treaty and 164 have ratified. But it
will enter into force only when 44 countries complete their ratification procedures. Particular

attention is being paid to eight countries – China, Egypt, Iran, Israel and the U.S., which have
signed the Treaty, and North Korea, India and Pakistan that have until now refused to put their
signature on the CTBT.
Nevertheless, with the exception of "ugly" tests carried out by North Korea all countries have
abided by the de facto ban on nuclear testing. Despite being pitted against each other in South
Asia, both India and Pakistan have declared unilateral moratorium on nuclear testing. The next
positive step would be to declare a "bilateral moratorium".
Kazakhstan's global status is also underlined by the country's choice to host the international
low enriched uranium bank under the auspices of the International Atomic Energy Agency
(IAEA), which will start operating next year. The 'bank' will ensure supply of uranium for civilian
purposes such as building nuclear power plants.
Of equally great importance is the Universal Declaration for the Achievement of a Nuclear-
Weapons-Free World tabled by Kazakhstan and co-sponsored by 35 countries. President
Nazarbayev initiated the proposal at the first Nuclear Security Summit in Washington, D.C. in
April 2010. He reiterated it on September 28, 2015 at the general debate of the 70th session of
the UNGA in New York.
The Kazakh Ministry of Foreign Affairs worked hard from 2010 to 2015 with all interested
parties to agree on the text of the Declaration, which was finalised at the session of the UNGA
First Committee held in October and November 2015.
"The Declaration was not adopted unanimously," says Idrissov but 133 countries voted for its
adoption, 23 countries voted against and 28 abstained.
The document itself calls for a series of steps. First: the total elimination of nuclear weapons as
the only absolute guarantee against their use or threat of use. Second: the adoption of a global
multilateral and legally binding document that provides for the total elimination of nuclear
weapons.
Third: the redirection of the investment of human and economic resources that now go toward
the development, maintenance and modernisation of nuclear weapons into strengthening
sustainable development, peace and security, as well as saving millions of people from poverty.
Finally, it calls for compliance with the norms of international law, including international
humanitarian law, because of the catastrophic humanitarian consequences from any use of
nuclear weapons.
Among Kazakhstan’s important activities is the support for the UN's Open-Ended Working
Group (OEWG). 107 nations expressed support for the convening of a UN conference in 2017 to
negotiate a legally binding instrument to prohibit nuclear weapons, leading towards their total
elimination. This proposal formed the key recommendation in the working group’s report,
adopted in Geneva on August 19 with overwhelming support.

The world has also seen a reduction in the global threat to human lives from nuclear weapons.
But there are still 15,000 in existence – enough to destroy humanity many times over. Still,
there has been progress.
"We have seen the growth of nuclear weapons-free zones as we now have in Central Asia. The
number of weapons, too, has been reduced." But the threat from nuclear weapons has scarcely
ever been as great, because violent extremist groups are actively trying to get their hands on
nuclear weapons and technology. If they succeed, they would not hesitate to use them. In their
view, the greater the loss of life and destruction the better.
With this in view, President Nazarbayev has called for the mankind to set, as its main goal for
this century, ridding our world of nuclear weapons by 2045, the centenary of the United
Nations. With his Manifesto: The World. The 21st century, he has produced a blueprint to show
how this goal could be achieved.
The last 25 years have shown this won’t be easy. But, as Idrissov rightly points out, "we must
step up our efforts to rebuild the trust needed". The example of Kazakhstan shows both the
price to be paid in case of failure and also what can be achieved with vision.
This is underlined by the Declaration adopted by conference on 'Building a Nuclear-Free World'
'The Astana Vision: From a Radioactive Haze to a Nuclear-Weapon Free World'. The Declaration
recalls that closure of the Semipalatinsk nuclear test site was "the first such step in the world
history of disarmament".

