Cold War Unit

The Cold War
Jessica Grendzienski, Raven Allen, Aiza Khan

Table of Contents
1. Curriculum Guidelines.p. 2-4
2. Divisions in the post-war era..p. 5-64

I. Hooks
II. Activities
III. Assessments
IV. Appendices
3. At the height of Cold war Politics.p. 65- 82

I. Hooks
II. Activities
III. Assessments
IV. Appendices
4. A time of technological innovation. p. 83- 96

I. Hooks
II. Activities
III. Assessments
IV. Appendices
5. The times they are a changin: culture and media in the Cold Warp
.p. 97-121
I. Hooks
II. Activities
III. Assessments
IV. Appendices
6. Changes in Cold War Relationships: collapse of the dtente..p. 122-157

I. Hooks
II. Activities
III. Assessments
IV. Appendices
7. The Dissolution of the Soviet Union.p. 156-177

I. Hooks
II. Activities
III. Assessments
IV. Appendices
8. The end of the Cold War.p. 178-197

I. Hooks
II. Activities
III. Assessments
IV. Appendices
9. Culminating Assessment..p. 198- 199
1
Curriculum Guidelines
World History: The West and the World

Grade 12, University Preparation (CHY4U)
This course investigates the major trends in Western civilization and world history from the
sixteenth century to the present. Students will learn about the interaction between the emerg-
ing West and other regions of the world and about the development of modern social, political,
and economic systems. They will use critical-thinking and communication skills to investigate the
historical roots of contemporary issues and present their conclusions.
Prerequisite: Any university or university/college preparation course in Canadian and world

studies, English, or social sciences and humanities
Communities: Local, National, and Global

OVERALL EXPECTATIONS
By the end of this course, students will:
demonstrate an understanding of a variety of types of communities that have evolved

since the sixteenth century;
compare elements of various types of interactions that have occurred among diverse
peoples and cultures since the sixteenth century;
evaluate factors that have led to conflict and war or to cooperation and peace between
various communities since the sixteenth century.
SPECIFIC EXPECTATIONS
I. Types of Communities and Their Development

II. The Nature of Interactions Among Communities
III. Conflict and Cooperation
Change and Continuity

demonstrate an understanding of how the historical concept of change is used to analyse

developments in the West and throughout the world since the sixteenth century;
demonstrate an understanding of how the historical concept of continuity is used to
analyse developments in the West and throughout the world since the sixteenth century;
2
demonstrate an understanding of the importance and use of chronology and cause and
effect in historical analyses of developments in the West and throughout the world since
the sixteenth century.
I. Change in History
II. Continuity in History
III. Chronology and Cause and Effect
Citizenship and Heritage

explain how key Western beliefs, philosophies, and ideologies have shaped the West and
the rest of the world since the sixteenth century;
analyse how non-Western ideas and culture have influenced the course of world history
since the sixteenth century;
analyse different forms of artistic expression and how they have reflected or challenged
the societies in which they have appeared;
assess the range and diversity of concepts of citizenship and human rights that have
developed since the sixteenth century.
I. Western Beliefs, Philosophies, and Ideologies

II. Ideas and Cultures of the Non-Western World
III. Artistic Expression
IV. Citizenship and Human Rights
Social, Economic, and Political Structures

describe diverse social structures and principles that have guided social organization in
Western and non-Western societies since the sixteenth century;
analyse significant economic developments in the West and the rest of the world since the
sixteenth century;
describe key developments and innovations in political organization in theWest and the
rest of the world since the sixteenth century;
analyse changing aspects of womens economic, social, and political lives in Western and
non-Western societies since the sixteenth century.
3
I. Social Structures
II. conomic Structures
III. Political Organization
IV. Womens Experience
Methods of Historical Inquiry and Communication

use methods of historical inquiry to locate, gather, evaluate, and organize research
materials from a variety of sources;
interpret and analyse information gathered through research, employing concepts and
approaches appropriate to historical inquiry;
communicate the results of historical inquiries, using appropriate terms and concepts and
a variety of forms of communication.
I. Research
II. Interpretation and Analysis
III. Communication
4
Part I: 1945-1960
Divisions in the Post-War Era
I. Hooks
Hook 1: Winston Churchills The Sinews of Peace (Iron Curtain Speech)
This hook will introduce the Post-World War Two setting that exists between the
Democratic West and the Communist East. Churchill outlines the increasing role of the
United Nations Organization, acknowledges the United States as the new superpower that
Britain will closely work with, and raises concern that the Soviet Union must be stopped.
The students will first watch the YouTube video of the speech and then will be given a
written copy.
Objective:
Getting students familiar with the two dominant ideologies that existed and the types of
international organizations that formed in the midst of the Cold War such as the United
Nations Organization (UNO) and later the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO).
Procedure:
At the beginning of class the teacher will play the YouTube Video of Winston
Churchills Iron Curtain Speech on a projector screen.
After watching the video, students will get a handout with the written version of
the speech.
Before starting to read Student will be asked to highlight key words and phrases
that they think are important.
Once students finish reading they will discuss their highlighted phrases with a
partner beside them to build on their ideas and come up with key themes.
As a wrap up there will be a class discussion about the significance of Churchills
speech in setting the ideological climate for the Cold War Era.
5
Hook 2: Korean War of 1950-1953 and the 38th Parallel
This hook will use two YouTube videos to give a general overview about Korea and how
the Korean split of the North and South started Post-World War II. The first video talks
about how the North Korea aligns politically with the Soviet Union while South Korea
was influenced by the United States. Furthermore, the 38th parallel line was the only
physical boundary that was separating the two different ideologies from each other until
June 25th 1950 when North Korea sent troops over the border to attack the South. Both
videos give good context on communist leader Kim II-Sung and president Syngman
Rhee of South Korea.
Objective:
The student will start to think about the consequences of having a physical split of land
that separates the Communist North Korea and Democratic South Korea from each other.
This will push students to debate whether the 38th parallel was successful in keeping both
sides from conflict or creating a larger issue of misunderstanding through isolation.
Materials:
Video 1: Everything You Need to Know About Korea
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hD1vXYeODxE
Video 2: A History of the Korean War

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-X7nbwFxGRU
Procedure:
At the beginning of class the two YouTube videos will be shown to
provide context and background information on Korea and the ideological
split.
Following the videos, a map will be put on an overheard projector to give
a visual representation for students to think about why a political, physical
and military division occurred between North and South Korea.
After getting the class to brainstorm about the divide, students will be split
into two sides of the room. One side will be North Korea and the other
will be South Korea. There will be a line of tape that splits the room in
half, which will represent the 38th parallel.
Students will pick one delegate from each side and will take turns in
expressing their political, military, and economic vision at the parallel line
to the opposing delegate on other end.
The hook is meant to familiarize students with both North and South
Korean beliefs and vision when the class listens to the delegates
expressing their goals and concerns and coming forwards once themself.
6
Hook 3: The 1956 Suez Crisis Overview Video
The teacher will introduce the Suez Canal conflict in playing an over 2 minute video that
goes through the key events of the Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser nationalizing
the Suez Canal which angers France, Britain, and their ally Israel. Further, the three
nations decide to invade Egypt to try and gain control of the Suez Canal without
informing the United States or the United Nations Organization about their actions.
President Eisenhower of the United States comments that his country will not get
involved or support the Egyptian invasion.
Objective:
The video is an effective opener for students that may not be familiar with the Suez Canal
and the conflict that arise once President Nasser nationalized the use of the Canal which
France and Britain frequently used for their own economic purposes. The students will
become knowledgeable on the key nations involved in the crisis and their position on the
nationalization of the canal. This will later lead in to Canadas changing international role
as a peacekeeper with Lester B. Pearsons leadership in the United Nations.
Materials:
Video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=44-B2eDU0Q0
Article:
http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/suez-crisis/
Procedure:
The Suez Crisis overview video will be played on a projector screen at the
beginning of class once everyone settles down
Then the teacher will conduct a class discussion on what students can take away
from the video and why is the Suez Canal so important to all the nations involved
in the conflict.
There will be a handout given with a few questions to get students to critically
think about the topic and grasp the historical significance of all the events.
7
II. Activities
Activity 1: The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) Versus The Warsaw
Pact
The activity will get students to work individually and in small groups of 4 to 5 in the
time frame of one class period. First each Student will be provided with a page summary
that goes over the formation of NATO and Warsaw pact that will list which countries are
involved, the purpose of each pact and the dominant beliefs of each. Each student will be
given 10 minutes to read and then will be assigned into small groups by the teacher.
Once in their groups, a blank Venn diagram will be provided to each table where groups
will be expected to compare and contrast NATO and the Warsaw Pact as a group. Once
all the groups finish, there will be a spokesperson selected from each group that will list
one similarity and difference between the pacts to the rest of the class. The purpose of
this is to generate a diverse set of ideas since each group will want to say something
different from the other. While this is happening the teacher can record the answers on
the chalkboard for everyone to see.
After everyone speaks the teacher will hand out a blank map of Europe to every
individual in same groups. Now students will be expected to label all the countries and
colour code nations belonging to NATO, the Warsaw Pact or neither . Students are
encouraged to work as a group for the remainder of the class but every individual will
hand in their own map at the end for the teacher to look over.
By the end of the class, the goal is for students to become familiar with the two
international organizations and know the geographical positioning of the alliances.
Materials:
NATO and Warsaw Pact Reading:

