People's Democratic Republic of Algeria

Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research

Echahid Hamma Lakhdar University, El-Oued
Faculty of Arts and Languages
Department of English Language

The United States Containment Policy as a Defence

Strategy During the Cold War:Korean War

Dissertation Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements

for a Master Degree in Literature and Civilization

Submitted By: Supervisor:

Asma BENNOUH Mr.Tarek SEMMARI

Bouchra ZITOUNA HAMED

Board of Examiners

Chairman/President: Dr.Mohamed GHEDEIR IBRAHIM University of El-Oued

Supervisor:
Mr.Tarek SEMMARI University of El-Oued
Examiner:
Dr.Mohammed NAOUA University of El-Oued

Academic Year: 2091/2020

 II

DEDICATION

In the Name of Allah, the most merciful, the most compassionate all praise be to
Allah

I would like to take this opportunity to give warm thanks:

To my brothers Abd el kader, Akram, Abd el chakour, Mohammed;

To my sisters, Wissam, Hidaya, and Ritadj;

To my father Mohammed Lamin and all my family member each by his

name.who have been so supportive;

To the pure sole of my beloved mother god bless her;

To all my beloved friends particularly my best friends and my roommates

Naziha, Hala;

So special thanks to my future husband Zaki for all his support, love and
respect.

AsmaBennouh
 III

DEDICATION

I thank Allah for giving me the strength and patience to accomplish this work .

I dedicate this humble work :

To the light of my life , my Parents , for their love, support , and tenderness.

To my soulmate , my Husband , for his help , encouragement , and care.

To my lovely sisters , and my brother. I wish to see them in higher places

To my life , my daughter , Layan .

Love you all.

BouchraZitounaHamed
 IV

Acknowledgement

First and foremost, we would acknowledge our limitless thanks to God for giving us the
power and patience to finish this work.

We would like to thank all our teachers in the University of HammaLakhder and
elsewhere,and special thanks to our supervisor Mr.Tarek SEMMARI for his guidance
throughout this work.

We are grateful to the honourable to the president of juryDr.Mohamed GHEDEIR IBRAHIM

and the examiner Dr. Mohammed NAOUA who took the task of reading and correcting this
dissertation.

We would like to take this opportunity to express our immense gratitude toour classmate
Samir KIRED for his constant support, stimulating suggestions at various stages of the
research development.

Notwithstanding all the above support for this research, any errors and/or omissions are
solely our own.
 V

Abstract

During the cold war, the United States faced so many serious foreign policy issues; the most
divisive one, of course, was the war in Korea. However, the overriding ambiguity of Asia's
relation to the U.S. national interest was clouding the study of American policy in Asia. The
Containment policy which was planned for Europe, was extended to Asia to cover the
Korean War. Some studies on the evaluation of the United States Containment policy in Asia
shows that it has created problems for the American-Asian relations rather than solving them.
This research attempts to examine the American application of the containment policy
throughout the Cold War era particularly during the American involvement in the Korean
War between 1950-1953.The method adopted to achieve this purpose is the descriptive-
historical method which helps us describe the historical events of the U.S. interference Korea.
The results of the study indicate that the ultimate goal of the United States of America was
the prevention of the communist spread in the world under the policy of containment. The
American administration employed several economic and political means to achieve the
above aim in Europe. Nevertheless, the practice of the same policy was totally different in
Asia. Thither, mainly in Korea, the Americans based on military forces to roll back the Soviet
Union‟s Communism. Hence, the Korean War represents the turning point of the
Containment policy.

Key words: The Cold War, Communism, Containment, The Korean War, The Soviet Union,
The United States.
 VI

List of Abbreviations and Acronyms

CCP :Chines Communist Party.

DM : Deuche Mark

DMZ : Demilitarized Zone

DPRK: Department People‟ s Republic of Korea.

ECA : Economic Cooperation Administration.

ERP: European Recovery Program.

KPA: Korea People‟s Army.

MDL: Military Demarcation Line.

NATO: North Atlantic Treaty Organization.

NPG : Nuclear Planning Group.

OEEC : Organization for European Economic Cooperation.

PRC : People‟ s Republic of China.

ROK : Government of Republic of Korea.

UN: United Nation.

UNC : United Nation Command.

USA: United States of America.

USSR: Union of Soviet Socialist Republic.

 VII

List of Figures

Figure 01:Distribution of American Aid in Gifts AmongEuropean Countries…………..24

 VIII

Table of Contents

Dedication …………………………………………………………………………………...I

Acknowledgment.…………………………………………………………………………...IV

Abstract……..………………………………………………………………………………..V

List of Abbreviations and Acronyms………………………………………….…………..VI

List of

Figures………………………………….………………………………………….VIII

Table of Content………………………………………………………………………….VIII

General Introduction...………………………………………………………………………1

1. Background of the Study…………………………………………………….…………..1

2. Statement of the Problem………………………………………………………………..2

3. Aim of the Study………………………………………………………………………..2

4. Research Questions……………………………………………………………..……….2

5. Research Hypotheses……………………………………………………………..……...2

6. Research Methodology…………………………………………………………….……2

7. Structure of the Dissertation …………………………………………………………...3

Chapter One:
The Historical Context of Cold War

1.Introduction…………………………………………………………..…………..............6

2. Origins of the War…………………………………………...………………...…….......6

3. Ideological Conflict of Superpowers Communism vs. Capitalism……………................7

4. ColdWar in Europe ……………………………...…………………………..….............9

4.1. Truman Doctrine……………………………….............................………...…..9

4.2. Marshall Plan ………………………………………………...……………..91

 IX

4.3. Berlin Blockade………………………………………..…............................91

4.4. North Atlantic Treaty Organisation……………………………………..…..12

4.4.1. The Washington Treaty…………………………………………….….12

4.1.2. Definition of NATO …………………………………………………..12

4.4.3. Origins of North Atlantic Treaty Organisation ………………………13

5. Towards a Hot War in Asia……………………………………………........................14

5.1. Japan: from Enemy to Cold War ally…………………...………………………..14

5.2. Communist China…………………………...……………………………………15

5.3. Vietnam War……………………………………………………………….……..16

6. Conclusion………………………………………………………………..…………....16

Chapter Two
US Containment Policy as a Defence Strategy during the Cold War

1. Introduction………………………………………………………..………...…...……11

2. Concept of Containment ……………………………………………………………...11

2.1. Formulating Containment…………………………………..…………………….11

2.2. Definition of Containment………………………………………………………..21

2.3. Main Objectives of Containment…….......…………………….............................29

3. Implementing Containment………………………………...…………........................29

3.1. The Economic Dimension of the American Containment policy……….……….29

3.2. The Political Dimension of the American Containment Policy………............…25

4. Conclusion……………………………………………………………………............27

Chapter Three
The Korean War a Turning Point in the Containment Policy

1. Introduction……………………………...…………………………….………….......01

2. The Outbreak of the Korean War………………………………………………...…....01

 X

2.1. The Korean War and its Origins…………………..………………………………01

2.1.1. TheDivision of Korean Peninsula …………………………...…………….32

2.1.2. Creating the 38th Parallel…………………………......................................32

2.2. Factors of U.S Intervention in the Korean War…….……………….................30

2.3. United Nations Security Council Resolution…………………………………....30

2.4. Comparison of Military Forces of the Two Koreas…………….………………34

3. War Crimes…………………………………………………………….…………...34

3.1. Civilian Deaths and Massacres………………………………........……………34

3.2. BodoLeague Anti-Communism Massacre……………………….…..................34

3.3. Prisoners of War…………………………………...…………......….................34

4. Korean War, a Turning Point in the U.S. Containment Policy in Asia ……….........35

5. Conclusion………………………………………………………………………....38

General Conclusion……………………………………………………………..………41

References…………………………….………………………………………….………43
General Introduction
General Introduction...………………………………………………………………………1

1. Background of the Study…………………………………………………...…………..1

2. Statement of the Problem………………………………………………………………..2

3. Aim of the Study………………………………………………………………………..2

4. Research Questions……………………………………………………………..……….2

5. Research Hypothesis……………………………………………………………..……...2

6. Research Methodology…………………………………………………………….……2

7. Structure of the Dissertation ……………………………………………………… …...3

 1

1. Background of the Study

During the Second World War, the United States and the Soviet Union fought together
against the Axis threat. However, they were suspicious of each other. During the last months
of the war in Europe, the United States and the Soviets were advancing towards Berlin in the
opposite directions. In the post-war years, the two countries defined themselves as
superpowers. The two countries, however, have different ideologies, different economic
systems, and different political systems. The United States is a country advocating an
ideology based on democratic values and an economic system based on profit and private
property (Capitalism) while the Soviet Union is a country based on autocratic values, ruled
by a single person, and on a Communist system .
After the war, the Soviet leader Joseph Stalin did not remove his troops from the
"liberated" Eastern Europe. Instead, Soviet troops and Communists controlled this eastern
part of Europe and henceforth we will talk about the countries of Eastern Europe, which were
under the Soviet control, and the democratic Western European countries, allied capitalists of
the United States. Stalin's goal was to spread his communist ideology internationally, starting
from Europe. In 1946, Churchill, the British Prime Minister, named this division between
Eastern and Western Europe: The Iron Curtain. Relations between the Americans and the
Soviets would get cold, hence the expression: The Cold War started to be used in the world
of politics .
The Cold War is a war of ideological influence between the United States and its allies
and the Soviet Union and its satellite countries. The two superpowers would always clash in
foreign lands, never on their respective territories.
During the Cold War the United States of America based its policy towards the Soviets
on Containment, a policy which was firstly mentioned in the “X-Article” by the Foreign
Service Officer George Foster Kennan in 1947. when he declared that the Soviet pressure
against the free institutions of the Western World necessitated containment; Kennan‟s ideas
became the basis of the Truman Administration‟s foreign policy .
2. Statement of the Problem
The Containment policy created a huge competition between the United Stated and the
Soviet Union as it contributed to arms race. In order to preserve its interests abroad, the
United States of America involved itself in many external affairs as the European case and
faced many serious foreign policy issues; the most pressing and divisive issue, of course, is
the war in both Korea and Vietnam. The debate on the Korean War had to be about the
 2