Jigsaw Text #4
H-Bomb Guinea Pigs! Natives Suffering Decades After New Mexico Tests
Much has been made of the dropping of the first atomic bomb on two now-infamous cities,
Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and the health-nightmare aftermath.
But only now is the spotlight being put onto those who had the actual first atomic bomb
dropped in their vicinity—it was the Americans’ own people, Turtle Island’s original inhabitants,
the Indigenous Peoples of the southwest. The world’s first atomic bomb was detonated on July
16, 1945, in New Mexico—home to 19 American Indian pueblos, two Apache tribes and some
chapters of the Navajo Nation. Manhattan Project scientists exploded the device containing six
kilograms of plutonium 239 on a 100-foot tower at the Trinity Site in the Jornada del Muerto
(Journey of Death) Valley at what is now the U.S. Army’s White Sands Missile Range. The blast
was the equivalent of 21 kilotons of TNT. At the time an estimated 19,000 people lived within a
50-mile radius.
It has taken nearly 70 years, but the National Cancer Institute is launching a study to determine
how much radiation the residents of New Mexico were exposed to that fateful day, and what
effect it could have on their lives.
What people reported seeing at 5:30 that morning was a flash more brilliant than daylight
followed by a green (or red or violet or blue, depending on who is recounting the story) glow in
the sky. No one knew what had happened, no one knew how to protect themselves from the
effects of this new technology, and no one knew that it would be almost 70 years before the
government would investigate what those effects were.
“No one was told, everything was top secret, and that’s the mistake,” said Marian Naranjo,
Santa Clara Pueblo, director of Honor Our Pueblo Existence, an area community group.
“Because when you look at what people here in New Mexico were doing during 1945, they
were farmers. And in July you get up at the crack of dawn to go out and do your work.”
The Trinity test was conducted to determine whether the plutonium bomb intended for
Nagasaki would act according to theory. It did. But the Department of Defense changed the
design of the bomb anyway.
“From the Trinity test they determined that they were going to have to drop the bomb from a
higher altitude or detonate the bomb at a higher altitude than they did at Trinity,” said Tina
Cordova, Santa Clara Pueblo, head of the Tularosa Basin Downwinders’ Consortium, an activist
group that has been pushing for just such a study for more than 10 years. “At Trinity they put it
on a platform 100 feet in the air, and at Nagasaki they detonated it much higher in the
atmosphere because at Trinity what happened was that they didn’t create a very large blast
field but created a very expansive radiation field. At Nagasaki they wanted a different effect;
they wanted to create a large blast field, and they weren’t necessarily interested in creating a
radiation field.

The government briefly monitored the radiation levels at several sites near the blast with the
relatively crude instruments that were available at the time and according to the extremely lax
standards of the time.
“So they detonate the bomb at Trinity and they leave,” said Cordova, a cancer survivor. “They
never come back and tell the people to take care of how they live, what they consume, what
they eat, drink. Nothing.”
Contemporary reports from both American Indian and government witnesses describe a light
ash that rained down for four or five days after the detonation. It went everywhere—onto
people’s clothes and bodies and into their homes, into the cisterns they used to collect
rainwater for drinking, on the crops they would feed their families, on the forage their animals
would consume, and into the watershed from which the animals they hunted drank.
Manhattan Project Searchlight Station L-8 crew who were cooking steaks over an open fire a
few hours after the blast buried the steaks and left the area after the food became
contaminated by fallout.
“The dust could be measured at low intensities 200 miles north and northeast of the site on the
4th day,” said Colonel Stafford Warren, chief of the Manhattan Project’s Medical Section, in a
July 21, 1945 statement. “There is still a tremendous quantity of radioactive dust floating in the
air. It is this officer’s opinion that this site is too small for a repetition of a similar test of this
magnitude except under very special conditions. It is recommended that the site be expanded
or a larger one, preferably with a radius of at least 150 miles without population, be obtained if
this test is to be repeated.”
Henceforth, the U.S. conducted almost all of its nuclear tests at the Nevada Test Site and in the
Pacific. No other test was ever conducted in New Mexico. Still, there would be no picking up
and leaving for the people whose ancestors had lived on this land and who, in any case, did not
know they were in danger.
The radiation field was as extensive as it was because the blast was so close to the ground that
it picked up the soil, which was drawn up into the mushroom cloud by hot air currents. Then
there was a huge lightning and rainstorm the night after the test, which would have caused
radioactive particles trapped in the cloud to fall to earth. The wind also helped disperse the
particles.
The radioactive cloud “slowly assumed a zigzag shape because of the changing wind velocity at
different altitudes,” Los Alamos scientist Kenneth Grisen wrote in an eyewitness account now in
the National Archives. “A sort of dust haze seemed to cover the area.”
That observation echoed in reports by Cyril S. Smith and Philip Morrison.
“The obvious fact that all of the reaction products were not proceeding upward in a neat ball
but were lagging behind and being blown by low altitude winds over the ground in the direction