http://www.history.com/topics/cold-war/formation-of-nato-and-warsaw-pact
Venn Diagram:
http://www.studenthandouts.com/3batch/venn2.pdf
Blank Map:
http://mod-world-hist-4-
i.ycjusd.yhs.schoolfusion.us/modules/locker/files/get_group_file.phtml?gid=4527527&fi
d=28552960
8
Activity 2: For or Against Trumans Decision to fire General MacArthur
This activity will take one or two class periods to get student familiar with Americas role
in the Korean War. There will be a video both on General Douglas MacArthur military
role in previous global conflicts and one on American President Harry S. Trumans
disagreement on General MacArthurs decision in South Korea. This will give students
both perspectives on the Truman and MacArthur disagreement.
There will also be a be handout of the President Trumans April 11, 1951 firing speech
justifying why he believed General MacArthur had to be relieved from his duty as
General in South Korea. The primary document will provide students with an opportunity
to analyze and pick out key phrases they can use in their opinion piece.
After analyzing president Trumans speech, students will be given a quotation about
MacArthur and the divided debate that came with his dismissal. When MacArthur came
back to the United States he was greeted as a hero for his military efforts and received
much praise from the American public.
The purpose of the activity is to give the American perspective on the Korean War by
getting students familiar with the President Harry Trumans vision for South Korea and
General MacArthurs military agenda. This is a good way to get students to form their
own individual opinions on the situation by getting to write a page on which side they
choose.
Materials:
General MacArthur Video:
http://www.history.com/topics/korean-war/videos/douglas-macarthur
Truman Video:
http://www.history.com/topics/korean-war/videos/truman-sacks-general-macarthur
Truman Firing Speech:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/macarthur/filmmore/reference/primary/officialdocs03.ht
ml
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/macarthur/sfeature/officialdocs02.html
MacArthur Quote:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/macarthur/peopleevents/pandeAMEX96.html
9
Activity 3: Invaders versus Peacekeepers Role Play Game
This activity will take one class period where the teacher will split the class in two and
assign one half to be the invaders in the Suez Canal Crisis and the others will be the
peacekeepers. The Invaders can choose whether they want to be France, Britain, or Israel.
Similarly, the Peacekeepers can pick the United States, Canada, or the United Nations.
Once students pick a country or international organization that goes with their role they
will be asked to pair up with a someone from the opposite side. Each pair will have an
invader and peacekeeper. The paired students will take turns expressing their views on
the Suez Canal Crisis using the context of their country. After half a period student will
switch sides.
The purpose of this activity is to get students engaged with the Suez Canal Crisis in
making students see the situation from both perspectives. The role plays is intended for
students to work on their oral communication skills.
Materials:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/modern/suez_01.shtml
10
III: Assessments:
Assessment 1: Cold War Propaganda Posters
This assignment can be worked on individually or in pairs based on the students personal
preference. There are two options for this assignment.
Options:
1. Create your own propaganda poster that either aligns with the Soviet Union
ideology or the United States.
2. Pick and analyze a propaganda poster that already exists. Questions will be
provided that should be addressed in the 1 page critical reflection.
Objective:
The assessment is designed to give students an opportunity to show their understanding
on the Cold War unit and the important role propaganda played in promoting political,
military, and economic agendas of the two world powers. Essentially it was American
capitalism against Soviet communism. The assignment encourages creativity and critical
thinking that allows different type of learners to express their knowledge of the unit in a
way that benefits them.
Materials:
Blank sheet of paper
Pencil crayons
Sample propaganda posters
Question sheet
Procedure:
Students will have half a period to work on the assessment in class so if questions arise
the teacher can address any concerns or provide assistance when needed. If more time is
needed students will be expected to finish the assignment on their own time and bring in
their hard copy to class in the next two days.
Resources:
Review of different types of propaganda present in media:

http://alphahistory.com/coldwar/cold-war-propaganda/
Examples of different types of Cold War propaganda posters

http://www.designer-daily.com/10-amazing-cold-war-propaganda-posters-2901
11
Assessment 2: Korean War Comics
Students will create a comic strip that will summarize the Korean War using illustrations
to highlight key events that occurred from 1950 to 1953. Students can focus on key
foreign nations, leaders, battles, and disputes that they believe were significant. Student
may work on this individually or in pairs.
Options:
For foreign nation involvement: Soviet Union, United States, and China
For leaders students can focus on Kim II-Sung, Syngman Rhee, President Harry
Truman, and General MacArthur.
Battles: Osan, Inchon, Kapyong, and first/ second/ battle of Seoul
Objective:
The purpose of this assessment is to see how students understand the international events
that led North and South Korea to split and have a War. The students will also be marked
on their ability to visually communicate their knowledge of the Korean War.
Materials:
Blank piece of paper
Timeline of the Korean War
Markers
Pencils
Sharpies
Procedure:
Students will be given one to two class periods to create a comic strip
representing some of the key nations, leaders, and battles in the Korean War. At
the beginning of class, students will be given a timeline of the Korean War to
refresh their memory and help them pick events they want to focus on in the
comic. After choosing their focus of the Korean War students will start drawing
out their comic and adding short phrases. After two periods of working in-class
students will be expected to hand in their comic.
Resources:
http://www.softschools.com/timelines/korean_war_timeline/36/
http://www.authentichistory.com/1946-1960/2-korea/4-comics/
12
Assessment 3: Writing a Letter to Lester B. Pearson
This assessment asks students to write a letter to Lester B. Pearson as a Canadian living
in 1956 on whether they agree with pulling out British and French troops from Egypt.
Some things to consider are:

How will this change Canadas international role?
Will it change Canadas close relationship with Britain by disagreeing with their
presence in Egypt?
Will Canada and the United States develop a better relationship if they take on
the role of the peacekeeper?
Is there an increasing importance on diplomacy instead of military power?
Is Pearson a hero in your eyes?
Objective:
The assessment aims to get students to critically think about Canadas changing
international role as a peacekeeper with Lester Pearson being an important Canadian
figure whether the general public agreed with him or not. Pearsons proposal at the
United Nations General Assembly changed the course of the Suez Crisis. Students will be
marked on how well they can express their opinion in a one-page letter.
Procedure: Students will have one class period to individually write a letter to Lester
Pearson expressing if they agree or disagree with his peacekeeping decision.
Resources:
http://www.suezcrisis.ca/video_pearson.html
http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/lester-bowles-pearson/
http://www.cbc.ca/history/EPISCONTENTSE1EP15CH1PA3LE.html
13
Appendix 1:
Winston Churchills Iron Curtain Speech
A shadow has fallen upon the scenes so lately lighted by the Allied victory. Nobody
knows what Soviet Russia and its Communist international organization intends to do in
the immediate future, or what are the limits, if any, to their expansive and proselytizing
tendencies. I have a strong admiration and regard for the valiant Russian people and for
my wartime comrade, Marshal Stalin. There is deep sympathy and goodwill in Britain -
and I doubt not here also - towards the peoples of all the Russia and a resolve to
persevere through many differences and rebuffs in establishing lasting friendships. We
understand the Russian need to be secure on her western frontiers by the removal of all
possibility of German aggression. We welcome Russia to her rightful place among the
leading nations of the world. We welcome her flag upon the seas. Above all, we welcome
constant, frequent and growing contacts between the Russian people and our own people
on both sides of the Atlantic. It is my duty however, for I am sure you would wish me to
state the facts as I see them to you, to place before you certain facts about the present
position in Europe.
From Stettin in the Baltic to Trieste in the Adriatic, an iron curtain has descended across
the Continent. Behind that line lie all the capitals of the ancient states of Central and
Eastern Europe. Warsaw, Berlin, Prague, Vienna, Budapest, Belgrade, Bucharest and
Sofia, all these famous cities and the populations around them lie in what I must call the
Soviet sphere, and all are subject in one form or another, not only to Soviet influence but
to a very high and, in many cases, increasing measure of control from Moscow. Athens
alone - Greece with its immortal glories - is free to decide its future at an election under
British, American and French observation. The Russian-dominated Polish Government
has been encouraged to make enormous and wrongful inroads upon Germany, and mass
expulsions of millions of Germans on a scale grievous and undreamed-of are now taking
place. The Communist parties, which were very small in all these Eastern States of
Europe, have been raised to pre-eminence and power far beyond their numbers and are
seeking everywhere to obtain totalitarian control. Police governments are prevailing in
nearly every case, and so far, except in Czechoslovakia, there is no true democracy.
Turkey and Persia are both profoundly alarmed and disturbed at the claims which are
being made upon them and at the pressure being exerted by the Moscow Government. An
attempt is being made by the Russians in Berlin to build up a quasi-Communist party in
their zone of Occupied Germany by showing special favours to groups of left-wing
German leaders. At the end of the fighting last June, the American and British Armies
withdrew westwards, in accordance with an earlier agreement, to a depth at some points
of 150 miles upon a front of nearly four hundred miles, in order to allow our Russian
allies to occupy this vast expanse of territory, which the Western Democracies had
conquered.
If now the Soviet Government tries, by separate action, to build up a pro-Communist

