In the years 1953-61 some might say that the cold war tensions were eased by peaceful coexistence, with super power negotiations and key agreements paving the way for better relations. Despite this, the stronger argument suggests that ultimately, cold war tensions were not eased, the cold war continued for another 30 years. This was due to failure to negotiate anything of substance at conferences such as Geneva 1955 and the lack of change in superpower attitude with Eisenhower’s new look policy and the USSR’s approach to Hungary.
One argument suggests that peaceful coexistence did ease cold war tensions due to the …show more content…
Whilst it all appeared to be good that the two superpowers were meeting, nothing was ever achieved. There was no end to the arms race, nor any agreement over Germany, therefore peaceful coexistence failed to ease tensions in the cold war between the two superpowers between 1953-61 as the arms race and the cold war continued.
Peaceful coexistence did not ease cold war tensions between the two superpowers, the most significant reason was due to there not being any real change in superpower attitudes. Whilst there was an obvious change in attitudes after Stalin’s death, between 1953-61 there was no real change in Khrushchev’s attitude to peaceful coexistence. Whilst the Austrian treaty was Khrushchev’s initiative, the events in Hungary in 1956 show that in reality, Khrushchev was not committed to peaceful coexistence. Whilst he was prepared to give up countries that did not matter to him, he was prepared to use violence and force when countries mattered to him. The creation of the Warsaw pact also signifies that Khrushchev was not committed to peaceful coexistence, if he was then he would not have felt the need to create an eastern European security pact. Equally there was no real change in superpower attitude in the USA. Eisenhower’s new look policy which emphasised the expansion of the nuclear programme along with his continuation of the