of inhabited areas produced very definite reflection that this is not a pleasant weapon we have
produced,” Smith said in his account.
Nowadays the United States Environmental Protection Agency readily acknowledges on its
website the likely effects associated with long-term or chronic low-level radiation exposure. The
longer the exposure the more likely that cancer and other illnesses will occur, according to the
EPA’s website.
However, this is in hindsight prompted in part by what happened to the Navajo and other
American Indians after the test blast. In New Mexico, American Indians would begin to
experience many types of cancers—rare cancers as well as multiple primary cancers. Cordova
said that her father, who was three years old at the time of the test, had two oral cancers and
one gastric cancer, none of them the result of metastasis. He never smoked or drank.
“At one time I could name ten people who had brain tumors,” said Cordova, who grew up in
Tularosa. “The town I grew up in is probably about 3,500 people. The normal incidence of brain
tumors in the [general] population is about one in 5,000. So that gives you some idea on the
incidence of these things. Brain tumors are associated with radiation exposure.”
Cordova is far from the only witness to these effects.
“A lot of the people here in New Mexico, men, women and children have been victims,” said
Kathy Sanchez, San Ildefonso Pueblo, of Las Mujeres Hablan (The Women Speak), a network of
local activists working in Northern New Mexico to protect their peoples and lands from the
nuclear weapons industry. “We are losing many family and tribal members, and it is heartache
and hardship as a consequence of radioactivity around us.”
Mescalero Apache Tribal Council member Pam Cordova said her tribe has experienced the
same thing.
“There have been a lot of deaths,” she said, “and a lot of it is cancer related.”
Bake sales sometimes pay for pain medications, but most often people simply do not have the
resources to take care of themselves in the face of such devastating diseases.
“People in these small communities are almost always underinsured or uninsured, and then
they’re left to deal with these horrific, horrific cancers with little to no insurance or means for
taking care of themselves,” said Cordova.
New Mexicans affected by the Trinity test are not eligible for remuneration under the Radiation
Exposure Compensation Act, which covers virtually all nuclear and uranium workers and so-
called down-winders except those affected by the Trinity test, in part because no one has ever
before formally studied what happened in New Mexico after Trinity.
But that could soon change

Jigsaw Text #6
The Legacy of Uranium Development on or Near Indian Reservations and Health Implications
Rekindling Public Awareness
EXCERPT
1.3. Nuclear Weapons Development
Pacific Northwest tribal groups on nine reservations in Washington, Idaho and Oregon were
impacted by Hanford Nuclear reservation activities [29]. The Hanford Nuclear site is located on
1518 square km of shrub-steppe desert in southeastern Washington State [17] surrounded by
these nine reservations (Figure 3).
Figure 3. Hanford Nuclear Reservation, shown in red, was located in the state of Washington.
Nine Native American reservations surround it. Figure modified from Edward Liebow in
Hanford, Tribal Risks, and Public Health [29].

The people of these reservations traditionally used [17] and continue to use the lands and
resources from the Columbia River Plateau region including land that was ceded to the
government for which they retained hunting and gathering privileges [29]. Thus, they may have
been exposed to more radiation and contaminants than the general public in practicing
traditional lifestyles while fishing, hunting game, food gathering (berries, root plants, etc.)
harvesting medicinal plants and traditional practices (i.e., sweats), as well as social and spiritual
interaction networks [29]. This region was contaminated by Hanford activities through primarily
two distinct forms: airborne and river-borne releases, both normal operations and some
accidental releases [29]. During the period from 1944 to 1972 Hanford released 25 million
curies of radioactive contamination into the environment as a comparison the Chernobyl plant
released between 35 and 49 million curies of iodine-131 (I-131) [29]. Five of the reservations,
the Colville Confederated Tribes, Spokane, Kalispel, Kootenai, and Coeur D’Alene are primarily
downwind of Hanford Nuclear site’s 1450 square kilometer area (Figure 3) and would have
been exposed to the airborne release of radioactive contamination for the most part normal
by-product of chemical reactions used to separate weapons-grade plutonium from enriched
uranium reactor rods, i.e., I-131 with less of a contribution of the river borne releases [29]. The
other four reservations, the Nez Perce, Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla, Confederated
Tribes and Bands of the Warm Springs and the Yakama Nation are known to consume large
quantities of fish and likely received higher doses of river borne releases which resulted from
both accidental releases and normal operations that used Columbia River water to cool
weapon-production reactor cores [29]. Additionally, liquid waste that had been poured onto
the ground or held in ponds or trenches at the Hanford reservation evaporated or soaked into
the soil on the site [30]. The waste contaminated some of the soil and is thought to have also
created underground “plumes” of contaminants [30] which could also affect the tribes who
consumed native food sources in the area. These nine reservations were all part of the
Intertribal Council on Hanford Health Projects established in 1994 when all tribal governing
bodies involved agreed on bylaws and operations plans for the council [29]. The group sought
to give the tribal perspective of the information needed for estimating radiation doses from
distinctive traditional lifestyles of the represented tribes and protect their sovereignty in public
health research while also ensuring the scientific integrity of the research involving their people
and land [29]. The final report of the federal government’s Hanford Thyroid Disease Study
(HTDS), a dose-based analysis epidemiological study conducted under contract by researchers
at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle from 1989 to 2002 [30], showed
northwest U.S. residents with childhood radiation exposures from Washington State’s Hanford
nuclear site had similar risk levels for thyroid cancer and other thyroid disease regardless of
their radiation dose [31]. Many people were dissatisfied with the results of the report and have
lawsuits pending [30]. The study was not specific to Native American communities though “the
authorizing language which provided funding for the study specifically required that thyroid
disease among Native Americans be studied. However, no study focusing on thyroid disease
among Native Americans was ever completed.” ([29], p. 152). According to the HTDS summary
report: “based on information from Native American Tribes and Nations, a study such as the
HTDS in Native American populations alone was not feasible because it would have too little