Germany in their areas, this will cause new serious difficulties in the British and
American zones, and will give the defeated Germans the power of putting themselves up
14
to auction between the Soviets and the Western Democracies. Whatever conclusions may
be drawn from these facts - and facts they are - this is certainly not the Liberated Europe
we fought to build up. Nor is it one which contains the essentials of permanent peace.
The safety of the world requires a new unity in Europe, from which no nation should be
permanently outcast. It is from the quarrels of the strong parent races in Europe that the
world wars we have witnessed, or which occurred in former times, have sprung. Twice in
our own lifetime we have seen the United States, against their wishes and their traditions,
against arguments, the force of which it is impossible not to comprehend, drawn by
irresistible forces, into these wars in time to secure the victory of the good cause, but only
after frightful slaughter and devastation had occurred. Twice the United States has had to
send several millions of its young men across the Atlantic to find the war; but now war
can find any nation, wherever it may dwell between dusk and dawn. Surely we should
work with conscious purpose for a grand pacification of Europe, within the structure of
the United Nations and in accordance with its Charter. That I feel is an open cause of
policy of very great importance.
In front of the iron curtain which lies across Europe are other causes for anxiety. In Italy
the Communist Party is seriously hampered by having to support the Communist-trained
Marshal Tito's claims to former Italian territory at the head of the Adriatic. Nevertheless
the future of Italy hangs in the balance. Again one cannot imagine a regenerated Europe
without a strong France. All my public life I have worked for a strong France and I never
lost faith in her destiny, even in the darkest hours. I will not lose faith now. However, in a
great number of countries, far from the Russian frontiers and throughout the world,
Communist fifth columns are established and work in complete unity and absolute
obedience to the directions they receive from the Communist centre. Except in the British
Commonwealth and in the United States where Communism is in its infancy, the
Communist parties or fifth columns constitute a growing challenge and peril to Christian
civilisation. These are sombre facts for anyone to have to recite on the morrow of a
victory gained by so much splendid comradeship in arms and in the cause of freedom and
democracy; but we should be most unwise not to face them squarely while time remains.
The outlook is also anxious in the Far East and especially in Manchuria. The Agreement
which was made at Yalta, to which I was a party, was extremely favourable to Soviet
Russia, but it was made at a time when no one could say that the German war might not
extend all through the summer and autumn of 1945 and when the Japanese war was
expected to last for a further 18 months from the end of the German war. In this country
you are all so well-informed about the Far East, and such devoted friends of China, that I
do not need to expatiate on the situation there.
I have felt bound to portray the shadow which, alike in the west and in the east, falls upon
the world. I was a high minister at the time of the Versailles Treaty and a close friend of
Mr. Lloyd-George, who was the head of the British delegation at Versailles. I did not
myself agree with many things that were done, but I have a very strong impression in my
mind of that situation, and I find it painful to contrast it with that which prevails now. In
those days there were high hopes and unbounded confidence that the wars were over, and
15
that the League of Nations would become all-powerful. I do not see or feel that same
confidence or even the same hopes in the haggard world at the present time.
On the other hand I repulse the idea that a new war is inevitable; still more that it is
imminent. It is because I am sure that our fortunes are still in our own hands and that we
hold the power to save the future, that I feel the duty to speak out now that I have the
occasion and the opportunity to do so. I do not believe that Soviet Russia desires war.
What they desire is the fruits of war and the indefinite expansion of their power and
doctrines. But what we have to consider here to-day while time remains, is the permanent
prevention of war and the establishment of conditions of freedom and democracy as
rapidly as possible in all countries. Our difficulties and dangers will not be removed by
closing our eyes to them. They will not be removed by mere waiting to see what happens;
nor will they be removed by a policy of appeasement. What is needed is a settlement, and
the longer this is delayed, the more difficult it will be and the greater our dangers will
become.
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. If the Western
Democracies stand together in strict adherence to the principles of the United Nations
Charter, their influence for furthering those principles will be immense and no one is
likely to molest them. If however they become divided or falter in their duty and if these
all-important years are allowed to slip away then indeed catastrophe may overwhelm us
all.
Last time I saw it all coming and cried aloud to my own fellow-countrymen and to the
world, but no one paid any attention. Up till the year 1933 or even 1935, Germany might
have been saved from the awful fate which has overtaken her and we might all have been
spared the miseries Hitler let loose upon mankind. There never was a war in all history
easier to prevent by timely action than the one which has just desolated such great areas
of the globe. It could have been prevented in my belief without the firing of a single shot,
and Germany might be powerful, prosperous and honored to-day; but no one would listen
and one by one we were all sucked into the awful whirlpool. We surely must not let that
happen again. This can only be achieved by reaching now, in 1946, a good understanding
on all points with Russia under the general authority of the United Nations Organization
and by the maintenance of that good understanding through many peaceful years, by the
world instrument, supported by the whole strength of the English-speaking world and all
its connections. There is the solution which I respectfully offer to you in this Address to
which I have given the title "The Sinews of Peace."
Let no man underrate the abiding power of the British Empire and Commonwealth.
Because you see the 46 millions in our island harassed about their food supply, of which
they only grow one half, even in war-time, or because we have difficulty in restarting our
industries and export trade after six years of passionate war effort, do not suppose that we
16
shall not come through these dark years of privation as we have come through the
glorious years of agony, or that half a century from now, you will not see 70 or 80
millions of Britons spread about the world and united in defence of our traditions, our
way of life, and of the world causes which you and we espouse. If the population of the
English-speaking Commonwealths be added to that of the United States with all that such
co-operation implies in the air, on the sea, all over the globe and in science and in
industry, and in moral force, there will be no quivering, precarious balance of power to
offer its temptation to ambition or adventure. On the contrary, there will be an
overwhelming assurance of security. If we adhere faithfully to the Charter of the United
Nations and walk forward in sedate and sober strength seeking no one's land or treasure,
seeking to lay no arbitrary control upon the thoughts of men; if all British moral and
material forces and convictions are joined with your own in fraternal association, the
high-roads of the future will be clear, not only for us but for all, not only for our time, but
for a century to come.
http://history1900s.about.com/od/churchillwinston/a/Iron-Curtain.htm
Youtube Video of Iron Curtain Speech:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jvax5VUvjWQ#t=44
17
Appendix 2:
Korean War Map and Photos:
http://www.history.com/topics/korean-war/pictures/korean-war/military-
trucks-crossing-the-38th-parallel-in-korea
18
19
20
Appendix 3:
Suez Crisis:
The 1956 Suez Crisis was a military and political confrontation in Egypt that
threatened to divide the United States and Great Britain, potentially harming
the Western military alliance that had won the Second World War. Lester B.
Pearson, who later became prime minister of Canada, won a Nobel Peace
Prize for using the worlds first, large-scale United Nations peacekeeping
force to de-escalate the situation.
21
The 1956 Suez Crisis was a military and political confrontation in Egypt that threatened
to divide the United States and Great Britain, potentially harming the Western military
alliance that had won theSecond World War. Lester B. Pearson, who later became prime
minister of Canada, won a Nobel Peace Prize for using the worlds first, large-
scale United Nations peacekeeping force to de-escalate the situation.
Egypt Seizes Canal:

The Suez Canal directly links the Mediterranean Sea to the Red Sea. It was built by
Egyptian workers under the French and British-owned Suez Canal Company, and opened
in 1869. The company was seized and nationalized by Egyptian President Gamal Abdel
Nasser on 26 July 1956. The move worried Western governments, as the canal was a vital
route for oil travelling to Britain. If Egypt blocked the flow of oil, Nasser could badly
damage the British economy.
The Egyptian seizure came during the Cold War, further ratcheting up the tensions.
Egypts stated reason for the nationalization of the canal was to use the shipping tolls to
finance construction of the Aswan Dam which promised to control flooding on the
Nile, and provide hydroelectricity as well as other means of industrializing the country.
Nasser continued to operate the canal as usual, but Britain, France and their regional ally
Israel began plotting a military response. Nasser, meanwhile, obtained military arms from
the Soviet Union.
Bombing the Canal:

When diplomacy failed to produce a solution, France, Britain and Israel secretly plotted
to attack, without informing the US, Canada and other NATO allies. Israeli forces
advanced on 29 October to within 42 kilometers of the canal. Britain and France ordered
both Israel and Egypt to withdraw from the Canal Zone (a move pre-planned with Israel).
Nasser did not retreat. On 31 October, Britain and France began bombing the Canal
Zone.
22
The US, not wanting a war, had urged Britain to seek peace. British aggression in Egypt
caused the biggest rift between these important allies in the 20th century.
Canada Becomes Peacemaker:
Publicly, the Canadian governments role was that of conciliator. Privately, however,
Ottawa strongly objected to the military action out of concern that it was dividing the
Commonwealth, damaging relations with the US, and risking a wider war.
Pearson was Canadas secretary of state for external affairs (foreign minister) and headed
Canadas delegation to the UN. He had played an important role in the creation of the
state of Israel in 1947. He spent the summer and fall of 1956 working toward a
diplomatic solution to the Suez Crisis. When that failed, and the bombing began, Pearson
changed tactics.
Working with colleagues at the UN, he developed the idea for the UNs first, large-
scale peacekeeping force. At that time, UN military observers were already being used to
monitor cease-fire agreements in Kashmir and Palestine, but a more robust and armoured
peacekeeping force had not been tried before.
Addressing the UN General Assembly in New York, in the midst of the Suez Crisis,
Pearson made his case for a peace and police force, saying: Peace is far more than
ceasing to fire.
On 4 November, 57 UN states voted in favour of the idea and 19 abstained; no country
voted against the peacekeeping mission. The following day, however, British and French
paratroops ignored the vote and landed in the Canal Zone.
The US continued to pressure British Prime Minister Sir Anthony Eden to find a peaceful
resolution. A cease-fire was arranged, beginning on 6 November, and UN peacekeepers
later entered the canal area. Pearsons solution allowed Britain, France and Israel to
withdraw their forces without giving the appearance of having been defeated. A United
Nations Emergency Force (UNEF) under the command of Canadian General E.L.M.
23
Burns, and including a Canadian supply and logistics contingent, was in place by late
November.
Pearson Wins the Nobel Peace Prize

Pearson won the 1957 Nobel Peace Prize for his initiative in Egypt. In his acceptance
speech, he highlighted Canada's important role in the breakthrough.
I realise also that I share this honour with many friends and colleagues who have
worked with me for the promotion of peace and good understanding between peoples. I
am grateful for the opportunities I have been given to participate in that work as a
representative of my country, Canada, whose people have, I think, shown their devotion
to peace.
Some in Canada and Britain objected to Ottawa's perceived lack of support for Britain. In
the 1957 Canadian election, Pearsons Liberals, under the leadership of Prime
Minister Louis StLaurent, faced accusations that they had betrayed Britain still
regarded by many Canadians as the Mother Country. Pearson defended his position as the
best way to stop the fighting before it spread. The hostile view of some Canadians
towards their country's role in the Suez Crisis is thought to have played a part in the
Liberal government's defeat in the national election.
Pearson, however, would go on to become prime minister six years later in 1963. And his
role in creating the UNs first modern peacekeeping force pointed the way to the future;
UN-sponsored peacekeeping missions would become the proud centrepiece of Canada's
military and diplomatic activities around the world for decades to come.
24
Suez Crisis Question Handout:
1. Why did Egyptian president Gamel Abdel Nasser decide to nationalize the Suez
Canal?
2. Why was Britain and France angry that President Nasser wanted to national the
Suez Canal? How did both countries react?
3. How did Israel get involved in the conflict?
4. What was the United States position on the issue?
5. How did Canadas international role change because of Lester Pearson?
25
Appendix 1:
Formation of NATO and the Warsaw Pact Article:
In 1949, the prospect of further Communist expansion prompted the United States and 11
other Western nations to form the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). The
Soviet Union and its affiliated Communist nations in Eastern Europe founded a rival
alliance, the Warsaw Pact, in 1955. The alignment of nearly every European nation into
one of the two opposing camps formalized the political division of the European
continent that had taken place since World War II (1939-45). This alignment provided the
framework for the military standoff that continued throughout the Cold War (1945-91).
A DIVIDED EUROPE
Conflict between the Western nations (including the United States, Great Britain, France
and other countries) and the Communist Eastern bloc (led by the Union of Soviet
Socialists Republics or USSR) began almost as soon as the guns fell silent at the end
of World War II (1939-45). The USSR oversaw the installation of pro-Soviet
governments in many of the areas it had taken from the Nazis during the war. In
response, the U.S. and its Western allies sought ways to prevent further expansion of
Communist influence on the European continent. In 1947, U.S. leaders introduced
the Marshall Plan, a diplomatic initiative that provided aid to friendly nations to help
them rebuild their war-damaged infrastructures and economies.
Events of the following year prompted American leaders to adopt a more militaristic
stance toward the Soviets. In February 1948, a coup sponsored by the Soviet Union
overthrew the democratic government of Czechoslovakia and brought that nation firmly
into the Communist camp. Within a few days, U.S. leaders agreed to join discussions
aimed at forming a joint security agreement with their European allies. The process
gained new urgency in June of that year, when the USSR cut off ground access to Berlin,
forcing the U.S., Britain and France to airlift supplies to their sectors of the German city,
which had been partitioned between the Western Allies and the Soviets following World
War II.
26
NATO: THE WESTERN NATIONS JOIN FORCES
The discussions between the Western nations concluded on April 4, 1949, when the
foreign ministers of 12 countries in North America and Western Europe gathered
in Washington, D.C., to sign the North Atlantic Treaty. It was primarily a security pact,
with Article 5 stating that a military attack against any of the signatories would be
considered an attack against them all. When U.S. Secretary of State Dean
Acheson (1893-1971) put his signature on the document, it reflected an important change
in American foreign policy. For the first time since the 1700s, the U.S. had formally tied
its security to that of nations in Europethe continent that had served as the flash point for
both world wars.
The original membership of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) consisted of
Belgium, Britain, Canada, Denmark, France, Iceland, Italy, Luxembourg, the
Netherlands, Norway, Portugal and the United States. NATO formed the backbone of the
Wests military bulwark against the USSR and its allies for the next 40 years, with its
membership growing larger over the course of the Cold War era. Greece and Turkey
were admitted in 1952, the Federal Republic of Germany (West Germany) in 1955 and
Spain in 1982. Unhappy with its role in the organization, France opted to withdraw from
military participation in NATO in 1966 and did not return until 1995.
WARSAW PACT: THE COMMUNIST ALLIANCE
The formation of the Warsaw Pact was in some ways a response to the creation of
NATO, although it did not occur until six years after the Western alliance came into
being. It was more directly inspired by the rearming of West Germany and its admission
into NATO in 1955. In the aftermath of World War I and World War II, Soviet leaders
felt very apprehensive about Germany once again becoming a military powera concern
that was shared by many European nations on both sides of the Cold War divide.
In the mid-1950s, however, the U.S. and a number of other NATO members began to
advocate making West Germany part of the alliance and allowing it to form an army
27
under tight restrictions. The Soviets warned that such a provocative action would force
them to make new security arrangements in their own sphere of influence, and they were
true to their word. West Germany formally joined NATO on May 5, 1955, and the
Warsaw Pact was signed less than two weeks later, on May 14. Joining the USSR in the
alliance were Albania, Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, the German Democratic Republic (East
Germany), Hungary, Poland and Romania. This lineup remained constant until the Cold
War ended with the dismantling of all the Communist governments in Eastern Europe in
1989 and 1990.
Like NATO, the Warsaw Pact focused on the objective of creating a coordinated defense
among its member nations in order to deter an enemy attack. There was also an internal
security component to the agreement that proved useful to the USSR. The alliance
provided a mechanism for the Soviets to exercise even tighter control over the other
Communist states in Eastern Europe and deter pact members from seeking greater
autonomy. When Soviet leaders found it necessary to use military force to put down
revolts in Hungary in 1956 and in Czechoslovakia in 1968, for example, they presented
the action as being carried out by the Warsaw Pact rather than by the USSR alone.
28
Name: ______________________________________________________________________ D ate: ________________________________ Cl ass Period: _____
Student Handouts, Inc. www.studenthandouts.com
29
NATO vs. Warsaw Pact
Source: http://www.phschool.com/curriculum_support/map_bank/pdfs/Europe_After_WW_II_A.pdf
= Warsaw Pact
= NATO
= Non-aligned
Nations
= The Iron
Curtain
30
Appendix 2:
Address by President Truman About Policy in the Far East, 1951
HOLD FOR RELEASE

APRIL 11, 1951
CONFIDENTIAL The following address of the President, to be broadcast from the White House
MUST BE HELD IN STRICT CONFIDENCE until release time - 10-30 p.m., est., April 11,
1951. Release is automatic at 10.30 p.m., est.
EXTREME CARE MUST BE EXERCISED TO AVOID PREMATURE PUBLICATION OR

