Academic journal article Presidential Studies Quarterly

Ronald Reagan and the Defeat of the Soviet Empire

Academic journal article Presidential Studies Quarterly

Ronald Reagan and the Defeat of the Soviet Empire

Article excerpt

American policy in the 1980s was a catalyst for the collapse of the Soviet Union.

Former KGB General Oleg Kalugin(1)

In 1980, the Soviet Union threatened the survival of the United States, her allies, and the very principle of self-government. In 1990, the Berlin Wall was gone, the Warsaw Pact had disintegrated in all but name, and the Soviet Union was only months away from ceasing to exist as a nation. The United States won what was, for all practical purposes, the "third world war." Far from being accidental or, conversely, inevitable, this foreign policy triumph arguably resulted from a coherent strategic vision forged and implemented by American policy makers against much opposition and great odds; a triumph of the West, and a triumph for the foreign policy of Ronald Reagan.

From the Communist victory in Vietnam until the invasion of Afghanistan, the Soviet empire absorbed ten countries: an average of one every six months. By mid-1979, commentators across party lines were calling this sequence of events "America in Retreat."(2) This burst of Soviet expansion, fed by America's failure in Vietnam, was undergirded by an enormous and offensive-oriented military buildup. By 1979, Soviet military spending was estimated at 12-14 percent of their GNP; up 70 percent more in dollar terms than U.S. defense spending.(3) By the beginning of the 1980s, "Soviet leaders stated with growing confidence that the correlation of forces had shifted in their favor."(4)

In response, American defense spending stopped its downward slide in 1978. Public opinion began favoring a firmer line toward the Soviets, a trend that accelerated through 1979 and 1980.(5) In November 1979, the Iranian hostage crisis began, which proved a catalyst for the reassertion of American strength. And in December, the Soviets drove the final nail into the coffin of "detente" when they took Kabul. Jimmy Carter responded with further defense spending increases, the removal of SALT II from Senate consideration, the grain embargo, the Olympic boycott, and the "Carter Doctrine." The post-Afghanistan Carter, however, would only be a transitional figure, serving as a bridge between the accommodationist pre-Afghanistan Carter and Ronald Reagan.

The Restoration of Containment and Deterrence

The first task facing Reagan was to prevent further erosion of America's position in the world, and to restore the vigor of the policy of containment and the military strength needed to deter further Soviet expansionism. A month before taking office, Reagan was warned by Alexandre de Marenches, France's intelligence director, that in the absence of significant American stiffening even France and other close allies might begin to waver between East and West.(6) Vital as this task was, it remained defensive and reactive in character. This defensive track consisted of three major components: the military buildup, the re-establishment of containment, and the solidification of America's alliances.

Defense Buildup

Reagan expanded on Carter's defense spending proposal, and U.S. defense spending increased from $134 billion in 1980 to $253 billion in 1985 before levelling off This was an increase of 42 percent in real terms. The three most important aspects of this defense buildup were: strategic modernization, conventional force buildup, and improvements in readiness and mobility. The strategic buildup had several objectives: to maintain the strategic balance threatened by Soviet strategic modernization; to make possible a "counterforce" targeting strategy; and to restore American negotiating leverage. Despite the considerable influence of the nuclear freeze movement in 1981-83, the Reagan administration and Congress put most of the strategic modernization program into effect. The, administration increased conventional forces by adding to the number of men and divisions under arms, the number of tactical fighter wings, and the number of ships in the Navy. …

Search by... Author
Show... All Results Primary Sources Peer-reviewed


An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.