chance of detecting any health effects from Hanford’s iodine-131” [32]. Native Americans were
included in the HTDS if they were identified in the group that made up the study cohort [32].
The study used computer programs from Hanford Environmental Dose Reconstruction Project
(1987–1994) and interviews with participants to estimate I-131 doses for 3440 people born
between 1940 and 1946 to mothers living in seven Washington counties, took nearly 13 years
to complete and cost $18 million dollars [31]. The site is an environmental cleanup project that
approximately 11,000 Hanford employees are involved with today [30].
1. Liebow, E. Hanford, tribal risks, and public health in an era of forced federalism. In Half-Lives &
Half-Truths, Confronting the Radioactive Legacies of the Cold War; Johnston, B.R., Ed.; School
for Advanced Research Press: Santa Fe, NM, USA, 2007; pp. 145–165. [Google Scholar]
2. Department of Energy Hanford. Hanford Cleanup; Available
online: http://www.hanford.gov/page.cfm/HanfordCleanup (accessed on 28 December 2014).
3. Reynolds, T. Final Report of Hanford Thyroid Disease Study Released. J. Natl. Cancer
Inst. 2002, 94, 1046–1048. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
4. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, HTDS Guide—How the Study Was Conducted.
Available
online: http://www.cdc.gov/nceh/radiation/hanford/htdsweb/guide/conduct.htm (accessed on
16 January 2015).

Jigsaw Text #7
Nuclear war: Uranium mining and nuclear tests on Indigenous Lands
Hanford Nuclear Reservation in Washington state has caused dramatic increases in cancer rates
among indigenous peoples. Radioactive gases and fluids released between 1944 and 1977
directly affected fish and wildlife. Eight out of nine reactors at the facility were water-cooled
from the Columbia River, affecting the fish that provide food and economic subsistence.
Spokane
In 1957, Dawn Mining Co. began operating the Midnight Mine only a few miles from the
Spokane Reservation in Washington state. The mine was closed in 1981. The leftover uranium
mining pits hold contaminated water. One pit has 450 million gallons of contaminated water;
another holds 150 million gallons of less contaminated water. A major concern is the
contaminated water seeping into Lake Roosevelt.
Havasupai, Kaibab Paiute
Energy Fuels Nuclear is developing Canyon Mine. The Canyon Mine, along with the Sage Mine,
will be built on the southern rim of the Grand Canyon. Canyon Mine will disturb 17 acres of land
for a 1,400-foot shaft and surface facilities. The site, which sits on top of a major aquifer, is also
near the Cataract Creek and could contaminate both bodies of water. The site also lies near and
partially on sacred religious lands.
Navajo, Hopi
Uranium mining and aboveground nuclear-weapons tests have occurred for about 50 years on
and around these reservations. Since 1942, the reservation lands and the surrounding areas of
the Navajo and Hopi have been mined for uranium. From 1946 to 1968, 13 million tons of
uranium were mined on the Navajo Reservation. The largest underground uranium mine on
Navajo and Hopi lands operated from 1979 to 1990. The worst nuclear accident happened at
Uranium Mill, which is south of the Navajo Reservation. More than 1,000 open-pit and
underground uranium mines on the reservation are abandoned, unreclaimed, and highly
radioactive. Some 600 dwellings on Navajo tribal lands are contaminated with radiation.
Former uranium mining and milling districts of the Navajo Reservation suffer from cancer and
leukemia clusters and birth defects.
Western Shoshone, South Paiute
The Nevada Test Site is in the traditional land-use area of the Western Shoshone and South
Paiute. The U.S. government appropriated the land in 1951 for exploding nuclear weapons. The
Western Shoshone are the most bombed nation on the earth: 814 nuclear tests have been
done on their land since 1951. Substantial radioactive fallout has contributed to a high
concentration of cancer and leukemia on the reservation.
Oglala Lakota