RADIO ANNOUNCEMENT and no portion, synopsis or intimation may be given out, broadcast
or published until release time.
JOSEPH SHORT
Secretary to the President
------------------------------------
I want to talk plainly to you tonight about what we are doing in Korea and about our policy in the
Far East.
In the simplest terms, what we are doing in Korea is this: We are trying to prevent a Third World
War.
I think most people in this country recognized that fact last June. And they warmly supported the
decision of the Government to help the Republic of Korea against the communist aggressors.
Now, many persons, even some who applauded our decision to defend Korea, have forgotten the
basic reason for our action.
It is right for us to be in Korea. It was right last June. It is right today.
I want to remind you why this is true.
The communists in the Kremlin are engaged in a monstrous conspiracy to stamp out freedom all
over the world. If they were to succeed, the United States would be numbered among their
principal victims. It must be clear to everyone that the United States cannot and will not -- sit idly
by and await foreign conquest. The only question is: When is the best time to meet the threat and
how?
The best tine to meet the threat is in the beginning. It is easier to put out a fire in the beginning
when it is small than after it has become a roaring blaze.
And the best way to meet the threat of aggression is for the-peace-loving nations to act together. If
they don't act together, they are likely to be picked off, one by one.
If they had followed the right policies in the 1930's -- if the free countries had acted together, to
crush the aggression of the dictators, and if they had acted in the beginning, when the aggression
was small -- there probably would have been no World War II.
31
If history has taught us anything, it is that aggression anywhere in the world is a threat to peace
everywhere in the world. When that aggression is supported by the cruel and selfish rulers
of a powerful nation who are bent on conquest, it becomes a clear and present danger to the
security and independence of every free nation.
This is a lesson that most people in this country have learned thoroughly. This is the basic reason
why we joined in creating the United Nations. And, since the end of World War II, we have been
putting that lesson into practice -- we have been working with other free nations to check the
aggressive designs of the Soviet Union before they can result in a third world war.
That is what we did in Greece, when that nation was threatened by the aggression of international
communism.
The attack against Greece could have led to general war. But this country came to the aid of
Greece. The United Nations supported Greek resistance. With our help, the determination and
efforts of the Greek people defeated the attack on the spot.
Another big communist threat to peace was the Berlin blockade. That too could have led to war.
But again it was settled because free men would not back down in an emergency.
The aggression against Korea is the boldest and most dangerous move the communists have yet
made.
The attack on Korea was part of a greater plan for conquering all of Asia.
I would like to read to you from a secret intelligence report which came to us after the attack. It is
a report of a speech a communist army officer in North Korea gave to a group of spies and
saboteurs last May, one month before South Korea was invaded. The report shows in great detail
how this invasion was part of a carefully prepared plot. Here is part of what the communist
officer, who had been trained in Moscow, told his men: "Our forces," he said, "are scheduled to
attack South Korean forces about the middle of June. The coming attack on South Korea marks
the first step toward the liberation of Asia."
Notice that he used the word "liberation." That is communist double-talk meaning "conquest."
I have another secret intelligence report here. This one tells what another communist officer in the
Far East told his men several months before the invasion of Korea. Here is what he said: "In order
to successfully undertake the long awaited world revolution, we must first unify Asia.... Java,
Indo-China, Malaya, India, Tibet, Thailand, Philippines, and Japan are our ultimate targets. The
United States is the only obstacle on our road for the liberation of all countries in southeast Asia.
In other words, we must unify the people of Asia and crush the United States."
That is what the communist leaders are telling their people, and that is what they have been trying
to do.
They want to control all Asia from the Kremlin.
This plan of conquest is in flat contradiction to what we believe. We believe that Korea belongs to
the Koreans, that India belongs to the Indians -- that all the nations of Asia should be free to work
out their affairs in their own way. This is the basis of peace in the Far East and everywhere else.
The whole communist imperialism is back of the attack on peace in the Far East. It was the Soviet
32
Union that trained and equipped the North Koreans for aggression. The Chinese communists
massed 44 well-trained and well-equipped divisions on the Korean frontier. These were the troops
they threw into battle when the North Korean communists were beaten.
The question we have had to face is whether the communist plan of conquest can be stopped
without general war. Our Government and other countries associated with us in the United
Nations believe that the best chance of stopping it without general war is to meet the attack in
Korea and defeat it there.
That is what we have been doing. It is a difficult and bitter task.
But so far it has been successful.
So far, we have prevented World War III.
So far, by fighting a limited war in Korea, we have prevented aggression from succeeding, and
bringing on a general war. And the ability of the whole free world to resist communist aggression
has been greatly improved.
We have taught the enemy a lesson. He has found out that aggression is not cheap or easy.
Moreover, men all over the world who want to remain free have been given new courage and new
hope. They know now that the champions of freedom can stand up and fight and that they will
stand up and fight.
Our resolute stand in Korea is helping the forces of freedom now fighting in Indo-China and other
countries in that part of the world. It has already slowed down the time-table of conquest.
In Korea itself, there are signs that the enemy is building up his ground forces for a new mass
offensive. We also know that there have been large increases in the enemy's available air forces.
If a new attack comes, I feel confident it will be turned back. The United Nations fighting forces
are tough and able, and well equipped. They are fighting for a just cause. They are proving to all
the world that the principle of collective security will work. We are proud of all these forces for
the magnificent job they have done against heavy odds. We pray that their efforts may succeed,
for upon their success may hinge the peace of the world.
The communist side must now choose its course of action. The communist rulers may press the
attack against us. They may take further action which will spread the conflict. They have that
choice, and with it the awful responsibility for what may follow. The communists also have the
choice of a peaceful settlement which could lead to a general relaxation of tensions in the Far
Fast. The decision is theirs, because the forces of the United Nations will strive to limit the
conflict if possible.
We do not want to see the conflict in Korea extended. We are trying to prevent a world war -- not
to start one. The best way to do that is to make it plain that we and the other free countries will
continue to resist the attack.
But you may ask why can't we take other steps to punish the aggressor. Why don't we bomb
Manchuria and China itself? Why don't we assist Chinese Nationalists troops to land on the
mainland of China?
If we were to do these things, we would be running a very grave risk of starting a general war. If
that were to happen, we would have brought about the exact situation we are trying to prevent.
33
If we were to do these things, we would become entangled in a vast conflict on the continent of
Asia and our task would become immeasurably more difficult all over the world.
What would suit the ambitions of the Kremlin better than for our military forces to be committed
to a full scale war with Red China?
It may well be that, in spite of our best efforts, the communists may spread the war. But it would
be wrong -- tragically wrong -- for us to take the initiative in extending the war.
The dangers are great. Make no mistake about it. Behind the North Koreans and Chinese
communists in the front lines stand additional millions of Chinese soldiers. And behind the
Chinese stand the tanks, the planes, the submarines, the soldiers, and the scheming rulers of the
Soviet Union.
Our aim is to avoid the spread of the conflict.
The course we have been following is the one best calculated to avoid an all out war. It is the
course consistent with our obligation to do all we can to maintain international peace and security.
Our experience in Greece and Berlin shows that it is the most effective course of action we can
follow.
First of all, it is clear that our efforts in Korea can blunt the will of the Chinese communists to
continue the struggle. The United Nations forces have put up a tremendous fight in Korea and
have inflicted very heavy casualties on the enemy. Our forces are stronger now than they have
been before. These are plain facts which may discourage the Chinese communists from
continuing their attack.
Second, the free world as a whole is growing in military strength every day. In the United States,
in Western Europe, and throughout the world, free men are alert to the Soviet threat and are
building their defenses. This may discourage the communist rulers from continuing the war in
Korea -- and from undertaking new acts of aggression elsewhere.
If the communist authorities realize that they cannot defeat us in Korea, if they realize it would be
foolhardy to widen the hostilities beyond Korea, then they may recognize the folly of continuing
their aggression. A peaceful settlement may then be possible. The door is always open.
Then we may achieve a settlement in Korea which will not compromise the principles and
purposes of the United Nations.
I have thought long and hard about this question of extending the war in Asia. I have discussed it
many times with the ablest military advisers in the country. I believe with all my heart that the
course we are following is the best course.
I believe that we must try to limit the war to Korea for these vital reasons: to make sure that the
precious lives of our fighting men are not wasted; to see that the security of our country and the
free world is not needlessly jeopardized; and to prevent a third world war.
A number of events have made it evident that General MacArthur did not agree with that policy. I
have therefore considered it essential to relieve General MacArthur so that there would be no
doubt or confusion as to the real purpose and aim of our policy.
It was with the deepest personal regret that I found myself compelled to take this action. General
34
MacArthur is one of our greatest military commanders. But the cause of world peace is more
important than any individual.
The change in commands in the Far East means no change whatever in the policy of the United
States. We will carry on the fight in Korea with vigor and determination in an effort to bring the
war to a speedy and successful conclusion.
We are ready, at any time, to negotiate for a restoration of peace in the area. But we will not
engage in appeasement. We are only interested in real peace.
Real peace can be achieved through a settlement based on the following factors:
One: the fighting must stop.
Two: concrete steps must be taken to insure that the fighting will not break out again.
Three: there must be an end to the aggression.
A settlement founded upon these elements would open the way for the unification of Korea and
the withdrawal of all foreign forces.
In the meantime, I want to be clear about our military objective. We are fighting to resist an
outrageous aggression in Korea. We are trying to keep the Korean conflict from spreading
to other areas. But at the same time we must conduct our military activities so as to insure the
security of our forces. This is essential if they are to continue the fight until the enemy abandons
its ruthless attempt to destroy the Republic of Korea,.
That is our military objective -- to repel attack and to restore peace.
In the hard fighting in Korea, we are proving that collective action among nations is not only a
high principle but a workable means of resisting aggression. Defeat of aggression in Korea may
be the turning point in the world's search for a practical way of achieving peace and security.
The struggle of the United Nations in Korea is a struggle for peace.
The free nations have united their strength in an effort to prevent a third world war.
That war can come if the communist rulers want it to come. But this Nation and its allies will not
be responsible for its coming.
We do not want to widen the conflict. We will use every effort to prevent that disaster. And in so
doing, we know that we are following the great principles of peace, freedom, and justice.
35
Statement by President Truman Relieveing Gen. MacArthur of his Military
Duties, 1951
IMMEDIATE RELEASE
April 10, 1951
STATEMENT BY THE PRESIDENT
With deep regret I have concluded that General of the Army Douglas MacArthur is unable to
give his wholehearted support to the policies of the United States Government and of the
United Nations in matters pertaining to his official duties. In view of the specific
responsibilities imposed upon me by the Constitution of the United States and the added
responsibility which has been entrusted to me by the United Nations, I have decided that I
must make a change of command in the Far East. I have, therefore, relieved General
MacArthur of his commands and have designated Lt. Gen. Matthew B. Ridgway as his
successor.
Full and vigorous debate on matters of national policy is a vital element in the constitutional
system of our free democracy. It is fundamental, however, that military commanders must be
governed by the policies and directives issued to them in the manner provided by our laws
and Constitution. In time of crisis, this consideration is particularly compelling.
General MacArthur's place in history as one of our greatest commanders is fully established.
The nation owes him a debt of gratitude for the distinguished and exceptional service which
he has rendered his country in posts of great responsibility. For that reason I repeat my
regret at the necessity for the action I feel compelled to take in his case.
36
MacArthur Biography:
You couldn't shrug your shoulders at Douglas MacArthur," observes historian David
McCullough. "There was nothing bland about him, nothing passive about him, nothing dull
about him. There's no question about his patriotism, there's no question about his courage,
and there's no question, it seems to me, about his importance as one of the protagonists of
the 20th century."
Douglas MacArthur lived his entire life, from cradle to grave, in the United States Army. He
spent his early years in remote sections of New Mexico, where his father, Arthur MacArthur