American purposes and interests in Asia generally. Yet, many historians have questioned
almost all aspects of American policy in Asia. Even with the big number of the existing
works that pay attention to the change that has happened in the American policy in the
Korean peninsula, the topic is still researchable, and some questions still arise. And despite
the fact that these studies were very helpful in understanding the Korea‟s position in U.S.
policy planning.
3. Aim of the Study
In this work, we shall introduce the strategy that was developed by George Kennan and
how this policy had been applied by Harry S Truman's administration in Europe. After that,
we will move to the policy application in Asia particularly during the American involvement
in Korea. We will also try to clarify how the Containment policy was different in Korea, and
to explore the reasons behind that transformation.
4.Research Questions
The objectives of the study are directed by the following questions:
1- What are the reasons behind the US involvement in the Korean War?
2- Why was the U.S. Containment policy different in Korea?
5. Research Hypotheses
These questions seem complex ones and may not have single absolute answers.
Therefore, we put the following hypotheses in the light of the present research.
1- The U.S. involvement in the Korean War might be to serve the American
interests in Asia.
2-May be the United States of America changes its policy towards Korea because
the Korean peninsula was a special case.
6.Research Methodology
The Korean War has brought out the need to find the answers. In order to begin to
answer the questions of this research, it is necessary to go beyond Asia as the area of study.
To understand the basic principle in America‟s Asian policy of containment for most of the
post-war period, it is necessary to begin at its roots in Europe . The method adopted to
conduct this research is a descriptive-historical method. The research intends to describe the
United States Containment Policy and the historical events of the Korean War. It also seeks
to describe the political strategies and practices adopted by the Truman‟s Administration in
both Europe and Korea.
 3

7. Structure of the Dissertation

The layout of the dissertation is divided into three chapters. The first chapter revolves
around the origins of the Cold War, the ideological struggle of Communism and Capitalism,
and the Cold War in Europe with the Truman doctrine, the Marshall Plan, Berlin blockade
and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization It also., points to the effective areas of the Cold
War in Asia such as Japan, China and Vietnam. The second chapter sheds light on the
concept of Containment, its formulation, its definition, and its main objectives. It further
highlights the implementation of the Containment policy, both economically and politically.
The last chapter contains the outbreak of the Korean War and its origins, it also points out
some factors of the US intervention in the Korean War, the United Nations Security Council
resolution and a comparison of military forces of the two Koreas. It also presents the Korean
War crimes such as the civilian deaths and massacres, the Bodo League anti-communism
Massacre and the prisoners of the war, than, it explains the turning point in the U.S
Containment policy in Asia during the Korean War.
 4

CHAPTER ONE
The Historical Context of Cold War
 5

Chapter One:
The Historical Context of Cold War

1. Introduction…………………………………………………………..…………..............6

2. Origins of the War…………………………………………...………………...…….......6

3. Ideological Conflict of Superpowers Communism vs Capitalism…………….................7

4. Cold War in Europe ……………………………...…………………………..….............9

4.1. Truman Doctrine……………………………….............................………...…..9

4.2. Marshall Plan ………………………………………………...……………..91

4.3. Berlin Blockade………………………………………..…............................91

4.4. North Atlantic Treaty Organisation……………………………………..…..12

4.4.1. The Washington Treaty…………………………………………….….12

4.1.2. Definition of NATO …………………………………………………..12

4.4.3. Origins of North Atlantic Treaty Organisation ………………………13

5. Towards a Hot War in Asia……………………………………………........................14

5.1. Japan: from enemy to Cold War ally……………………………………………..14

5.2. Communist China…………………………...……………………………………15

5.3. Vietnam War……………………………………………………………….……..16

6. Conclusion………………………………………………………………..…………....16
 6

1. Introduction
For forty-five years, the Cold War, as distinct from a hot one, was at the center of
world politics. It began with the aftermath surrender of Hitler‟s Germany, the Cold War was
a lengthy struggle between the United States of America and the Soviet Union and their
respective ideologies. It followed the Second World War and persisted from roughly 1945
through 1991 .
The Cold War really began with British Prime Minister Winston Churchill‟s speech
in 1946 in which he described an “iron curtain” which separated the East and the West; the
East was the Soviet Union and its countries of influence and the West includes the United
States and its allies. The two superpowers were competing to gain the world‟s leadership.
Even though the conflict was very ferocious, it witnessed no armed forces.
The present chapter presents the origins of Cold War, the ideological struggle of
Communism and Capitalism. It also points the Cold War policies in Europe as the Truman
Doctrine, the Berlin Blockade, and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. Moreover, it
defines the most effective areas of expansion in Asia.

2. The Origins Of the Cold War

After the end of the Second World War, the two remaining powers in the world came
up against each other, due to the inability to reach a compromise or find a common ground.
The United States and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republic (USSR) began a comforting
battle of ideologies and policies.
Historians offered different interpretations of the outbreak of Cold War; those
interpretations which were shaped by the ongoing Cold War had deep conflicts ideologically
and philosophically. Some defenders of US policies pin the outbreak of the Cold War on the
Soviet Union, according to this view; US officials wanted to accommodate with the Soviets
but slowly they realize that this was impossible because of the Kremlin‟s drive for world
domination. (Leffler & Painter, 2005)
Some scholars relate the origin of the Cold War to the time when Hitler invaded Russia.
Because the relationship between Roosevelt and Stalin was very good, Roosevelt the
President of USA sent armaments to Russia. Nevertheless, after the defeat of Germany,
England and America suspected Stalin when he wanted to implement Communist ideology in
Poland, Hungary, Bulgaria and Rumania. Winston Churchill, the Prime Minister of England
in his „Fulton Speech‟ on March 5th 1946 said that Soviet Russia was covered by an Iron
Curtain. Which led Stalin to think deeply. As a result, suspicions became wider between
 7

Soviet Russia and Western countries. Thus, the Cold War took place.
(https://www.academia.edu/32138562/)
However, most historians viewed the origins of the Cold War as the periodthat
immediately followed World War II. Russian's writers argue that it began with the October
Revolution in Russia, in 1917, when the Bolsheviks took power. (Gaddis, 1990)
3. The Ideological Conflict of Superpowers: Communism vs. Capitalism
The Cold War witnessed a great development after the end of the Second World War; it
was represented as a political conflict, military tension, and economic competition between
the United States of America and the Soviet Union. The Cold War arose due to an ideological
conflict where the two theories Capitalism and Communism were extremely opposites. Thus,
it was a debate battle between the two extreme ideologies that represent contrary ways of
thinking. One is farthest individualistic that promotes civil rights and free trade, which is
Capitalism. While the other one believes in putting the society before self, calls for complete
government control, and lack of civil liberties, which is Communism. Therefore, the two
could not stand together and the Cold War was a direct result of this. The world was divided
into two blocks during the “Communism verses Capitalism” clash. Both ideologies looked to
expand, so they both had to fight each other to exist.
Communists started a revolution; they believed that other countries should be run
in a communist way and that Communism was required to expand and to achieve its idea of a
perfect world. On the other hand, Capitalists also wanted to grow and spread. In the early
beginning of the struggle between the Soviet Union and the United States of America, The
Americans disseminate an evil image of Communism. In fact, Communism was not as the
Americans represented it; it was just another way of running a country. Both Capitalism and
Communism have their own ideas on how a government should be organised, and the way
the governors should govern their people. Communism insists on the government ownership
of lands and properties where all the means of production and other resources should be
owned by the State, which means the whole community of people. It is a system where the
worker rises up and takes control of government and means of production; it aims at equality
in terms of rights, privilege and material possession; and reduce individual ownership of
lands or any vital resources. Instead, all lands and resources, which enable the production of
goods and services, will be owned by one and all. Everything will be shared. All decisions
about production will be made by the whole community by democratic means, and will be
taken according to what is good for all. There will be equal wages for all and a call for
worldwide revolution. (Bouaziz, 2010; Hess, n.d.).
 8

On the other hand, Capitalism is an economy based on private ownership of

wealth; it is defined by investments that are decided privately by prices; production and
distribution of goods determined by competition. Scott (2006) defined Capitalism as:

the indirect system of governance based on a complex and continually

evolving political bargain in which private actors are empowered by a

political authority to own and control the use of property for private

gain subject to a set of laws and regulations. Workers are free to

work for wages, capital is free to earn a return, and both labour and

capital are free to enter and exit from various lines of business.

(p.04)

Capitalism is an economic system in which the means of production of goods and

services are owned by private people, and operated for individual profit. It believes in
privatelypossession of lands and means of production; each man can got to earn his worth
and can get his wages according to his benefit. The main share of the profits earned from a
business will go to the person who owns the means of production; whereas the workers who
are responsible for running the business can get a small share.
Cold War knew different battle areas between Communism and Capitalism; the
Truman doctrine that was issued on March 12th 1947, was an important first step as an
attempt to fight the growing spread of Communism that was taken by the United States.
Another place in which Communism and Capitalism would battle is Korea; the Korean War
was not based on the issue of power, but on which ideology would have control and then
spread further. The Vietnam War was yet another example of war created due to the
difference in ideologies between the two superpowers.
The ideological conflict that led to clashes, disagreement and struggle, showed clearly
that the two superpowers had different goals. The Soviet Union sought to expand its sphere of
influence through military occupation of other countries. The United States looked after
economic and diplomatic policies of containment to stop the spread of Communism and to
strengthen its sphere of influence as reflected in the Truman Doctrine and the Marshall Plan.
These conflicts did not allow either ideology to exist peacefully while the other existed. The
Cold War was inevitable as both ideologies needed to expand their sphere of influence in the
 9

world; and due to these differences between the two nations, many countries had to choose an
ideological side, either Capitalism or Communism.
4. Cold War in Europe
4.1. The Truman Doctrine
Harry Truman had a major role in shaping Containment, and America‟s understanding
of Cold War (Edwards Spalding, 2006) . Levering (2016) stated that Truman lacked to
Franklin D. Roosevelt‟s self-confidence , public speaking skills , and experience in foreign
relations. He believed that American foreign policy had to oppose World Communism, and
provide financial and military aid to the countries threatened by Soviet Expansion. (Levering,
2016)
Winston Churchill‟s speech of March 1946 was given at West Minister Colleges, in
Truman‟s home in the state of Missouri. Moreover, he spoke about the developing of Cold
War in Asia and Europe. When He stated the power of the US and its responsibility in
defending the West and its civilization, and the rise of the military strength of United
Nations. As Harry Truman, he called to defend freedom and the rights of individuals. He also
reasoned that the United States was obliged to fight the Soviet Union because it became the
leader of the New World .( Edwards Spalding ,2006).
Churchill believed that previous policies could not counter the Communist threat.
In this passage below, he convinced, said that Cold War manifested new political dimensions:
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. (Edwards Spalding, 2006 , p.39).