Uranium and gold mining occurs in the Black Hills of South Dakota, a sacred area for the Lakota.
The U.S. Department of Energy wants to use more of the land for such mining because the area
is rich in mineral deposits. Half of the gold mined in the United States each year comes from the
Black Hills. The mining sites in the Black Hills could threaten underground water directly
underneath the operating mines. Mining is seen as one cause of epidemic levels of sterility,
miscarriages, cancer, and other diseases on the Pine Ridge Reservation.
Cherokee
Radioactive waste from the Sequoyah Plant in Gore, Oklahoma, was spread on Cherokee lands
for testing as fertilizer and demonstration purposes. The Cherokee National and Native
Americans for a Clean Environment sued to shut down the plant. The plant was recently shut.
Mescalero Apache, Prairie Island Mdewakanton, Minnesota Siouz, Skull valley Goshutes, Lower
Brule, two Alaskan native communities, Chickasaw, Sac and Fox, Eastern Shawnee, Quassarie,
Ponca.
These tribes have all applied to be sites for Monitored Retrievable Storage (MRS), a temporary
solution to the problem of storing vast amounts of high-level nuclear waste. Such waste now
sits at 110 nuclear power plants. The MRS sites would keep the waste for 40-50 years. The
safety of these plants is still under question.
CANADA
Inuit, Chipewyan, Metis, Anishinabe
A German company wants to establish the Baker Lake Mine i the Northwest Territories, 40
miles from an Inuit settlement. The 50 percent unemployment rate in this community gives the
company leverage in opening the mine. The project include one uranium mill, two open pits,
and tailings covering 20 square miles.
Serpent Lake Band
Rio Algom Corp. opened the Elliot Lake Mine in 1953. The Serpent Lake Band lives directly
downriver from the complex and has been affected by uranium mining and its leftover tailings.
Until the early 1960s, all waste went untreated. By 1980, so many tailing were being dumped in
the headwaters of the Serpent River that liquid wastes during the summer were between half
to two-thirds of the total water flow. On the reservation, there are many cases of diabetes,
cardio-vascular disease, fetal death, and deafness.
Cree, Chipewyan, Metis
Saskatchewan Province has been called the "Saudi Arabia of Uranium Mining." Four uranium
deposits are being mined, the largest of which is Cigar Lake, with estimates it could supply
14,000 tons of uranium annually. Construction is planned to begin in 1994. The other mines in
this area are Cluff Lake (now shut), Key Lake (which produces 12 percent of the world's
uranium), Beaverlodge, and Rabbit Lake.

From 1975 to 1977, a half million gallons of untreated waste went into Wallaston Lake.
Radioactive contaminates still leak into the lake through groundwater channels.
AUSTRALIA
Kokatatha, Arabana
The Roxby Downs Mine/Olympic Dams has one of the world's largest deposits of uranium,
producing 1.5 million tons of tailings a year. This affects an area of "mound spring," where
artesian water naturally rises to the surface, that has a profound significance to local
aborigines. The miners refuse to grant compensation to the aboriginal caretakers of the land for
the sacred sites that have been destroyed by mine development. Olympic Dam operates under
considerable secrecy and prohibits the Kakatha access to sacred sites without an escot of
company personell.
Martujarra
The CRA Company has discovered one of Australia's largest uranium deposits inside Rudall
National Park on indigenous lands. The mining would affect a women's sacred dreaming site at
Mount Cotten, and mining would be done directly on Martujarra lands. The Martujarra have
been unable to stop the mining because they have no property rights to their land.
Yungnora
Workers at the Argyle Diamond Mine smashed several ceremonial boards at Noonkanbah while
searching for diamonds and uranium. Noonkanbah is a sacred site for the Yungnora. The
Yungnora community was able to prevent more prospecting by blocking 98 out of 101 CRA-
proposed sites. This pressured CRA to move out of the other three spots, including
Noonkanbah.
Aborigines (various)
Ranger Mine operates adjacent to aboriginal sacred sites at Mount Bockman and is surrounded
by the Kakadu National Park.
Nabarlek Mine, located in the Northern Territory, is on aboriginal lands and adjacent to an
aboriginal sacred site. In March 1981, contaminated water escaped from the plant's runoff
pond at Nabarlek and entered the creek system of the Buffalo and Coopers creeks.
From 1952 to 1963, the United Kingdom exploded nine aboveground nuclear bombs in Emu,
Monte Bello, and Maralinga, affecting 11 aboriginal tribes. Radioactive contamination was
widespread, and entry into large contaminated areas is still prohibited.
SOUTH AND CENTRAL AMERICA
Yanomami, Yekuana, Munduruku, Kayapo, Bau-Megragnoti, Menkranotire
Uranium mining companies are moving into indigenous lands, where the Yanomami pose an
obstacle. Brazil's then-president, Fernando Collor, had allowed the companies to mine and
exploit radio-active minerals in almost all the Yanomami territory.

