Foreign Affairs Discussion Group Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Jacob Snyder who wrote (87674)	3/29/2003 1:43:49 PM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) of 281500

Beyond the Final Scorecard How did Reagan contribute to the demise of the Soviet empire? You can draw up a scorecard and count the economic costs that Reagan’s policies placed on a struggling Soviet economy, using Moscow’s numbers: • The second strand of the European natural gas pipeline Reagan stopped: lost revenue, $7–8 billion a year • The cost of counterinsurgency operations against Reagan-backed guerrillas: $8 billion a year • Extra arms shipped to Cuba to soothe anxieties following the U.S. invasion of Grenada: $3 billion • Military spending increases announced to match Reagan’s: $15–20 billion a year • Lost revenue due to restrictions on technology imports: $1–2 billion a year • Lost revenue from a sudden drop in oil prices: $5–6 billion a year • Extra aid delivered to Poland after Reagan’s sanctions: $1 billion This amounts to a hefty price tag for a superpower that had total hard-currency earnings of approximately $32 billion at the time. Or you can look at the body blows that the Soviet empire suffered. Military defeat in Afghanistan demoralized the Kremlin and the military as they suffered their first defeat of the Cold War. At the same time, the survival and eventual triumph of Solidarity in Poland burned a hole in the heart of the empire that could never be filled. In both of these cases, Reagan proved decisive in victory. Since the end of the Cold War, a debate has raged about how it ended. It is fashionable now to denigrate Reagan’s role in winning the Cold War. His achievements and strategic vision are minimized in many quarters. We are often offered the image of Reagan as an amiable bumpkin who just happened to be there when it all happened around him. But not only was Reagan passionate and courageous in battle, he had a well-developed plan seeking the demise of the Soviet Union. Developed over the course of 30 years and spelled out in detail through several top-secret national security directives while he was president, the ideas and concepts behind it were largely his own. Make no mistake: This “bumpkin” won the Cold War. It is revealing, though, that one person who never got wrapped up in this debate was Ronald Reagan. One of the last items to be removed from his Oval Office desk in January 1989 was a small sign that read “It’s surprising what you can accomplish when no one is concerned about who gets the credit.” Today we live in a world very different from the one only a quarter-century ago. There is no longer talk of a large-scale war in Europe, no fear of a massive nuclear strike. Understanding Reagan’s struggle and final triumph over communism involves more than debating the past or deciding who gets the credit. It provides us wisdom and hope for the struggles of today and tomorrow. Reagan’s hope that we be guided not by fear but by courage and moral clarity is as apt today as it was during the height of the Cold War. www-hoover.stanford.edu

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next