In order to create a good economy of the USA, Wallace agreed about the preparation
of the Bretton Woods Agreement in 1945. In addition, he suggested that the Soviet Union
would participate in the secretary of commerce but Truman did not accept that. (Edwards
Spalding, 2006).
 10

In Clifford Memorandum or “American Relations with the Soviet Union” report as

the theoretical basis of containment. President Truman requested Counsel Clark Clifford to
write for several reasons. However the Clifford report started by stating US-USSR relations
and the problem facing USA. According to Clifford to report , the Soviets were striving for
greater control ; he was not convinced at first of the need to consider the Soviet Ideology
.The final Clifford report gave a clear picture about the political role locked in the Cold War,
which gave great help to the president to construct the political thought of containment .(
Edwards Spalding ,2006).
In 1947, Great Britain informed the USA that could not obtain its responsibilities any
more upon Greece and Turkey. President Truman shows the importance of the independence
of Turkey from Soviet demands but he could not implement a policy about Greece since the
British ruled it after World War Two .Truman had explained: “If Greece was lost, Turkey
would become an untenable outpost in a sea of Communism similarly. If Turkey yielded to
Soviet demands, the position of Greece would be extremely endangered” (Edwards Spalding,
2006, p.64). Under the fear of the spread of Communism in Turkey and Greece, President
Marshall authorized the recommendations for Greek-Turkish aid. This strategic policy is
known as the Truman Doctrine. It is the First formal Presidential Doctrine since the Monroe
Doctrine of 1823.
In March 1947, President Truman defined the circumstances in Greece and Turkey
and the types of actions needed. He thought that they both were moving in the direction of
Democracy but with no chance under the communist control. The Truman policy represented
a new dimension in American foreign policy. (Edwards Spalding, 2006).

4.2. Marshall Plan :

Harry Truman and George Marshall shared the need to rehabilitate a war–raked
Europe; He delegated to Marshall the announcement of The European Recovery Program
(ERP) in June 1947. What he called Marshall Plan became the next development in the
strategy of Containment and Post-War Liberal Internationalism. (Edwards Spalding , 2006).
Europe was suffering another harsh winter and further economic Despair; The
Communist parties in France and Italy abused it to make new advances, and by 1947 and
1948, it was unclear if those two countries could prevent Communism.
On June 5, 1947, Billions of Dollars were involved in The Program. Henry Wallace
favoured the European Recovery Program if it were removed from the Cold War Conflict.
 11

The Marshall Plan offered economic and political aid for recovery to promote liberal
Democracy. (Edwards Spalding, 2006).
4.3. The Berlin Blockade and the Airlift of 1948/1949
At the end of World War II, defeated Germany became a battleground for the Cold
War; it was divided into four occupied zones by the occupying powers, Britain, France, the
Soviet Union, and the United States. Although each power took charge of managing affairs
in its own zone. The three Western Powers agreed at a conference in London in February
1948 to blend their three zones in Western Germany into a single independent German state.
(Altman, 2014). Despite the fact that Berlin was located at the center of the Soviet Zone in
Eastern Germany, it was divided as well. The Western part of the city in Allied hands, and
the east under Soviet Union control. (Altman, 2014).
The newly, unified West German state incorporated with a single stable
currency. The German Mark and the Deutsche Mark (DM) were introduced in all the Western
zones and replaced the Reich Mark, which had lost all its value, without informing their
Soviet equivalents. (CVCE, 2016). In response, the Soviets introduced their own new
currency in East Berlin just 24 hours before the West Mark was to go into circulation, and
denounced what it called the Anglo-American policy of acting without consultation by
imposing a total blockade on West Berlin. Food supplies and electricity were cut, access to
Berlin by road, rail routes and water was impossible until 12 May 1949. (CVCE, 2016).
Western Powers revenged for the blockade by stopping all trade with East Germany on July
26, 1948. The Soviet Union probably wanted to make the British, French and Americans
leave Berlin but the Allied airlift introduced by General Lucius D. Clay, was the appropriate
American countermeasure. (CVCE, 2016)
In June 26, 1948, two days after the blockade was announced, U.S. and British
planes carried out the largest air relief operation in history, more than 270,000 flights over 11
months. Each day, thousands of aircraft brought food, fuel and other essential goods to the
city. Every day , over 13 000 tonnes of goods were delivered The division of Europe into
two blocs was confirmed and Berlin became one of the main areas of confrontation and
tension between East and West. (CVCE, 2016)
On 12 May 1949, Soviet authorities lifted the blockade and conceding defeat,
but the air supply operation continued until September 30, 1949 .When Stalin decided to end
the blockade, the political division of the city was established. Two separate administrations
were put in place, and the Soviets began to merge the Social-Democratic and Communist
Parties. In December 1948,democratic elections were held in West Berlin. The result was a
 12

victory for the Western powers. The Western opinion accepted the inevitable partition of
Germany because of the success of the Berlin Airlift . The divided city of Berlin became the
showcase for the Western and Soviet models on either side of the Iron Curtain. Confronted
with the Soviet threat, the idea of German equipment and its integration into a united
European structure became more and more important in Western eyes. (CVCE, 2016)

4.4. North Atlantic Treaty Organization 1949

4.4.1. The Washington Treaty
Relations between the US and USSR were defined by hatred and disagreement even
after lifting the blockade in May 1949. In January of the same year, the US president Harry S.
Truman called for an alliance of nations for defensive purposes in the North Atlantic. In
April, representatives from Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Great Britain, Iceland, Italy,
Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, and Portugal joined the United States to sign the
North Atlantic Treaty agreement. This Treaty is considered as the legal and contract for the
Alliance that was created within the framework of Article 51 of the United Nations Charter,
which confirms the right to individual or collective defence for independent states. By this
agreement, the Allies aims to promote peaceful and friendly relations throughout the North
Atlantic Area. After the ratification of all signatory states, the Treaty came into action on 24
August 1949, (The NATO handBook, 1998)
Cronin (2019) argues that the treaty content was a result of several months of
discussions and negotiations. Members commit each other to share the risk, responsibilities
and benefits of the collective security they agreed on that any armed attack against one or
more of them, should be considered an attack against them all. They became a unique
community sharing values and principles such as individual liberty, democracy, human rights
and the rule of law.
4.4.2. Definition of NATO
In a simple definition, Cronin (2019) stated:
North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) is a military alliance

consisting of the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, and

more than 20 other member countries. NATO seeks to protect the

freedom and security of its member countries through political and

 13

military efforts. The organization also participates in a variety of

international peacekeeping and crisis management efforts. (p.1).

Furthermore, The United States, Canada, and several Western European nations
created The North Atlantic Treaty Organization in 1949 in order to provide collective
security against the Soviet Union; it was an inter-governmental organisation in which
member countries have their full sovereignty and independence. It provides the structure
needed to facilitate conferencing and collaboration between them, in political, military and
economic as well as scientific and other non-military fields. The NATO also provides the
form in which the member state consult together on any issues they may choose to rise and
take decisions on political and military matters affecting their security. (The NATO
handBook, 1998).
4.4.3. Origins of North Atlantic Treaty Organisation
Gejdošová (2015) argues that, the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation was established
as a response to the threat posed by the Soviet Union, but that was not the only reason as it is
to be understood. The organization was also created to build a strong North American
presence on the continent that will help preventing the revival of the national militarism in
Europe, and to encourage European political integration.
By the end of WWII, the USA abandoned its policy of isolationism and decided
to fully engage in European affairs. Aid provided through the US-funded Marshall Plan and
other means achieved a degree of economic stabilisation. The European countries were
struggling to rebuild their economies and ensure their security. The economic stabilization
brought enough confidence in European countries; however, before they would begin trading
with each other, starting military and political cooperation was important to stabilize the
current situation. The Western European countries felt threatened by the Soviet expansion
and consequently they decided to start projects with the aim of greater military cooperation
and collective defence (Gejdošová, 2015).
The convention of the Washington Treaty on April 4th, 1949 that twelve countries
had agreed on, and introduced a common security system based on a partnership amongst
them. This Treaty itself is rather short as it contains only 14 articles. The member countries
commit themselves not to enter into any other international commitments, which might
contradict with the treaty, undertake to share the risks and responsibilities of collective
security (Gejdošová, 2015).
 14

As the U.S joined NATO, its foreign policy significantly changed. The United
States could not revert to the isolationist attitude and it became a part of the world
community. The U.S. also became the leader of NATO and was sometimes required to
intervene in international disagreements. Similarly, NATO helped strengthen U.S. security,
especially during the Cold War era. As part of NATO, the U.S. and other members now
spoke with a collective voice that required the Soviets to listen. (Gejdošová, 2015)
5. Towards a Hot War in Asia 1945_1950
5.1. Japan: from Enemy to Cold War Ally
Guthrie-Shimizu (2010) stated that Japan was occupied by the Allied Powers, led by the
United States at the end of the Second World War and Japan, for the first time in its history,
faced occupation by foreign troops and reconstitution of its government at the command of
external authorities. As the nominally allied occupation of the defeated empire began, the
post-World War II histories of the United States and Japan became inseparable. The atomic
bombs, of Hiroshima and Nagasaki (1945) foreshadowed in the nuclear age and Japan‟s quest
for escape in the post-war world, where visions of the “American Century” now reigned
supreme.
As time and event passed the epic struggles for national freedom and independence raised by
Asian and other Third World peoples in the aftermath of World War II. Those struggles were
quite distinct from the temporally overlapping contest for power and influence being waged
by the United States and the Soviet Union, doubtless would have transpired with or without a
Cold War. (McMahon, 2003). Decolonization and the Cold War were evaluated to become
inextricably linked. Yet the latter conflict occur, and its summing character inevitably formed
the temper, pace, and ultimate outcome of the former.
McMahon (2003) argues that as the post-war era dawned; the Soviets initially pursued an
opportunistic and cautious policy in East Asia. Stalin sought to reclaim all territory once held
by Czarist Russia, to re-establish economic concessions in Manchuria and Outer Mongolia,
and to ensure Soviet security along the 4,150-mile Sino-Soviet border. Those aims pointed
towards the need to keep China friendly but weak to avoid any major clashes with the
Western powers. For its part, the United States advanced a more wide-ranging and ambitious
foreign policy agenda, predicated upon defanging Japan, turning the Pacific into an American
lake, transforming China into a dependable and stable ally, and fostering a moderate solution
to the colonial problem.
US planners considered itvery important that Japan never again be allowed to
threaten of the region‟s peace. The American goal was to use its power to remake Japanese
 15

society by destroying all legacies of militarism while helping to promote the development of
liberal, democratic institutions. The United States succeeded to a remarkable extent, As East–
West tensions in Europe mounted, the US occupation regime in Japan shifted from focusing
on reforming and demilitarizing a former enemy state to a preoccupation with facilitating its
speedy economic recovery. (McMahon, 2003).
McMahon (2003) expressed that US strategists judged a stable, economically
spirited, pro-American Japan to be even as essential to overall US policy objectives in post-
war Asia due to its potential as the engine of East Asian economic recovery and because of
its intrinsic strategic worth. From 1947 onwards, the Harry S Truman administration‟s
preponderant Asian policy goal was to orient a stable, prosperous Japan to the West .In
December 1949, Secretary of State Dean Acheson equally framed Japan‟s strategic
importance in terms of the power balance between East and West. Were Japan added to the
communist bloc. He stressed:"the Soviets would acquire skilled manpower and industrial
potential capable of significantly altering the balance of world power If Tokyo fell under
communist influence" (McMahon, 2003,p.38-39)