Shuar, Archuara, Cfan, Huaorani, Quechua, Secoya, Siona
These groups in Ecuador are encountering various problems with uranium mining and
exploration on their lands.
Mapuche, Techueleche, Chaco, Mataco, Choroti, Toba, Mocobi, Pilaga, Chrguanos,
Chinguancos, Quenchua.
In Argentina, Mapuche Uranium Mine and the Chubut Uranium Mine re situated on traditional
Techuelche and Mapuche territory. The government also dumps nuclear waste from its military
and civilian nuclear programs on indigenous territories.
Quechua
The Peruvian Nuclear Energy Institute, with the assistance of other countries, has been
exploring Peru's uranium resources. The government has the right to explore and develop
uranium fields located on indigenous lands.
AFRICA
Tamacheq
From 1960 to 1965, France conducted aboveground nuclear-weapons tests in the Sahara
desert, but it has released no information on contamination or on the people affected. There
are also large deposits of uranium in the Hoggar Mountains that if mined are potentially
harmful to the Tamacheq and other indigenous peoples.
Tamacheq, Ful
Uranium is the major export of Niger, amounting to 90 percent of the country's 1980s exports.
Niger's infrastructure is centered around uranium mining. The mining occurs mostly in the
desert region, which not only causes ecological damage to the land but also affects nomadic
tribes.
Beduin
The world's largest phosphate resources are in Morocco. The mining of phosphate intersects
the traditional migration routes of the Beduin.
Ovambo
The world's second-largest open-pit uranium mine is in Namibia, owned by the Rossing Co.
Most of the mining is done by hundreds of Ovambo laborers who live in neo-colonial housing
villages and work under an apartheid management system. They are exposed to high levels of
radiation from radon gases. There are concerns that water-borne radiation from tailings left
from mining operations could contaminate the Khar River.
Bambuti
The French Atomic Energy Commission started searching for uranium in Gabon in 1948. Mining
began in 1961. The now closed Okla mine was in an area originally inhabited by the Bambuti.

Khoikhoi, Bantu-speaking groups
South Africa has conducted one known nuclear-weapons test, on September 22, 1979. South
Africa has three principal uranium deposits: Palaborwa, Witwatersrand, and Karoo Basin (Cape
Province). The Bantu-speaking peoples are exposed to the hazards of mining and radioactive
emissions from tailings because they work in these mines or have settlements nearby. South
Africa is one of the world's largest producers of uranium and platinum-group metals. The
mining industry is relatively unregulated, which results in many environmental problems,
especially for black communities where mining smelters spew sulfur dioxide and toxic air
pollutants. The traditional territory of the Khoikhoi in Northern Cape Province is slated to be a
dump for radio-active materials.
FORMER SOVIET UNION
Kazakh, Khanti, Mamsi, Evenk, Yakut, Chukchee, Eskimosy
The former Soviet Union conducted at least 713 nuclear-bomb tests above and below ground at
many sites, affecting many indigenous peoples. The two main testing and nuclear sites are
located at Semiplantinsk in Kazakhstan and Antic Island of Novaya Zemlya in Siberia. Although
the government conducted no known health-effects research, it can be assumed that
radioactive fallout affected local indigenous peoples. The Chukchee suffer from tuberculosis, 90
percent have chronic diseases of the lung, and the average life expectancy is 45 years.
INDIA
Ho, Santal, and Mundu
Judugara Mine produces 200 tons of yellow cake annually and affects the Ho, Santal, and
Mundu. Many workers in the mine are tribal people who are illiterate and are forced to do the
dirtiests jobs. They are exposed to high levels of radiation and don't have the proper protective
gear. Many indigenous miners suffer from a high incidence of lung disease.
Rajasthani and Bhil
The one confirmed nuclear underground test in 1974 in India caused the Rajathani and Bhil
tribes to move from their traditional lands.
CHINA
Uigur, Kazakh, Kirghiz, Xibo, Tadzhik, Uzbek, Tatar, Western Mongols, Tibetan
All these peoples are affected in one way or another by uranium mining, bomb testing, and
nuclear waste disposal. Uranium mines are scattered all over China. An "atomic factory"
planned in the Gobi desert will affect such minorities as Mongols, Muslim Dugans, and Hui
Chinese. Some of the world's richest uranium sources are located in Tibet, but the area is
generally unsuitable for large-scale uranium mining. One hot spot for uranium mining in Tibet is
the Riwoche Hill, a sacred site to Tibetans.
SOUTH PACIFIC