Jr., commanded an infantry company charged with protecting settlers and railroad workers
from the Indian "menace." As a teenager, Arthur had served with distinction in the Union
Army, eventually earning the Congressional Medal of Honor for leading a courageous assault
up Missionary Ridge in Tennessee. But he soon discovered that life in the post-Civil War U.S.
Army held little of the glamour he knew during the war. These years were even harder for
Douglas' mother, Mary Pinkney Hardy MacArthur, whose upbringing as a proper Southern
lady had done little to prepare her for raising a family on dusty western outposts. But seen
through a boy's eyes, life at a place like Ft. Selden, New Mexico, was heady stuff. "My first
memory was the sound of bugles," Douglas MacArthur recalled in his "Reminiscences." "It
was here I learned to ride and shoot even before I could read or write -- indeed, almost before
I could walk or talk." Even more importantly, by watching his father and listening to his
mother, he learned that a MacArthur is always in charge.
When Douglas was six, Captain MacArthur was assigned to Ft. Leavenworth, Kansas, where
"Pinky," as his mother was known, could finally introduce him and his older brother Arthur
to life back in "civilization." Three years later the family took another step in that direction
when they moved to Washington, D.C., where Arthur took a post in the War Department.
During these formative years, Douglas was able to spend time with his grandfather, Judge
Arthur MacArthur, a man of considerable accomplishment and charm. As his grandfather
entertained Washington's elite, Douglas learned another valuable lesson: a MacArthur is a
scholar and a gentleman.
Douglas, who had always been an unremarkable student, first started to reveal his own
intellectual gifts when his father was posted to San Antonio, Texas, in 1893. There he
attended the West Texas Military Academy, thriving in an atmosphere which combined
academics, religion, military discipline and Victorian social graces. By virtue of his excellent
record there, his family's political connections and top scores on the qualifying exam,
Douglas received an appointment to the United States Military Academy at West Point in
1898. Over the next four years, he would achieve one of the finest records in Academy
history. General Arthur MacArthur -- back from the Philippines, where he had helped defeat
the Spanish and served as military governor -- looked on proudly as his son graduated first in
the class of 1903.
What became a lasting connection with the Philippines began with Douglas' first assignment
out of West Point, when the young Lieutenant sailed to the islands to work with a corps of
engineers. While on a surveying mission there, he recalled being "waylaid on a narrow jungle
trail by two desperados, one on each side." MacArthur responded without hesitation. "Like
all frontiersmen, I was expert with a pistol. I dropped them both dead in their tracks, but not
before one had blazed at me with an antiquated rifle." Soon after this first brush with
physical danger, MacArthur enjoyed excitement of a different kind, when he was assigned to
accompany his father on an extended tour through Asia, where the General would review the
military forces of eleven countries. The MacArthurs, Pinky included, were treated like
royalty, and Douglas came away from the trip firmly convinced that America's future -- and
his own -- lay in Asia.
37
One of Douglas's next assignments included service as an aide in Theodore Roosevelt's White
House. But when he found himself in a tedious engineering assignment in Milwaukee in
1907, his performance dropped and he received a poor evaluation. To add to his confusion,
he had fallen in love with a New York debutante named Fanniebelle, and his brilliant career
prospects seemed to wane. But Douglas made amends in his next assignment, at the staff
college at Leavenworth, and when his father died in 1912 he was transferred to the War
Department in Washington, so that he could care for his mother. While there he was taken
under the wing of Chief of Staff Leonard Wood, a protege of his father, and his career was
again firmly on track. In 1915 MacArthur was promoted to major and the following year
became the Army's first public relations officer, performing so well that he is largely credited
with selling the American people on the Selective Service Act of 1917, as the country moved
ever closer to joining the war in Europe.
Even though his record to that point had been excellent, the First World War gave Douglas
MacArthur his first real measure of fame. Quickly promoted to brigadier general, he helped
lead the Rainbow Division -- which he had helped create out of National Guard units before
the war -- through the thick of the fighting in France. With a flamboyant, romantic style
matched only by real feats of courage on the battlefield, MacArthur became the most
decorated American soldier of the war.
While his peers were demoted to their pre-war ranks, MacArthur kept his through a plum
new assignment as Superintendent of West Point. Although he antagonized many of the old
guard, MacArthur made good on his mandate to drag the moribund Academy into the 20th
century, enabling it to produce officers fit to lead the country in the type of modern war he
had just experienced first hand. He also managed to get married -- to Louise Cromwell
Brooks, a vivacious flapper and heiress very different from her spit-and-polish second
husband. A minor scandal erupted when Chief of Staff John J. Pershing -- with whom Louise
had had an affair during the war -- shipped MacArthur from West Point to a makeshift
assignment in the Philippines. Although disappointed, MacArthur was glad to be back in his
beloved islands; Louise, used to the glamorous society of cities like New York and Paris, was
not pleased. Even after their return to the States in 1925, the marriage continued to
deteriorate. Louise filed for divorce in 1928. Once again, MacArthur found solace in the
Philippines, where he took command of the Army's Philippine Department and renewed a
friendship with the island's leading politician, Manuel Quezon, whom he had known since
1903.
Although he and Quezon failed in their bid to have MacArthur named governor of the
Philippines, President Hoover helped take the sting out of it by naming MacArthur to the
Army's top job, Chief of Staff, in 1930. But the early '30s were a trying time to be Chief, when
the Great Depression made Americans deaf to MacArthur's warnings about the rising tide of
world fascism. Despite his able leadership, the Army fell to all-time lows in strength under
his watch. This, along with the damage to his reputation from the Bonus March of 1932,
when he very visibly led army troops in routing impoverished World War I vets from the
capital, made MacArthur receptive to other opportunities. Once again, he was drawn to the
Philippines. In 1935, his old friend Quezon, President of the newly created Philippine
Commonwealth, invited him to return to Manila as head of a U.S. military mission charged
with preparing the islands for full independence in 1946.
The next few years were among the happiest in MacArthur's life. On his way to Manila, he
met and fell in love with 37-year-old Jean Marie Faircloth from Murfreesboro, Tennessee.
When Pinky died shortly after their arrival in Manila, Jean helped fill the void, and her
devotion would remain a source of strength for the rest of his life. After the birth of their son,
Arthur MacArthur IV, the 58-year-old general proved a doting father. But their blissful life in
38
Manila was slowly overshadowed by the growing threat posed by an expansionist Japan.
MacArthur, despite the able assistance of top aide Dwight Eisenhower, would not have
enough time or money to build a force capable of resisting the Japanese. When war finally
came with the blow at Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, the Philippines was doomed:
MacArthur's air force was quickly destroyed, his army shredded, and by January his forces
had retreated to the Bataan peninsula, where they struggled to survive. From his command
post on the island of Corregidor at the mouth of Manila Bay, MacArthur watched his world
fall apart.
But despite MacArthur's poor showing in the Philippines, President Roosevelt knew he
couldn't let America's most famous general fall to the enemy, and ordered him to withdraw to
Australia. Although it ran counter to his notion of a soldier's duty, MacArthur left his men
facing sure destruction, comforted only by the belief that he might lead an army back to
rescue them. For the next three years, the world watched as his personal quest -- "I shall
return" -- became almost synonymous with the war in the Pacific. Although MacArthur's
path through the dense jungles of New Guinea was hardly imagined in the initial war plans,
his singleminded drive and resourcefulness made it one of the two prongs in the Allied drive
to roll back the Japanese. Simultaneously fighting a two front war -- one with the Japanese,
the other with the U.S. Navy, who understandably saw the Pacific as theirs -- MacArthur
slowly gained momentum. In October of 1944 the world watched as he dramatically waded
ashore at Leyte, and in the following months liberated the rest of the Philippines. On
September 2, 1945, he presided over the Japanese surrender on board the "U.S.S. Missouri,"
bringing an end to World War II.
His place as a leading figure of the 20th century already secure, MacArthur may have made
his greatest contribution to history in the next five and a half years, as Supreme Commander
of the Allied Powers in Japan. While initiating some policies and merely implementing
others, by force of personality MacArthur became synonymous with the highly successful
occupation. His GHQ staff helped a devastated Japan rebuild itself, institute a democratic
government, and chart a course that has made it one of the world's leading industrial powers.
Yet by the late 1940s, MacArthur was increasingly bypassed by Washington, and it seemed
his remarkable career might be over.
But in June of 1950, the sudden outbreak of the Korean War -- "Mars' last gift to an old
warrior" -- thrust MacArthur back into the limelight. Placed in command of an American-led
coalition of United Nations forces, MacArthur reversed the dire military situation in the early
months of the war with a brillian amphibious assault behind North Korean lines at the Port
of Inchon. But within weeks of this great triumph he and Washington miscalculated badly.
MacArthur's approach to the Chinese border triggered the entry of Mao's Communist
Chinese, and as 1951 dawned, they faced what he called "an entirely new war." Although the
able leadership of General Matthew B. Ridgway stabilized the military situation near the
prewar boundary at the 38th parallel, MacArthur's months of public and private bickering
with the Truman administration soon came to a head. On April 11, 1951, the President
relieved General MacArthur, triggering a firestorm of protest over our strategy not only in
Korea, but in the Cold War as a whole. As the last great general of World War II to come
home, MacArthur received a hero's welcome. Despite his dramatic televised address to a joint
session of Congress, however, the issue died quickly, and with it any hopes MacArthur had of
reaching the White House in 1952.
True to his word, the old soldier "faded away" from the public eye, living quietly in New York
until his death in 1964. While it's questionable whether his storied life ever brought him
complete satisfaction, one thing is clear: Douglas MacArthur had more than fulfilled his self-
imposed destiny of becoming one of history's great men.
39
Appendix 3:
Suez Canal Crisis:
Creation of the Canal
In 1854 Ferdinand de Lesseps, a French former diplomat, persuaded the Viceroy of Egypt, Mohamed Said,
to permit the construction of a shipping canal through the 100 miles of desert between Africa and Asia. A
prospectus was circulated and on 20 December 1858 the Universal Company of the Suez Maritime Canal
was constituted.
Britain, which had regarded France's increased influence in this region with suspicion, declined the offer of
shares and even organised a boycott resulting in a shortage of investors. Egypt therefore acquired 44% of
the shares.
Construction began on 25 April 1859 and the canal was opened in November 1869 complete with a statue
of de Lesseps dominating the harbour. Said, who died in 1867, was succeeded by his nephew Ismail. In the
first year of the canal's existence, some three-quarters of the vessels using it were British.
By the mid 1870s, Ismail, who had set out to modernise Egypt, but had incurred massive debts, offered his
country's shares in the canal for sale. British Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli bought Egypt's shareholding
for 4 million establishing Britain's influence in the running of this new and extremely important waterway.
Top
Vital British interest
British Sherman tanks advance in North Africa during World War Two The
Suez Canal provided Britain with a shorter sea route to its empire and, as the 20th century dawned and oil
grew in importance, it provided a short sea route to the oilfields of the Persian Gulf. Britain was therefore
committed to protect the canal.
During the two World Wars, the Suez Canal came under attack. Soon after the outbreak of World War One,
Britain declared Egypt a protectorate and British and Indian forces were sent to protect the canal. Turkey,
which had entered the war as Germanys ally in 1914, sent troops to seize the canal in February 1915. This
attack was beaten back and by 1916 British defensive lines had been driven deep into the Sinai desert to
prevent any further attempt.
The defeat of Turkey in 1918 resulted in much of the Ottoman (Turkish) empire being divided between
Britain and France, leaving Britain in control of the oilfields of what is now Iraq.
40
The fighting ebbed and flowed until 1942, when Axis forces seemed poised to break through to the
Suez Canal.
In 1922, Britain gave nominal independence to Egypt, but it was some years before an agreement was
reached. The Anglo-Egyptian Treaty signed in London in 1936 proclaimed Egypt to be an independent
sovereign state, but allowed for British troops to continue to be stationed in the Suez Canal zone to protect
Britains financial and strategic interest in the canal until 1956, at which time the need for their presence
would be re-examined and, if necessary, renegotiated.
Soon after the outbreak of World War Two, Italy, Germanys ally, sent forces to invade Egypt from Libya.
A British and Commonwealth counter-offensive in December 1940 drove the Italians out of Egypt, but in
March 1941 the Italians, reinforced by the German Afrika Korps, attacked again and pushed the Allied
forces back.
The fighting ebbed and flowed along the North African coast until the summer of 1942, when the Axis
forces seemed poised to break through to the Suez Canal and beyond.
Their new offensive, launched on 1 July, lasted most of the month, but the Allied lines held. In August,
Lieutenant General Bernard Montgomery was appointed commander of the British Eighth Army. On 23
October 1942, he launched a major offensive from El Alamein which forced the German-Italian Panzer
Army into retreat.
Subsequent Anglo-American landings in Morocco and Algeria on 8 November cut off the Axis forces in
Tunisia, and on 13 May 1943 they surrendered. The canal was safe once more.
Top
The crisis builds
Anthony Nutting and Abdel Nasser sign the Anglo-Egyptian Suez