5.2. Communist China

After the foundation of the Chinese Communist Party by Mao Zedong in 1921 ,
which determined to break the legacies of the old China and make a fresh start in china‟s
foreign affairs ( Chen , 2001 ). China leverage in the Cold War determined by its size, with
the largest number of population. It„s role was central, the observation made by political
scientists Andrew Nathan and Robert S. Ross certainly makes good sense:“During the Cold
War, China was the only major country that stood at the intersection of the two superpowers
camps , a target of influence and enmity for both.”(Chen, 2001, p.02)
The US Policy was not successful in China, some conservative critics blamed Roosevelt
for "selling out" China at Yalta. The number two leader of the Chinese Communist Party
(CCP) , Liu Shaoqi in a meeting with Joseph Stalin decided that China‟s duty would be the
promotion of the Eastern revolution .China becomes the first enemy to the United States after
its involvement in Taiwan Strait Crises and Vietnam War(Chen , 2001; Levering,2016).
 16

5.3. Vietnam War

The Japanese conquer Vietnam during WWII just after its independence from France. A
Communist leader Ho Chi Minh founded the Indochina Communist Party to fight
theJapanese and get its independent before the WWII had ended. The French came back in
1945 controlling the south of Vietnam and the north by the Viet Minh supported by
Communist China .(Walsh , 2013)
In response to the Viet Cong “Guerrilla war” against the South Vietnam .The Americans
helped by supplying money, food, and equipment to the Villages. The Role of the US
Containment during this war was sending 500 Million Dollars a year to the French. Either in
1955, Americans helped NguDinh Diem with 1.6 Billion Dollars. As Robert McNamara, US
Defence Secretary explaining in 1964 why he supported the policy of sending troops to
Vietnam: “First is the simple fact that South Vietnam a member of the free world family, is
striving to preserve its independence from Communist attack .Second, South East Asia has
great significance in the forward defence of the USA”.(Walsh, 2013, p.112)

6. Conclusion
The post-World War II period was known as the era of decline of the old great powers
and the rise of two superpowers; the Soviet Union and the United States of America. After
being allies during World War II, they became rivals on the world‟s leadership. Both
superpowers had no desire to wage a war. However, each block wanted to spread its beliefs,
this rivalry resulted on what is known as the Cold War, where there was no direct military
confrontations but a War of ideologies Communism and Capitalism. Communists extended in
Germany, Eastern and central Europe what makes the American leaders attempted to prevent
any of the soviet's encroachments beyond the areas they had already occupied using the
policy of containment. The Truman Doctrine seeks to employ its financial strength to
influence Western Europeusing the Marshall Plan funds. The Soviet leaders created the
Berlin Blockade as a response to what is called the Anglo-American policy of acting without
consultation. In response, the United States of America founded the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization which makes the Communists made no other moves in Europe. In Asia, the
Cold war reached a climax and the relationship between the two superpowers became more
complicated, the ideological and political clash developed into military confrontations
particularly in Korea and Vietnam.
 17

Chapter Two
US Containment Policy as a Defence Strategy
during the Cold War
 18

Chapter Two
US Containment Policy as a Defence Strategy during the Cold War

1. Introduction………………………………………………………..………...…...……11

2. Concept of Containment ……………………………………………………………...11

2.1. Formulating Containment…………………………………..…………………….11

2.2. Definition of Containment………………………………………………………..21

2.3. Main objectives of Containment……………………………….............................29

3. Implementing Containment………………………………...…………........................29

3.1. The Economic Dimension of the American Containment policy……….……….29

3.2. The Political Dimension of the American Containment Policy………............…25

4. Conclusion……………………………………………………………………............27
 19

1. Introduction
During the Cold War, the United States of America aimed to hinder the spread of
communism, and to prevent attacks of The Soviet Union on America and on its allies. For
this purpose, American leaders, in addition to the military defensive forces, they had worked
on creating military and political alliances, which help to exchange support in case of war For
USA and for the member countries of those leagues as well. American leaders, for the same
reason mentioned above, had also adopted another strategy to stop the communist spread and
the Soviet control in Eastern Europe by developing a policy of containment. The United
States would hinder the spread of communism to other countries, even though it would not
challenge communism where it already existed.
The first application of Containment Strategy was in the Truman Doctrine of
1947, which guaranteed immediate economic and military aid to Greece and Turkey. The US
leaders believed that economic aid would create strong European allies and future trading
partners for the United States. The Containment Policy is based on building an international
economic system to achieve the economic prosperity.
This chapter will try to provide the main aspects of the containment concept: its
formulation, its definition, its main objectives and its implementation in both economic and
political dimensions.

2. The Concept of Containment

2.1. Formulating Containment
In early 1946, the diplomat George F. Kennan helped to clarify the situation between the
Soviet Union and the United States. Kennan was considered to be a leading figure on Russian
affairs, he joined the Foreign Service in 1925. The long-term experience he gained had won
him the reputation that by the end of the war he was one of the most qualified Russian expert
who worked at the US embassy in Moscow. Kennan thought that Communism had corrupted
all the Russian past. In February 1946, he sent an eight-thousand-word telegram
toWashington, D.C. known as the “long telegram” representing the Soviet Union policy
(Leffler, n.d.). Kennan wrote that Soviets used the idea of capitalist encirclement as an excuse
to their tendency. The Soviets would seek to expand everywhere. Moreover, they would not
negotiate in good faith; they understood only the logic of force. (Leffler, n.d.)
The Long telegram was greeted warmly in Washington. Kenan‟s attitude attracted
attention of many influential career diplomats at the U.S. Department of State. Among them
the General George C. Marshall who became Secretary of State early in 1947, he organized a
 20

"Policy Planning Staff," charged with formulating and developing long-term programs to
achieve the U.S. foreign policy objectives. He asked Kennan to head the new Policy Planning
Staff in the Department of State. Kennan was encouraged to spread his views widely. In July
1947, he wrote an article in Foreign Aff airs. Titled “The Sources of Soviet Conduct,” the
article that introduced the term "containment" to the world. Attributed only to a "Mr. X" to
preserve Kennan‟s anonymity. (Leffler, n.d.)
Therefore, the appropriate strategy is Containment it was clear that the main element of
the United States policy toward the Soviet Union should be of a long-term, patient but firm
Containment of Russian tendencies. The Soviet attacks on the free institutions of the Western
World could be contained only by the careful application of containment.

2.2. Definition of containment

Luhr (2005) stated:
Containment is a term first used by American diplomat George

Kennan during the late 1940s. As the USSR exerted influence

in Eastern Europe, the American government adopted a foreign

policy that sought to limit, or “contain,” Soviet influence in the

rest of theworld.(p. 5).

In a simple definition, Gaddis (2005) stated that containment is the term generally used
to characterize American policy toward the Soviet Union during the post-war era. It was a
series of attempts to deal with the consequences of that wartime Faustian bargain.Leffler
(n.d.) defines Containment:
The strategy by which the United States waged the Cold War. It had

a variety of meanings at its inception and evolved over the forty-five

years of its existence. The key goals of containment were to limit the

spread of Soviet power and Communist ideology. Yet containment

was never a defensive strategy; it was conceived as an instrument to

achieve victory in the Cold War(p.236).

 21

2.3. Main Objectives of Containment

By November 1948, the newly founded National Security Council approved a policy
enumerating U.S. objective with regard to the USSR. In both times of peace and times of war,
U.S. goals were:
 To protect the security of the nation, by which is meant the continued ability of this
country to pursue the development of its internal life without serious interference
from foreign powers; that means to reduce the power and influence of the USSR to
the limits to which no longer constitute a threat to the peace, stability and national
independence (Gaddis,2005).
 To restore the balance of power by promoting a world order in which the U.S. can
make the maximum contribution to the peaceful and orderly advancement of other
nations and derive maximum benefit from their experiences and abilities in order to
develop the prosperity of its people (Gaddis,2005).
In the bases of Kenan, the U.S. foreign policy should encourage self-security and
confidence in the nations threatened by communist expansion. For him, it should not focus on
the world‟s division into Soviet and American spheres of influence. But it should aid the

3. Implementing Containment
3.1. The Economic Dimension of the American Containment Policy
The economic aspect of the American policy during the Cold War can be clarified
throughout understanding the containment policy. The United States of America utilises
economic and military strategies under the containment policy in order to react against the
Soviet Union‟s communism expansion in Eastern Europe, China, and Korea. In doing so, the
economic means and strategies used to reduce the communist spread, were very significant
weapons in the American policy during the post-war era, including the Marshall Plan and the
economic-financial aids.
Officially, The European Recovery Program (ERP) also called the Marshall Plan was in
place from April 1948 to September 1951, it was firstly proposed by Secretary of State
George C. Marshall in his speech at Harvard University in the 5th June of 1947, but the
speech was not a plan yet. It developed nonetheless two understandable ideas that American
aid has to support a united Europe and to fight misery in this continent. The financial aids
were for the European nations as well as for the USSR and its allies, but the latter satellite
 22

countries had declined the Marshall offer in the Paris conference in 1947 (Sorel &Padoan,
2008).
Tarnoff (2018) argues that George C. Marshall did not give a detailed and concrete
program in his speech. He simply suggested thatthe United States would help to draft the
program and would provide assistance, but this was in fact the business of the Europeans, he
insisted that the planning should be a joint effort initiated and agreed by the European nations
to plan the rebuilding of Europe. The formulation of the Marshall Plan, therefore, was, from
the very beginning, a work of collaboration between the Truman Administration and
Congress, and between the U.S. Government and European governments.
Turning the plan into reality required the acceptance of the United States Congress, then
deep negotiations among the participant nations. In July 1947, Sixteen Western European
nations met in Paris to discuss the American aids and the way it would be divided to put
together an economic recovery plan. Different interests of the different nations make the
agreement about the direction of the planning very complex. Instead of a unified plan for
Europe as a whole, each country was developing its own shopping list. Moreover, the French
argued that Western Germany should remain economically weak and not receive Marshall
Plan aidto prevent its threat. Marshall determined that the plan should institute an
independent economy, the removal of trade barriers for the whole of Western Europe and
insisted the importance of full German participation, as it is necessary for the economic
recovery of Western Europe. With this push from Marshall, the Europeans chaffered and
presented a plan to the United States in September 1947. (Bouaziz, 2010; CRF-USA, n.d.)
In November 1947, President Truman called Congress for a special session to request
immediate aid for France, Italy, and Austria, which all had active communist parties. Truman
then followed up with the Marshall Plan funding request of $17 billion over four years(CRF-
USA, n.d.).
Truman Administration adjoinedmany experts to argue the Marshall Plan funds. These
experts pointed out different arguments from saving the United States from economic
depression and helping Europe, to idea that the Marshall Plan would help to contain and
prevent the spread of communism and that was the most powerful argument. (CRF-USA,
n.d.)
Debates in Congress were difficult and after four months, Congress moved quickly to
approve emergency aid to France, Italy, and Austria. The congress, then, accepted the plan
and Harry Truman signed it into law on April 3, 1948. The lawmakers after that adapt the
Economic Cooperation Act of 1948, which created the Economic Cooperation
 23