Yami
In May 1982, Taiwan started to dump low-level radioactive waste on the island of Lanyu, which
is populated by 2,900 Yami. The first dump site is two miles from their villages. Strong
opposition has mounted among the Yami against the establishment of a second nuclear dump.
Ironically, Taiwan plans to establish its fifth national park in the vicinity of the dumps.
Micronesians
In the 1940s and 1950s, the United States used Bikini, Enewetak, and Johnson atolls and
Christmas Island for testing nuclear weapons. Among the short-term effects on the indigenous
people were nausea, vomiting, and hair loss. Four weeks after tests, the white-blood-cell counts
of many islanders were down 70 percent. The long-term health effects include high rates of
cancers, miscarriages, birth defects, leukemia, and thyroid tumors. Four decades later, the
people of Bikini Atoll are unable to return home, despite U.S. government promises that their
homeland would be inhabitable again; the level of radioactive contamination is still too high.
Moruroa and Fangataufa
In 1966, France started testing nuclear weapons in French Polynesia.
Sources:
Judith L. Boice, "Searching for Uranium in Western Australia," Campaign for Indigenous Peoples
Worldwide, 1993.
Julian Burger, Gaia Atlas of First People, Anchor Books, 1990; Future for the Indigenous World,
Gaia Books, 1990.
Kimberly Craven, "Information Compiled for the World Uranium Hearing Briefing Book,"
Southwest Research and Information Center, 1992.
High Country News, December 1990.
IWGIA Newsletter No. 28/29, 1981; Survival International, Press Release, September 23, 1986.
Ester Krumbholz and Frank Kressing, Uranium Mining, Atomic Weapons Testing, Nuclear Waste
Storage: A Global Survey, World Uranium Hearing, 1992.
Arjun Makhijani, Radioactive Heaven and Earth, International Commission to Investigate the
Health and Environmental Effects of Nuclear Weapons Production and the Institute for Energy
and Environmental Research, 1991.
"Minority Trends Newsletter," Summer 1992.
Monitor Service, September 14, 1987 and May 5, 1988.
Roger Moody, The Indigenous Voice: Visions and Realities, Vol. 1, Zed Books, 1988.
Roger Moody, Plunder! Native Nevadan, June 1992.
Roger Moody, paper submitted to the World Uranium Hearing, 1990.

Navajo-Hopi Observer, August 2, 1989.
News from Indian Country, Mid-May 1992.
New York Times, October 3, 29, and 30, 1990.
OECD Nuclear Energy Agency and the International Atomic Energy Agency, "Statistical Update
1990: Uranium. Resources, Production and Demand."
John Redhouse, "Overview of Uranium and Nuclear Development on Indian Lands in the
Southwest," Redhouse/Wright Productions, 1992.
Tab, June 20, 1990.
Third Force, March/April 1993.
Uranium Institute, 15th International Symposium, 1991.
Harvey Wasserman and Norman Solomon, Killing Our Own: The Disaster of America's
Experience with Atomic Radiation, Delacorte Press, 1982.
Worldwatch Institute, State of the World, Norton, 1991.
World Information Service on Energy, "The Nuclear Fix," 1982.

Name:
Date:
Simile Guide
What is a simile? A simile is a figure of speech that compares two different things in an
interesting way. A simile uses the words "like" or "as" to draw a comparison, for example:
● We fought like cats and dogs.

