Political Science

The Cuban Missile Crisis which lasted thirteen days is regarded as one of the most dangerous moments of the cold war which drove the world on a brink of a nuclear war. The crisis was a conflict between the United States and the Soviet Union. While the US armed forces were more ready than ever for war after discovering that the Soviet Union had deployed missiles in Cuba, Soviet Union commanders stationed in Cuba were more than ready to use battlefield nuclear weapons in defense of the Island in the event it was invaded by the United States. The desire by Krushchev to strengthen the soviet union by acquiring allies in the western hemisphere and having its missiles close enough to strike the US was not taken well by the Americans who sought to defend their position globally and the maintain the status quo as the strongest nation in the world.  The crisis was however resolved after several diplomatic negotiations and compromises made by the then the then leaders of the two nations Premier Nikita Khrushchev and President John F. Kennedy saving the world of a nuclear war and changing certain aspects of the power of the two nations while others remained the same. It is on this background that this paper seeks to discuss how realistic perspective accounts for the origin and the outcome of this crisis.

The military aspects of the crisis represent several concepts of realism. First strike capability is one of the causes of the crisis as both nations sought military superiority. Though the Soviet Union had missiles powerful enough to strike against the entire Europe, US missiles were more powerful and had the capability of striking the entire U.S.S.R. The Soviet Union feared that the US, which was superior as far as nuclear weapon was concerned, would use this superiority against USSR. To counter this, the Soviet Union embarked on developing their own nuclear weapons to which the US responded by developing thermonuclear weapons which were more powerful. This fact can also be explained by security dilemma as any changes in the arming of one side resulted to uncertainty and mistrust which ended in a conflict. The situation was such that the security of one nation reduced that of the other. The decision by U.S.S.R to bring its nuclear weapons closer to the US in Cuba is what accelerated the Cuban Missile Crisis as this increased Soviet Unions first strike capability. The concept of balance of power is also revealed as each of the two nations sought to have military superiority as a way of curbing the influence of the other to itself and the rest of the world.

The diplomatic aspect of the crisis in which was characterized by each nation seeking to have the other make some compromise in order to protect its interest reveals offensiverevisionist vs. defensivestatus quo objectives which are concepts of realism. The main reason as to why the Soviet developed missiles in Cuba was so that it could have an ally in the region that was controlled by the US and to prevent the US from invading Cuba which the U.S.S.R did not want to lose. While the US found this offensive and sought to maintain the status quo that the western hemisphere was under its control, the Soviet wanted to revise this fact. Though Stalin who preceded Krushchev had acknowledged that the US was superior, Krushchev sought to revise this theory which had been accepted worldwide. As the US sought to defend its position and the status quo, and the soviets seeking to revise it, it culminated to the Cuban Missiles crisis. However, this also led to the resolution as the USSR agreed to pull its weapons out of Cuba after the US also agreed to withdraw its missiles from Turkey and Italy. Cuba also retained its sovereignty and could not be attacked by the US. The diplomatic aspect can be also be attributed to the concept of balance of power as each of the two competition nations sought to prevent each other from becoming strong enough to enforce its influence on the rest.

Both the US and the Soviet Union were economically superior in their respective regions. This brings out the concept of relative capability as both nations were well advanced in technology which they used to increase their military strength. It is this capability that caused them to compete each seeking to gain global supremacy. The result was the crisis which almost plunged the world in a nuclear war.

The concept of balance of power accounts for the resolution of the crisis in which both nations were forced to comprise. While US agreed to withdraw its missiles from Turkey and Italy which were close to Russia and not to ever attack Cuba again, the USSR had to also withdraw its missiles from Cuba, a clear indication of the concept of balance of power. Even though most people believe that the United States came out victorious following the resolution reached because its withdrawal from turkey and Italy was secrete, the Soviet Union also won this conflict as withdrawal of US missiles from territories close to it somehow reduced military threat from the US. It can be argued that in this case, both nations used their military power to influence the other to act in a way that each one of them desired.

Some aspects of this crisis can however not be explained well by realism. The fall out of USSR with China and the deterioration of its relations with Cubas as a result of the resolution are crucial to the understanding of the overall crisis but can only be explained by identity perspective and through the concepts of ideological differences and identity construction respectively. The compromises made by both the US and the USSR to end the crisis peacefully can also be explained more appropriately by liberal perspective and in particular the concepts of diplomacy and reciprocity. Diplomacy accounts for the fact that nations allowed talks and negotiations before waging war against each other. While the fact that the two nations mutually interchanged favors (withdrawal of the missiles from the various locations) is attributed to the concept of reciprocity.

In conclusion, the Cuban Missile Crisis its causes and resolution can be explained through the realist perspective using various concepts including relative capabilities, balance of power, security dilemma and, first-strike capability, offensiverevisionist vs. defensivestatus quo objectives. However, some aspects of the resolution as well as the outcomes of the crisis which are essential to an understanding of the overall crisis are most appropriately discussed using liberal and identity perspectives as discussed in the paper.