Administration (ECA). The United States equipped over $13 billion in aid to Sixteen Western
European nations, including West Germany during the next four years.(CRF-USA, n.d). (See
Figure 01).
Tarnoff (2018) says that the implementation of the European Recovery Program needed
two executing organizations the U.S. managed the Economic Cooperation Administration
(ECA) and the European nations run Organization for European Economic Cooperation
(OEEC). The latter was established to maintain the joint nature, encourage the sense of
mutual responsibility. The former, aimed to encourage the European curacy, facilitate
international trade between the USA and the European nations and at the same time to
contain the communism spread on the European continent.
To rebuild Western Europe, the Marshall Plan attempted to implement several economic
strategies and reformsbetween 1948 and 1951. The Dollar Aid Program was represented in
grants that made up more than 90% of the ERP. To pay the cost of essential commodities and
services, The Economic Corporation Administration (ECA) provided total grants. In order to
motivate trade among the European countries, conditional grants were provided requiring the
participating country to set aside currency so that other participating countries could buy their
exported goods(Tarnoff,2018).
Technical assistance and Investment Guaranties were also provided under the ERP. The
former was special fund created to finance expenses of U.S. experts in Europe and visits by
European leaders to the United States. Funds can be employed only on projects contributing
to increased production and stability. The latter were Guaranties provided for convertibility
into dollars of profits on American private sector investments in Europe. The objective of the
guaranties was to develop the American investments in the modernization and development
of European industry by ensuring that earnings could be obtained in dollars. (Tarnoff,2018)
 24

Figure 01:Distribution of American aid in gifts (direct and conditional grants)

among European countries April 1948-June 1951. Tarnoff, 2018.

In fact, the Europeans asked for USD 22 billion over four years. The US Congress accepted
to take into account a basis of USD 17 billion. Accordingly, the participant countries received
USD 11.8 billion as grants between 3 April 1948 and 31 June 1951.
 25

Strengthening commercial relation with the United States of America required the
European countries to adopt the free trade system that means that the Communist‟s zone
would be contained and the Capitalism extends in the west of the European continent as more
countries borrow money from America. The Marshall Plan was an economic strategy, which
related the European economy to the American one. This dependence can be considered as a
new form of American imperialism.
The degree of success in the European Recovery Program can be noticed by the time the
Marshall Plan ended in 1951, in Western Europe production of the industry had risen with
40% in comparison to the level of production during the post-war period. Trade and exports
also increased in comparison to what they were before the war. Unemployment reduced and
better life conditions raised. Politically, no European nation fell to Communism, and
Communism lost its influence almost everywhere. The economic revival of West Germany
helped to develop and raise its neighbour‟s economy rather than threatened them. (CRF-USA,
n.d.)
It should be mentioned that Marshal Plan succeed to solve all the economic problems.
Even if 30 % of Western Europe food was still imported until 1951. Inflation also remained
a problem in some countries. The Marshall Plan proposition for a common market in Europe
remained just an idea.
3.2. The Political Dimension of the American Containment Policy
To deal with the Soviet Union expansionism the United States focus its policy on
military and diplomatic strategies, which represents the Political dimension of the American
policy. “The Domino Theory” was the main. The Communism was a contagious force that
spread from country to country such as dominos if one domino falls, it will knock all the
dominoes surrounding it. The “Domino theory” was firstly proposed by General Marshall in
1947 however it was not applicable to Vietnam until 1950 after the fears of the spread of
Chinese Communism. (Smith, 2007).
The Domino theory was very influential in the Far East. The United States leaders
believed that the fall of Chine would result other negative consequences. The victory of Mao
Tse Tung‟s Communists in China and the swift beginning of the Communist military
campaign in Korea proved to many in the united states that there was a Sino-Soviet
conspiracy against the free world. Accordingly, if the U.S. officers let Korea follow the same
 26

path of china, Russia would gain another ally in Asia. In this case, and according to the
domino theory, the Asian countries would fall one after the other in communism which
would be the official system of many Asian countries, and Asia would soon become a
communist continent.(Bouaziz,2010; Smith, 2007)
Cizik and Novak 2015) maintain that North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) was a
political and military organization, originally constituted of twelve members from Europe and
Northern America in April 04th, 1949. NATO was founded as an organization of collective
defence against the rising power of the Soviet Union. NATO‟s role as a political and military
alliance was providing defence against the Russian military expansion, and maintain a secure
environment for the development of democracy and economic growth to the founding
members.However, NATO does not have independent armed forces of its own; most forces
remain under the control of their counties.
In NATO deterrence and defence, nuclear weapons had critical rule in preserving peace.
If any member security to be threatened; NATO has the capability to defend it. USA, France,
and United Kingdom have nuclear weapons. France had an Independent Nuclear deterrent.
Moreover, it is not included in the Nuclear Planning Group (NPG) founded in 1966. (North
Atlantic Treaty Organization,2020). The Korean War was a turning point in the history of
NATO alliance because it led to massive increase in US military assistance. (Lafeber,1989)
The United Nations was a different political association, it came into existence On
October 24th, 1945. President Franklin D. Roosevelt suggested the name just few weeks
before his death. This association came in response to the failed one “The League of Nations”
that first attempted in 1919.However, it was an assembly were countries meet and develop
peaceful resolutions to world conflicts (“Everything you always wanted to know” , 2008 ;
National Archives, n.d.).
During Cold War, and with the rise of conflicts among Nations, a developed
International organization was needed that have multiple focuses, to maintain international
peace and security, in order to establish friendly relation among Nations. Moreover, the
Moscow declaration and Tehran Conference in 1943 provided initial plans. Leaders from
China, The USSR, United Kingdom and The United States drafted the model for The United
Nations in Washington D.C. (NationalArchives, n. d.).
By the end of the world war, 80% of the world population from 50 countries met in
California to organize a formal charter of the UN. That structure would contain the Security
Council, International Court of Justice, General Assembly, and minor assemblies. The 50
countries approved The United Nations Charter on June 26th, 1945 (National Archives, n.d.).
 27

The first true test of the strength of UN was the Korean war, its main mission was
peace kipping around the world. In addition, it succeeded in the publication of The Universal
Declaration of human rights, and with the negotiations of the Ceasefire between Israel and
Arabs States (National Archives, n.d.).
On June 25th, 1950, when North Korean forces invaded South Korea, and crossed
the 38th parallel. The United States asked the United Nations to act by arguing for a ceasefire
and for all member nations to give help to the South Koreans. The Soviet Union boycotted
the UN Security Council and as a result the Council passed those measures. President Harry
S. Truman wanted to keep Korea a limited War and Avoiding a Nuclear World War. In
Addition, he classified the Korean Conflict as UN led “Police Action” (“Background essay
on the United Nations and the Korean War”, n. d.; National Archives, n. d.).
4. Conclusion
To sum up, and after examining both economic and political dimensions of the American
Containment Policy in Europe during the Cold War Era. We found that most of Western
European countries became economically and politically stable as they were saved by the
American economic aids. As consequence, trade measures increased among European
countries and between Europe and the rest of the world. The American aids also prevented
the economic deterioration of post-war Europe. The political, military and diplomatic
strategies followed by the United States of America while dealing with the Russian
expansions such as the NATO and the United Nations which played a very significant role
in changing the results of the Korean War. Thus, closing the door in front of Communism and
opening it to capitalism to spread in the far East.
 28

CHAPTER THREE
The Korean War a Turning Point in the
Containment Policy
 29

Chapter Three
The Korean War a Turning Point in the Containment Policy

1. Introduction……………………………...…………………………….………….......01

2. The outbreak of the Korean War………………………………………………...…....01

2.1. The Korean War and its Origins…………………..………………………………01

2.1.1. The Division of Korean Peninsula ……………………………...…………….32

2.1.2. Creating the 38th Parallel…………………………..........................................32

2.2. Factors of U.S Intervention in the Korean War…….………………....................30

2.3. United Nations Security Council resolution……………………………...……....30

2.4. Comparison of Military Forces of the Two Koreas…………….…………...……34

3. War Crimes…………………………………………………………….…………......34

3.1. Civilian Deaths and Massacres………………………………........………………34

3.2. Bodo League anti-communism Massacre……………………….…......................34

3.3. Prisoners of War…………………………………...…………......….....................34

4. Korean War, a turning point in the U.S. Containment policy in Asia ………….........35

5. Conclusion…………………………………………………………………………....38
 30

1. Introduction
Containment is a policy associated with the Truman Doctrine, the Marshall Plan and
NATO, it has a main objective which is the prevention of Soviet expansionism. Since the
outset of the Korean War, the United States of America adopted the Containment policy in
Asia as it achieved a huge success in Europe.
The Containment Policy was formulated basing on the conditions in Europe. However,
without any consideration for the Asian needs and wants, the Truman Administration hastily
extended the policy to Asia in order to cover the Korean War and it was continued even after
the War. The policy was hindered for the different viewpoints of Asian leaders and the
American policymakers, who overextended the principles of containment and misapplied
them in Asia, where Containment has been developed into commitment to defend every
nation against communist pressures.
The current chapter explores the background of the outbreak of the Korean War from its
origins, the division of Korean peninsula to the creation of the 38th parallel. Moreover, it
gives important information about the South and the North of Korea at that time, including
the military capabilities of both. In addition, it demonstrates the facts of U.S intervention in
the Korean War, it also presents the Korean war crimes such as the civilian deaths and
massacres, the Bodo League Anti-Communism Massacre and the prisoners of the war
Finally, it spotlight on the military containment of Soviet expansionism.