Agreement The Suez Crisis of 1956 has its roots in the post-war upsurge of nationalism in Egypt. In 1951,
Nahas Pasha leader of the recently-elected nationalist Wafd party revoked the Anglo-Egyptian Treaty of
1936.
Attacks on the British garrison soon followed and in January 1952 the British government authorised an
operation to disarm the Egyptian paramilitary police force in Ismailia which was orchestrating the violence.
This was successful, but the violence continued. Riots in Cairo of an unprecedented scale followed,
41
culminating in attacks on Saturday 26 January on British property and the expatriate community, thereafter
known as Black Saturday.
It was agreed that British troops would be permitted to return if the Suez Canal was threatened.
British threats to occupy Cairo prompted King Farouk of Egypt to dismiss Nahas Pasha, but in July 1952
Farouk was overthrown in a military coup and General Mohammed Neguib seized power. Rather than
insist on Britain's rights under the 1936 Treaty, Anthony Eden, the British foreign secretary tried to
negotiate with the new government.
In 1954, Colonel Gamel Abdul Nasser replaced General Neguib. He had three goals: to make Egypt
independent by ending British occupation; to build up Egyptian forces for a successful attack on Israel; to
improve Egypts economy by constructing a high dam at Aswan to irrigate the Nile valley.
On 19 October 1954 a treaty was signed by Nasser and by Anthony Nutting, British minister of state for
foreign affairs. The agreement was to last for seven years.
British troops were to be withdrawn from Egypt by June 1956, and the British bases were to be run jointly
by British and Egyptian civilian technicians. Egypt agreed to respect the freedom of navigation through the
canal, and it was agreed that British troops would be permitted to return if the Suez Canal was threatened
by an outside power.
Top
Appeasement fears
In February 1955, Anglo-Egyptian affairs were strained once more by Eden's decision to deprive Nasser of
promised British arms. In April, Eden succeeded Winston Churchill as prime minister.
As the last British troops left Egypt, Nasser was completing the purchase of Soviet-made aircraft, tanks and
arms from Czechoslovakia, which might help him to realise one of his goals, the destruction of Israel.
On 26 July 1956, President Nasser nationalised the Anglo-French Suez Canal Company to finance his
dam.
Despite anti-western demonstrations in Egypt, in January 1956 the United States and Britain had pledged
funding to help finance the construction of a new High Dam at Aswan. The US, however, became
convinced that the Dam project would not be a success and wanted to reduce expenditure on foreign aid.
It was also concerned about Nasser's purchase of Soviet arms. On 19 July, US Secretary of State John
Foster Dulles informed the Egyptian ambassador in Washington that his government had decided that it
would not provide funding for the construction of the dam.
42
The British foreign secretary, Selwyn Lloyd, followed suit and withdrew the British offer of aid. The World
Bank then refused to advance Egypt a promised $200 million. On 26 July 1956, President Nasser
nationalised the Anglo-French Suez Canal Company, declaring that he would take the revenue from the
canal to finance his dam.
Eden, who recalled Britain's appeasement of Adolf Hitler in the 1930s, looked to military action which
might result in Nasser's downfall and restore Britain's influence in the region. The United States, however,
made it clear that unjustified military action would not be tolerated.
Top
Treaties and collusion
Detail of the Israeli national flag The end of the Second World War in
1945 had brought a period of rapid change. The creation of the state of Israel in 1948 was followed by the
first Arab-Israeli War, and a renewed upsurge of Arab nationalism made the Middle East a volatile region.
The United States had emerged from World War Two as a global superpower and, as a former colony itself
it was committed to overseeing the decolonisation of the globe. Furthermore, the spread of communism
fostered by the Soviet Union was seen by the US as a threat to western democracy.
A secret agreement was made that Israel should attack Egypt as a pretext for an Anglo-French
invasion of Suez.
In an attempt to strengthen security in the Middle East against Soviet influence, Britain, Turkey, Iraq, Iran
and Pakistan signed a treaty known as the Baghdad Pact in 1955. But Egypt, which was looking to the
Soviet Union for armaments, refused to sign. Iraq later withdrew and the pact, which was renamed the
Central Treaty Organisation, became ineffective in preventing the Cold War from reaching the Middle
East.
In January 1956, Guy Mollet was elected prime minister in France and promised to bring peace to Algeria,
a French colony, in the throes of a nationalist uprising. But the presence of a million French settlers there
made a withdrawal from Algeria politically impossible and his attempts to resolve the situation escalated
the violence.
Meanwhile, Israel, greatly concerned about Egypts rearmament and involved in a series of border clashes
with Egypt, was purchasing aircraft and weapons from France. The French government had been meeting
secretly with Israel and invited Britain to join the negotiations.
43
In October 1956, Mollet, Eden and Israeli Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion met at Sevres near Paris and
concluded a secret agreement that Israel should attack Egypt, thereby providing a pretext for an Anglo-
French invasion of Suez.
Top
Military action
British troops moving through Port Said Ben-Gurion then ordered General Moshe
Dayan, his chief of staff to plan an attack on Egypt. On 29 October 1956, the Israeli attack was spearheaded
by an airborne drop to seize control of the Mitla Pass. Heavy fighting followed.
The next day, Britain and France issued ultimatums to both sides to stop the fighting immediately. The
Israelis continued their operations, expecting an Egyptian counter-attack. Instead, Nassers army was
withdrawing.
Militarily the operation was well on its way to being a great success.
On 5 November, some three months and 10 days after Nasser had nationalised the canal, the Anglo-French
assault on Suez was launched. It was preceded by an aerial bombardment, which grounded and destroyed
the Egyptian Air Force.
Soon after dawn, soldiers of 3rd Battalion, the Parachute Regiment, dropped onto El Gamil airfield, while
French paratroopers landed south of the Raswa bridges and at Port Fuad.
Within 45 minutes, all Egyptian resistance on the airfield had been overcome and Royal Naval helicopters
were bringing in supplies. With El Gamil secured, the British Paras moved eastwards towards Port Said,
meeting their first serious opposition en route. With air support, they overwhelmed the Egyptian forces then
stopped and dug-in overnight because the beach area of Port Said was to be bombarded next day during the
seaborne landing.
On 6 November, the sea and helicopter-borne assault went in. Royal Marine Commandos, together with
British and French airborne forces supported by British tanks soon defeated the Egyptian forces, capturing
men, vehicles and many of the newly purchased Czech-manufactured weapons.
44
At midnight on 6 November a cease-fire was called on the insistence of UN Secretary General Dag
Hammarskjld. The Anglo-French forces had reached El Cap, just south of Port Said, but were not yet in
control of the entire canal when they were stopped. Militarily, the operation was well on its way to being a
great success.
Backlash
Anthony Eden in 1956 Politically, the intervention in Suez was