● He is as strong as an ox.
● I slept like a log.
● The explanation is as clear as mud.
● It’s as easy as shooting fish in a barrel.
● He sat there like a bump on a log.
● We are as different as night and day.
● She is as thin as a rake.
● That idea went over like a lead balloon.
Instructions:
1. pick one Cold War related word from each color (blue, red, green) on the chart paper
posters and write each on the left lines below:
__________________ like/as _________________
__________________ like/as _________________
__________________ like/as _________________
2. think of one thing that each word compares to and write each of those words on the right
lines above.
3. add more words such as “is,” “are,” “an,” or “a” and read through the whole line like a
sentence. There is your simile!!
4. Pick one simile and explain why your simile might be a true statement, her

FINAL EDIT - USHistory - U1L1

Cargado por

Información del documento

Título original

Derechos de autor

Formatos disponibles

Compartir este documento

Compartir o incrustar documentos

Opciones para compartir

¿Le pareció útil este documento?

¿Este contenido es inapropiado?

Copyright:

Formatos disponibles

FINAL EDIT - USHistory - U1L1

Cargado por

Copyright:

Formatos disponibles

Grade 11 | Unit 1 | Lesson 1

TITLE: Cold War Realities Duration: 2 days

Grade 11 Unit1 Lesson1 U.S. History

Grade 11 Unit1 Lesson1 U.S. History

Grade 11 Unit1 Lesson1 U.S. History

Grade 11 Unit1 Lesson1 U.S. History

Grade 11 Unit1 Lesson1 U.S. History

Grade 11 Unit1 Lesson1 U.S. History

Grade 11 Unit1 Lesson1 U.S. History

Nonetheless, by 1985 Mikhail Gorbachev had replaced Brezhnev in Moscow, and he

Despite improved East-West relations, however, Gorbachev's reforms were unable to

Grade 11 Unit1 Lesson1 U.S. History

Grade 11 Unit1 Lesson1 U.S. History

Important Points CONCEPTS Further Questions

Central & South

Grade 11 Unit1 Lesson1 U.S. History

Grade 11 Unit1 Lesson1 U.S. History

Grade 11 Unit1 Lesson1 U.S. History

Fall of the Berlin

Grade 11 Unit1 Lesson1 U.S. History

Grade 11 Unit1 Lesson1 U.S. History

Grade 11 Unit1 Lesson1 U.S. History

Cold War Map 1980

Grade 11 Unit1 Lesson1 U.S. History

Grade 11 Unit1 Lesson1 U.S. History

US Enters the Korean Conflict

Grade 11 Unit1 Lesson1 U.S. History

Grade 11 Unit1 Lesson1 U.S. History

Cold War Text

Glasnost and Perestoika

Grade 11 Unit1 Lesson1 U.S. History

Researched by Sasha Gitomirski

Grade 11 Unit1 Lesson1 U.S. History

Grade 11 Unit1 Lesson1 U.S. History

FALL OF THE BERLIN WALL

Grade 11 Unit1 Lesson1 U.S. History

Grade 11 Unit1 Lesson1 U.S. History

ATOMIC BOMB DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY (I)

Grade 11 Unit1 Lesson1 U.S. History

Grade 11 Unit1 Lesson1 U.S. History

Grade 11 Unit1 Lesson1 U.S. History

FIRST INDOCHINA WAR

Grade 11 Unit1 Lesson1 U.S. History

Grade 11 Unit1 Lesson1 U.S. History

THE CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY

Grade 11 Unit1 Lesson1 U.S. History

Grade 11 Unit1 Lesson1 U.S. History

Grade 11 Unit1 Lesson1 U.S. History

THE NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY ORGANIZATION (NATO)

Grade 11 Unit1 Lesson1 U.S. History

Grade 11 Unit1 Lesson1 U.S. History

SENATOR JOSEPH MCCARTHY, MCCARTHYISM, AND THE WITCH HUNT

Grade 11 Unit1 Lesson1 U.S. History

Grade 11 Unit1 Lesson1 U.S. History

THE WARSAW PACT

Grade 11 Unit1 Lesson1 U.S. History

Grade 11 Unit1 Lesson1 U.S. History

THE KHMER ROUGE AND CAMBODIA

Grade 11 Unit1 Lesson1 U.S. History

Grade 11 Unit1 Lesson1 U.S. History

FALL OF THE SOVIET UNION

Grade 11 Unit1 Lesson1 U.S. History

Grade 11 Unit1 Lesson1 U.S. History