2. The Outbreak of the Korean War

2.1. The Korean War and its Origins
Many historians refer to the Korean War ruts to the civil war between South and North
Korea, which historically turns back to the Japanese colonial legacies and experience.
Koreawas reconstructed by the Japanese government under the policy of “divide and rule”.
During the Japanese colonial rule from 1910 to 1945, the Korean peninsula was demarcated
according to its geographic characteristics for more effective use of natural resources. The
mountainous northern part concentrated on the heavy industry because it was rich with raw
minerals and had geographic advantages. The southern part suited for rice and other crop
production and light industry. Paramountly, the ideological division within Korea has
coincided with the Japanese delineation. The Conservative Groups operated in South Korea
while the Communist Groups increasingly made their way to the North, where they engaged
 31

in guerrilla warfare as the form of resistance against the Japanese. (HyungGuas cited in Jang,
2010)
By the end of the Second World War the Japanese surrendered to the Allies in 1945, The
United States occupied the Southern part of Korea and the Soviet Union occupied the
Northern part as if Korea was liberated from the Japanese colonial rule only to be divided and
occupied by the two major superpowers of the Cold War era. In 1948 and on each side of the
38th parallel, two separate Korean governments were formed under the occupation rule of the
two ideologically opposing foreign forces. The government of the Republic of Korea (ROK)
was supported by the United States and headed by Syngman Rhee, while the northern
government of the Democratic People‟s Republic of Korea (DPRK) was backed by the Soviet
Union and headed by Kim IL-sung. (Cumingsas cited in Jang,2010)
Both leaders aimed to reunify Korea under their political systems. While Kim wanted to
establish a communist government for reunified Korea, Rhee called for a democratic
government these competing interests created tensions and mutual enmity between the South
and the North.
South Korea was invaded by the Korea People‟s Army (KPA) forces of the DPRK. On
June 25, 1950, the Northern army crossed the 38th parallel to attack the government of the
Republic of Korea, this attack became the immediate cause of the KoreanWar. They pounced
South Korea with confidence that they could win the war and communize the entire Korean
peninsula. This confidence was based on their ability to secure an easy victory in the war. In
fact, the South Korean forces were inferior in all categories of the fighting capabilities and
abilities to those of the North, who were armed with heavy weapons and supplied by the
Soviet Union and reinforced by support from Communist China. All in all, military
imbalance between the two parts of Korea was significant to afford the North Korea, the
Soviet Union and Communist China, who thought that the United States would not rapidly
involve its forces, a clear vision to secure an easy success in the war. (Chang-Il, 2010).
In response, to this northern provocation of war, secretary of State Dean Acheson‟s
decided to intervene and to commit more military forces to the war, this decision was
supported by President Truman and was later approved by the United Nations. The Southern
military forces were quickly suppressed by their Northern counterparts. Northern army
continued to successfully push southward in the summer of 1950, even against the dominant
numbers of US military forces on the ground, forcing the government of the Republic of
Korea and US armies to retreat as far as Pusan, the farthest south eastern port city on the
peninsula. By early August, the Northern advance wasstopped and the battle comparatively
 32

stabilized without any party‟s dramatic advance through the end of the month. The United
Nations Command forces led by General MacArthur succeeded in landing at Inchon in mid-
September, and recaptured Seoul from the KPA. Thus Kim Il-sung‟s initial plan to win or
“end the war in a month” then dissipated(Cumingsas cited in Jang,2010).
Duringthis movement, the US-led United Nations Command forces advanced (UNC)
toward the northern territory through crossing the 38th parallel. Chairman Mao made a
decision early to intervene in the war as a result of the good relationship between the North
Korean and Chinese since Chinese revolution. Hot fighting between the communist China-
North Korea military forces and the United Nation Command forces continued until the late
spring of 1951 when the fighting halted in terms of the battle lines (Cumingsas cited in
Jang,2010).
In July 1951, truce talks began among the four belligerents the DPRK, people s republic
of china (PRC), UNC, and ROK in the war. Two years of negotiation and “a form of trench
warfare” went on before thethree main actors of the war (DPRK, PRC, and UNC) signed the
armistice on July 27, 1953. South Korea‟s Syngman Rhee refused to sign it because he
refuses to recognize divided Korea. Nonetheless, the armistice agreement went into effect,
ended the fighting, and established the 2.5-mile-wide demilitarized zone (DMZ). This cease-
fire agreement was not a peace treaty, both North and South Koreas are still in a state of war
in a technical sense. (Cumingsas cited in Jang,2010).
2.1.1. The division of Korean Peninsula
Barry (2012) stated that the Korean Peninsula was divided at the 38th parallel in August
1945. the Military Demarcation Line (MDL) in the De-Militarized Zone (DMZ) was
segmented to the 38th parallel. Once the July 1953 Armistice signed the Korean War paused.
The 1945 division of Korea considered a tentative military pretension to denote a line above
and below which Soviet and American forces were to accept the surrender of Japanese
troops, was portentous. The dividing line remains 67 years later, even after having been
reshaped by battle. No one could have dreamed in 1945 that a temporary American
designation of surrender zones would become permanent, now a relic of both World War II
and the Cold War.
2.1.2. Creating The 38Th Parallel
The 38th parallel was chosen to facilitate the Japanese surrender and reinforce conditions
for a potential multi-national trusteeship in Korea. Thus, it was given a military and political
meaning in addition to its geographical one. Physically, the 38th parallel divided the Korean
peninsula, cutting more than 75 streams, 12 rivers, 181 small cart roads, 104 country roads,
 33

15 provincial all-weather roads, 8 good highways, 6 north-south rail lines, and even a single
house. Economically, the division was not acceptable for the daily lives of the Koreans
because the northern and southern parts of Korea were largely complementary to each other
both agriculturally and industrially. Politically, because of the subsequent American and
Soviet military occupations in the two parts of the peninsula, the line also divided the Korean
people into the two different blocks of the ideological, political, economic values and
systems. Overall, the 38th parallel, the artificial line, only promised to exacerbate the
situation in the Korean peninsula (Chang- II, 2010).
2.2. Factor of U.S. Intervention in the Korean War:
The Truman policy was at a crossroads since the military strategic were concerned with
the security of Europe against the Soviet Union than East Asia. Before the Korean invasion,
Korea was not included in the secretary of state Acheson‟s strategic Asian defence. Both the
world and The American administration were worried that the Korean War would lead to
another World War (Korean War,n.d.).
Japan was responsible of the changing attitude toward Korea, especially after China
became communist. It was according to the US administration another face of the Soviet
Union and China in East Asia that pushed South Korea to the fore, they wanted to shore up
Japan together with Korea, and make it against The Soviet Union and China
(KoreanWar,n.d.).
The US administration was frightened of the Soviet action in the event that the United
States intervene in Korea; and another European war would start. According to Truman, this
aggression should be checked, or it would start a reaction that would destroy the United
Nations or the further communist aggression. The U.N. Security Council approved forces to
help South Koreans. The U.S. started using Air and naval Forces hoping that it would stop
the North Koreans. After the Soviet Union communiqué that was received on June 27, U.S.
forces used ground troops in Korea (Korean War,n.d.).
2.3. United Nations security council resolutions:
The United Nations Security Council resolution 82, on 25 June 1950 condemned the
North Korean invasion of the Republic of Korea, because the USSR boycotted the council
meeting since January 1950. On JUNE 1950, the Security Council Resolution 83 yield
military assistance to the Republic of Korea, and at the same day, President Truman ordered
to use Air and Sea forces to help South Korea(Korean War,n.d.).
 34

2.4. Comparison of Military forces of the two Koreas:

The North Korean Army launched “Fatherland Liberation War” with air –land invasion
using 231,000 soldiers, including 274T-34-85tanks , some 150 YOK fighters , 110 attack
bombers , 200 Artillery pieces , 78 YOK trainers , and 35 reconnaissance aircraft . The North
Korean KPA had 114 fighters, 78 bombers, 105 T -34-85 tanks and some 30,000 soldiers
stationed in North Korea (Korean War,n.d.).
In contrast, the ROK army were unprepared, it had 98,000 Soldiers, 65,000 combat
33,000 support, no tanks, and a 22-piece Air Force comprising 12 Liaison type and 10 AT6
advanced-trainer airplanes. At Korean invasion time, there were no large foreign military
garrisons (Korean War,n.d.).
3. War Crimes
3.1. Civilian Deaths and Massacres:
Every educated academic, government, or religious person from South Korea who may
lead to the resistance against the North Korean Army Political offices. In response to that
massacre. The Military right-wing police executed thousands of communist political
prisoners at Daejeon Prison. However, it is about 100,000 pro-North Political prisoners were
buried in Mass graves (Korean War,n.d.).
U.S. troops acted under a “shoot-first-ask-questions-later” policy against any refugee,and
their soldiers killed 8 to 400of them, because those refugee were North Guerrillas fought The
UN forces. The Korean Armies forcibly conscripted civilian men and women to their War
efforts. In statistics of Democide (1997), Prof. R. J. Rummel reports that the North Korean
Army conscripted some 400,000 South Korean citizens (Korean War, n.d.).
3.2. Bodo League anti-communism Massacre:
President Syngman Rhee‟s regime assassinated South Koreans suspected of being
Communists by imprisoning them for Political re-education in BodoLeague, abetted by the
United States Army Military Government in Korea (USAMGIK), was the assassination of
some 10,000 “enemies of state”. Then after photographing the killings of 3,000 to 7,000
people were buried in mass graves at Daejeon City (Korean War,n.d.).
3.3. Prisoners of War:
As US Congress war crimes investigation reported that two-thirds of all American
Prisoners of Korea died as a result of War Crimes. Soldiers were beaten, starved, marched to
death and executed at the battles for HILL312,HILL 303, The Pusan Perimeter, and Daejeon.
In addition, about 43 percent of all U.S.Pow‟s died during 1950-51 , because of mass
 35

starvation and diseases and rarely been executed in the Chinese camps .Furthermore , that
starvation was used to force the prisoners to accept the Communism indoctrinations
Programs(Korean War, n.d.).
4. Korean War, a Turning Point in the U.S. Containment Policy in Asia:
Park(2000) mentioned that the changes in the world‟s situation and in the East Asian
system such as the Chines hegemony in Asian communist movements through the Korean
War resulted in an automatic change in the strategic value of Korea and on its position. In
order to reflect this new situation in the world, the U.S. policy makers attempted to change
their policies toward South Korea.
In 1950, Joseph McCarthy argues that the American containment policy failed in China
because of the communist spies who works in the state department, the administration of
Harry S. Truman and in the American military offices. This argument was widely accepted
among Americans. Many people jailed, lost their jobs and blacklisted for supporting
communism. As a result, America had to develop strict plan to deal with the new changes in
Asia and to modify its policy toward communism (Bouaziz, 2010).
The fall of China under communist hands widely influenced the American policy, it also
resulted in differences among the American elite. which led to the assumption that the
communist succession in China was a result of Soviet expansion, this assumption contributed
to the American containment frailer in Korea (Bouaziz, 2010).
The American leaders took into account that the fall of Korea in communism would be
black event in the American history that should be avoided using any tool. Thus, the United
States reacted on the attack of the North Korea on the South by entering the war; this decision
to meet the North Korean really meant that the area of containment policy had been expanded
to include the Far East. Yet, Europe still maintained the primacy in American policy
planning(Pilliter, 1969).
Pilliter (1969) argues that the influence of the theory of containment was even evident in
the United States military conduct of the Korean War. Achieving the re-establishment of the
border, that divide the Korean peninsula was the central and original objective of America in
Korea before the outbreak of the war. At the same time, the United States wanted to prevent
the conflict between the two Koreas from escalating into a possible atomic war between the
two superpowers Communism and Capitalism. He also stated that In order to prevent this
possibility, the concept of limited war was introduced in Korea, which means a war that its
 36

objectives are specifically limited in light of national interest and current capabilities; it is not
merely a small war that has not grown to full size.
The policy of containment was temporarily abandoned, when the Truman
Administration attempted to unify the two Koreas. Nevertheless, they had continued to adopt
this concept of containment because they believed that the policy of containment would
prevent the Soviet expansion and stem the outbreak of another World War. The Truman
Administration also believed that Korea offered the United States an opportunity to "roll
back" the line of Soviet control without the risk of global confrontation. (Pilliter, 1969)
The American strategy changed from saving South Korea to reunifying Korea in the
middle of the war, the American attack on North Koreans indicated another modification in
the United States foreign policy. Now instead of trying to contain communism the policy
became the roll back of communism thus the containment policy in Korea was no more an
economic strategy to fight communism (Bouaziz, 2010).
The Americans did not think that the Chinese would interfere in the war to prevent its
attempt to unify Korea by means of a military victory. Mao and his supporters considered the
United Nation forces threat to their internal security. When the American walked on the
Korean-Chinese borders, Mao threatened and the Communist soldiers interfered and fought
in the side of the North Korean. When Seoul fell in the hands of the North Koreans,the
United Nation forces withdrew back to the thirty-eighth parallel. As a result, the Korean War
became intensified and drawn out as the threat of global war was renewed(Bouaziz, 2010).
On September 30, the day before the ROK forces under the United Nations Command
first crossed the thirty-eighth parallel, Communist China's Premier Chou En-Lai publically
declared:
The Chinese people absolutely will not tolerate foreign aggression,

nor will they supinely tolerate seeing their neighbours being savagely

invaded. Whoever attempts to exclude nearly; 500 million people

from the United Nations and "whoever ignore and violate the interest

of this one-fourth of mankind and fancy vainly to solve arbitrarily any

Par Eastern problem directly concerned with China, will certainly

break their skulls. (Pilliter, 1969, p.52)

 37

By the entrance of Communist China into the Korean War, the entire complexion of it
has been change. The Communist regained the advantage once again and the United Nation
forces were forced back behind the 38th parallel. This Communist military success puts the
Truman Administration in hard situation that it had to decide whether the war was to be
extended to China or not. General MacArthur insisted that such a course was imperative.
While the Administration had to take into account before the decision, the Political
considerations that were important in Korea, because the military operations were being
conducted under the United Nations flag. Almost all U.N. members were opposed to any
enlargement of the war (Pilliter, 1969). Marshall the Secretary of Defence in discussing the
diplomatic aspects of the situation in Korea had stated that the three American Service
Secretaries agreed that it was most important that the United States not become involved
either individually or with the United Nations in a general war with China .(Pilliter, 1969)
Secretary of State Acheson also expressed his opposition to the extension of the war and
explained his position from the point of America's foreign policy:
We had banked our foreign policy on the idea of keeping Russia

contained, and we had succeeded in repulsing her attempts to break

out. If we allowed the Russians now to trap us inside their perimeter,

however, we would run the risk of being sucked into a bottomless pit

there would be no end, and it would bleed us dry(Pilliter, 1969, p.55).

Acheson, therefore, was opposed to a war with China, because he believed it would
hinder the main U.S. containment policy objective rather than assist it.
U.N. members, President Truman and his advisers, were all in agreement to not extend
the war to China except of course General MacArthur. From this point a desire to end
hostilities replaced the objective of uniting Korea through a military victory. While the
Truman Administration was firm in its decision not to enlarge the conflict, General
MacArthur was just as firm in his belief that the war had to be carried to China. With this
sharp difference of opinion between the President Truman and MacArthur who continued to
misrepresenting and criticising the policy of Harry Truman's administration. Harry S Truman
ended by firing MacArthur (Pilliter, 1969).
Pilliter, (1969) argues that the Americans manifested their dissatisfaction with the
Korean War in 1952, and elected a Republican President, Dwight David Eisenhower. The
Republicans had primarily based their presidential campaign on Eisenhower's promise to the
 38

Americans to finish the Korean War if elected. Close to the 38th parallel, delegations
representing sides in the Korean conflict began to meet at Kaesongon July, for discussions
regarding the halt of military activities and also the establishment of peace. These meetings
continued with no concrete results until finally an impasse was reached. Despite the impasse,
however, negotiations continued until 1953. Throughout this period the fighting dragged on.
The negotiations started again in April 1953 and the peace agreement was signed on July
27. The peace agreement stopped only the shooting; it did not include any political solution
and no peace treaty was signed. The Korean War, which was begun for ideological reasons,
killed 34,000 Americans, a million Koreans, and a quarter of a million Chinese, had achieved
no purpose, but destruction and division of Korea until today (Bouaziz, 2010).
The United States application of the containment policy in Korea changed the real
meaning of the theory which was explained by its founder George F Kennan who presents the
threat of the Soviet Union as an ideological, economic not military one or a threat that should
be fought by military means. The American leaders became convinced that depending on
economic means to contain the communist spread was not effective in Asia as it was in
Europe. After the fall of China in the communist hands, they decided that the only way to
save Korea is by using military forces instead of relying on economic and political tools like
Marshall Plan, International Monetary Funds, and the NATO. Based on all of this, the Korean
War represents a crucial turning point of the American policy during the Cold War era.
After the study of the United States policy of communist containment in Korea, it was
difficult to find any positive result. We may say that the Cold War in Korea was an area
where the United States forfeited energy, money, soldiers and many other sources. To sum
up, the Korean War was the distortion point of the essence meaning of containment policy,
which ha-d given no solutions to the Korean War.

5. Conclusion
To conclude, the Korean War was another course of the Cold War in which the two
superpowers fought to show that their way of life was better than the other. The underlying
reason for the American involvement in the Korean War was due to containment, which
meant that the United States would do anything to prevent any more countries from becoming
Communist. After examining the American Containment in Korea, we found that the policy
was transformed from depending on the economic strategy to much dependent to the military
forces in order to achieve the main goal of the Truman administration of stopping
 39

communism expansion. Even if this transformation was necessary for the policy to be put
into practice in Korea, it is important to mention that the policy of containment developed by
George Kennan was not the same policy that was implemented during the Korean War.
Which represented a different Concept of the Containment Policy in the Cold War era. The
Korean War came to an end by the armistice signed on July 27, after three years of bloody
war. The immediate result of containment was a dangerous world with the power of mutual
atomic destruction.
 40

General Conclusion
 41

General Conclusion

By the end of World War II, the United States abandoned its policy of isolationism and
adopted a new policy of Containment to oppose the spread of Communism in the world. The
founder of Containment George F. Kennan stated that the United States might oppose the
communist spread by economic and political means. The original environment of this policy
was Europe where the American national interests were served by political and economic
aspects such as the Truman Doctrine, the Marshall Plan, and NATO that were mostly the
principle stones in the American foreign policy abroad during the Cold War era (Source?)..
While the origins of the Korean War are still somewhat nebulous, its consequences for
the United States, one of the main belligerents in the conflict, are multiple and significant.
The Korean episode, in fact, brought in its wake significant repercussions on socio-cultural
and economic life. It is in the political field, however, that its effects are certainly the most
powerful and lasting like promulgation of the law on internal security, procrastination of the
reformist agenda, overwhelming victory of the Republican Party in 1952, advent of Great
Debate, degradation of Sino-American relations, and the expansion and militarization of
containment. This militarization was due to the communist revolution in China in 1949, and
the outbreak of the Koran War in 1950, before that dates, containment policy had been
ideological. US intervention to contain Soviet influence in the Third World was more military
than political, by fighting together with South Korea against North Communist supported by
USSR and China. The USSR and US do everything to avoid direct confrontation; the Korean
War represented a proxy war, in which each part should not lose in the profit of the other. As
a result, the East of Asia became central in the foreign policy of the United States, as it will
be qualified as a dangerous disequilibrium in this bipolar ideological world, thus this „domino
effect‟ must be avoided at all costs as president Truman said. The Korean War was another
course of the Cold War which represents the first military confrontation, as we have said,
between the two superpowers of the Cold War (the United States and the Soviet Union). It
also influenced international history and indeed brought about most of the characteristics
which we associate with the Cold War, and there were no events on the horizon which could
have been active substitutes for the war(Source?).
It should be noted that this conflict, constituted the starting point for the engagement of
troops under UN mandate and which shows to what extent the United States already
dominates the organization.
 42

All things considered, after examining the American Containment Policy in Korea,
we found that the American administration resorted to the militarization of the Containment
policy in Asia during the war in Korea in order to achieve the main goal of the Truman
administration which is stopping communism expansion at all costs. Even if this
transformation was necessary for the policy to be put into practice in the Korean context, the
evolvement turned to an open-ended commitment to resist Communism as the president
Eisenhower threatened to use the Nuclear weapons to end the Korean struggle.
With no winner, and after a conflict that had left more than two million dead,
Americans and Soviets ended the Korean War by recognizing the existence of two distinct
countries. The repercussions of the Korean War on US foreign policy are no less substantial;
historian Lawrence Kaplan presents this war as an important milestone in the development of
American diplomatic history.
 43

References

- Altman, D. (2015). Chapter5: The Berlin Blockade Crisis of 1948-1949 in D. Altman, Red
Lines and FaitsAccomplis in Interstate Coercion and Crisis (pp.90-133). [Doctorat Thesis,
Massachusetts Institute of Technology]. Retrieved from
https://dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/handle/1721.1/99775/927329080-MIT.pdf

- Background Essay on the United Nations and the Korean War (n. d.). [PDF document ]
Museum and Library .Retrieved May 17, 2020. from
https://www.trumanlibrary.gov/public/UnitedNations_Handouts.pdf

-Barry, M. P. (2012, December) the U.S. and the 1945 Division of Korea: Mismanaging the
Big Decision.International Journal on World Peace,Vol. 29, No. 4. Suite 289, 30 Seminary
Drive Barrytown, NY 12507 USA, p33. Retrieved
fromhttps://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/5d27/48d151038d64a6a2168ca8767a5a464e1b95.pdf.

-Bouaziz, R. (2009).The Koran War: A Distortion of The American Containment Policy.

[Published Master Thesis, University of Constantine].
http://bu.umc.edu.dz>theses>BOU1167.

-Chang-Il, O. (2010). The Causes of the Korean War, 1950-1953. International Journal of
Korean Studies, Vol. 14, No. 2. Korea Military Academy.

-Cizik, T , & Novak, P. (2015). North Atlantic Treaty Organization. URL not found.

-Cold War: definition, origins, causes, phases and end. (n.d.).Retrieved March 1,2020
from,https://www.academia.edu/32138562/Cold_War_Definition_Origin_Causes_Phases
and_End.

-Constitutional Rights Foundation. (n.d.).The Marshall Plan for Rebuilding Western Europe.
Constitutional Rights Foundationhttps://www.crf-
usa.org/images/pdf/gates/Marshall_Plan.pdf.

-Creative Commons Attribution.(n.d.). Korean War. [PDF document ] Retrieved May 18,
2020 from https://creativecommons.org/license/by-sa/3.0/.

-Cronin, B. (2019). North Atlantic Treaty Organization. Retrieved from

https://worldbookonline.com/student-new/#/article/home/394080.
 44

-Edwards Spalding, E, (2006). The First Cold Warrior Harry Truman, Containment, and the
Remarking of Liberal Internationalism. Scholarly publisher for the Commonwealth

-Gaddis, J. L. (1990). Russia, the Soviet Union, and the United States: An Interpretive
History. Russia: McGraw-Hill Publishing Company.

(2005) Strategies of Containment: A Critical Appraisal of American National Security Policy

during the Cold War.(New York) Oxford University Press, Inc.

-Gejdošová, I. (2015). What is NATO?. (Pražského) Martin Mezenský, Jan Kotara.

Association for international affairs.

-Guthrie-Shimizu, S. (2010) Japan, the United States, and the Cold War, 1945–1960. [E-
book].Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CHOL9780521837194.013.

-Hess. (n.d.). Communism vs. Capitalism. [PDF document ]. Retrieved March 3, 2020
fromhttps://www.gvsd.org/cms/lib02/PA01001045/Centricity/ModuleInstance/3385/Commu
nism_Vs_Capitalism.pdf.

-Jang, H. J. (2010). Overview of the Korean War and its Legacy. Retrieved from
https://spice.fsi.stanford.edu/docs/overview_of_the__korean_war_and_its_legacy

-Jian ,C .(2001).Mao’s China and The Cold War . (London) The University of North Carolina
Press.

-Lafeber, W. (2007). NATO and the Korean War: a context, 13, 416-477.

-Leffler, M. P. Containment.(n.d.). Retrieved from

http://assets.press.princeton.edu/chapters/pons/s2_9143.pdf

-Leffler, M. P, & Painter, D. S..(2005). Origins of the Cold War: An International History
(2nd ed.). (New York) Taylor & Francis e-Library.

-Levering, R. B. (2016).The Cold War .A Post Cold War History (3rd ed). (West Sussex)
John Willey and Sons.

-Luhr, E. (2005) . United States History 1945-1960. The Cold War: Containment at Home
and Abroad. Humanities Out There and the Santa Ana Partnership
 45

-Markedbyteachers.com.(n.d.).The cold war arose due to ideological conflict. Retrieved April

1, 2020 from http://www.markedbyteachers.com/as-and-a-level/history/thecold-war-arose-
due-to-ideological-conflict.html.

-McMahon, R. (2003). The Cold War: A Very Short Introduction. New York. Oxford
University Press.

-National Archives (n.d.).the United Nations in Korea. Harry S. Truman library. Museum.
Retrieved September 5,2020 from https://www.trumanlibrary.gov/education/presidential-
inquiries/united-nations-korea

-North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (2020, 1st February). Retrieved from

https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/144032.htm.

.-Office of Information and Press. (1998). The NATO Handbook. Brussels: NATO.

-Office of Information and Press (n .d.).Understanding NATO . Brussels: NATO.

-Park, T. G.(2000). U.S. Policy Change toward South Korea in the 1940s and the 1950s.
Journal of International and area studies. Vol.7, No.2, The School of International and Area
Studies, Seoul National University. Retrieved from http://s-
space.snu.ac.kr/bitstream/10371/46104/1/05%20U.S.%20Policy%20Change%20toward%20S
outh%20Korea.PDF

- Pilliter, R. J.(1969). The evolution of the U.S. Containment Policy in Asia. [Published
Master Thesis, University of Windsor]. Retrieved from
https://scholar.uwindsor.ca/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=7584&context=etd

-Scott, R. S. (2006). The Political Economy of Capitalism. Retrieved from

https://www.hbs.edu/faculty/publication%20files/07-037.pdf

-Smith, K. (2007, December22). How important was the So-called ‘domino theory’ in
forming US Policy towards Indochina during the Cold War?. Retrieved fromhttps://www.e-
ir.info/2007/12/22/how-important-was-the-so-called-%e2%80%98domino-
theory%e2%80%99-in-forming-us-policy-towards-indochina-during-the-cold-war-were-
other-factors-more-important/

-Sorel, E. &Padoan, P. C. (2008).The Marshall Plan: Lessons Learned for the 21st Century.
Retrieved
 46

fromhttps://www.oecd.org/marshallanniversary/themarshallplanlessonslearnedforthe21stcent
ury.htm

-Tarnoff, C. (2018).The Marshall Plan: Design, Accomplishments, and

Significance.Retrieved from https://fas.org/sgp/crs/row/R45079.pdf.

-THE Cold War (1945-1989) (August 7.2016). Retrieved March7, 2020, from
https://www.cvce.eu/obj/the%20_cold_war_1945_1989_full_text-en-6dfe06ed-4790-48a4-
8968-855e90593185.html.+9

-UN Department of Public Information. (2008, August 23). Everything you always wanted to
know about the United Nations. Retrieved June 1, 2020, from
https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/7052?In=en.

-Walsh, B. (2013). Cambridge IGCSE Modern World History. Cambridge International

Examination.Retrieved from http:theory%e2%80%99-in –forming-us-policy-towards-
indochina-during-the-cold-war-were-other-factors-more-important/.
 47

RÉSUMÉ

Pendant la guerre froide, les États-Unis ont été confrontés à tant de graves problèmes de
politique étrangère ; la question la plus controversée, bien sûr, était la guerre en Corée.
Cependant, l'ambiguïté dominante de la relation de l'Asie avec l'intérêt national américain
obscurcit l'étude de la politique américaine en Asie. La politique d‟endiguement qui a été
formulée pour l'Europe, a été étendue à l'Asie pour couvrir la guerre de Corée. Certaines
études sur l'évaluation de la politique d‟endiguementdes États-Unis en Asie montrent qu'elle
a créé des problèmes dans les relations américano-asiatiques plutôt que de les résoudre.Cette
recherche tentera d'examiner l'application de la politique américaine d‟endiguement tout au
long de la guerre froide, en particulier pendant l'implication américaine dans la guerre de
Corée entre 1950-1953. Le but ultime des États-Unis d'Amérique était d'empêcher la
propagation du communisme dans le monde dans le cadre de la politique d'endiguement.
L'administration américaine a employé plusieurs moyens économiques et politiques pour
atteindre cet objectif en Europe. Néanmoins, la pratique de la même politique était totalement
différente en Asie. Là, principalement en Corée, les Américains s'appuient sur des forces
militaires pour faire reculer le communisme. Ainsi, la guerre de Corée représente le tournant
de la politique de confinement

Mots clés : États-Unis, Union soviétique, Communisme, Endiguement, Guerre Froide,

Guerre de Corée.

.
 ‫‪48‬‬

‫التلخيص‬

‫نقذ َاجٍج انُالياث انمخحذة األمشيكيت خالل انحشب انباسدة انعذيذ مه قضايا انسياست انخاسجيت انخطيشة‪ َ .‬أكزش ٌزي‬
‫انقضايا إراسة نهجذنكاوج انحشب في كُسيا‪َ .‬مع رنك ‪ ،‬فإن انغمُض انسائذ في عالقت آسيا بانمصانح انُطىيت نهُالياث‬
‫انمخحذة يزيذ مه غمُض دساست انسياست األمشيكيت في آسيا‪ .‬فقذ قامج امشيكا بخمذيذ سياست االحخُاء انخي حمج صياغخٍا‬
‫نخكُن مُجٍت نهذَل األَسَبيت ‪ ،‬نخشمم آسيا نخغطيت انحشب انكُسيت ‪َ ،‬حظٍش بعط انذساساث حُل حقييم سياست االحخُاء‬
‫األمشيكيت في آسيا أوٍا خهقج مشاكم في انعالقاث األمشيكيت اآلسيُيت بذالً مه حهٍا‪ .‬وحاَل فيٍزا انبحذ دساست انخطبيق‬
‫األمشيكي نسياست االحخُاء طُال حقبت انحشب انباسدة خاصت أرىاء انخُسط األمشيكي في انحشب انكُسيت بيه ‪-9151‬‬
‫‪ . 9150‬انطشيقت انمعخمذة نخحقيق ٌزا انغشض ٌي طشيقت َصفيت حاسيخيت حيذ حٍذف انذساست إنى َصف األحذاد‬
‫انخاسيخيت نهخذخم األمشيكي في كُسيا‪ .‬كما حشيش وخائج انذساست إنى أن انٍذف انىٍائي نهُالياث انمخحذة األمشيكيت كان مىع‬
‫اوخشاس انشيُعيت في انعانم في ظم سياست االحخُاء‪ .‬اسخخذمج اإلداسة األمشيكيت انعذيذ مه انُسائم االقخصاديت َانسياسيت‬
‫نخحقيق ٌزا انٍذف في أَسَبا‪ ،‬غيش ان مماسست وفس انسياست اإلحخُاءكاوج مخخهفت حما ًما في آسيا‪ َ .‬خاصت في كُسيا ‪،‬‬
‫حيذ اعخمذ األمشيكيُن عهى انقُاث انعسكشيت نذحش شيُعيت االححاد انسُفيخي‪َ .‬عهيً ‪ ،‬فقذ مزهج انحشب انكُسيت وقطت‬
‫ححُل في سياست االحخُاء‪..‬‬

‫الكلمات المفتاحية‪ :‬انحشب انباسدة ‪ ،‬انشيُعيت ‪ ،‬االحخُاء ‪ ،‬انحشب انكُسيت ‪ ،‬االححاد انسُفيخي ‪ ،‬انُالياث انمخحذة‪.‬‬