a disaster. US President Dwight Eisenhower was incensed. World opinion, especially
that of the United States, together with the threat of Soviet intervention, forced
Britain, France and Israel to withdraw their troops from Egypt. In Britain too there
had been widespread outrage.
A United Nations peacekeeping force was sent in to supervise the ceasefire and to
restore order. The Suez Canal was cleared and reopened, but Britain in particular
found its standing with the US weakened and its influence 'east of Suez' diminished
by the adventure.
Eden told the Commons: 'There was not foreknowledge that Israel would
attack Egypt. There was not.
Accusations of collusion between Britain, France and Israel started in 1956, but were
denied in parliament by Eden who tried to avoid giving a clear and categorical
answer.
He was at last asked whether there was foreknowledge of the Israeli attack and on
20 December in his last address to the House of Commons, recorded in Hansard, he
replied: 'I want to say this on the question of foreknowledge, and to say it quite
bluntly to the House, that there was not foreknowledge that Israel would attack
Egypt. There was not.
In January 1957, his health shattered and his political credibility severely damaged,
Sir Anthony Eden, the British prime minister, resigned. Guy Mollet, the French prime
45
minister, survived longer despite fierce criticism, but his government collapsed in
June 1957 over the taxation he imposed to pay for the Algerian War.
Anglo-American relations were strained by the Suez Crisis, but as Cold War Allies in
the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (Nato) they continued to cooperate, and by
1962 Britain had adopted the US Polaris missile system. Nonetheless, the real
balance of power in the post-World War Two world had been starkly demonstrated
and Britain's prestige was dealt a severe blow.
46
Appendix 1:
Cold War propaganda reached its heights in the 1950s and 1960s, with concerted
attempts to demonise communism while extolling the virtues of capitalism and
democracy. Pro-American values were promoted in film, television, music, literature
and art. This was done openly and often with little subtlety; watched today, some
examples are little more than nonsensical propaganda. The 1948 animated
feature Make Mine Freedom extolled the advantages and freedoms available to those
who live in a capitalist society. Released the following year, Meet King Joe told
American workers to be content with their lot, as they had it better than workers
anywhere else in the world. As time progressed the themes and methods in pro-
democracy propaganda became more subtle; governments produced less of it
themselves, instead relying on film and television studios to incorporate acceptable
ideas and values into their product. Most of the radio series, dramas and sit-coms
made in America during the 1950s celebrated the distinct advantages of living in a
prosperous, capitalist nation. The benefits of things such as the nuclear family, school,
community, obedience and loyalty were openly promoted.
In addition, communism was condemned both as an ideology and a social system.

Every medium from motion pictures down to childrens comic books was used to
portray an America under the heel of a communist dictatorship. A classic example was
the early 1950s film Red Nightmare, first made as an instructional film for the armed
forces but later released on television. Red Nightmare makes the outlandish claim that
entire US cities had been reconstructed in Soviet territory, in order to train communist
spies and infiltrators in methods of bringing down American government and society.
In the comic book This Godless Communism, an American family finds the US has
been taken over by communists, virtually overnight, and renamed the United Soviet
States of America. As they attempt to find help, they find all their rights and freedoms
have been abolished; father is relocated to a distant lumber mill, mother to an urban
factory and the children to state-run schools and nurseries. In the 1950s the CIA
commissioned an animated film version of George Orwells Animal Farm an
allegorical account of the Russian Revolution and Soviet government to serve as
propaganda.
Anti-communism in popular culture
Some other examples of Cold War propaganda include:
Movies. Motion pictures brought the battle between democracy and communism to
the big screen. Many of these films were made in the wake of the HUAC-inspired
blacklists, as movie studios and producers strived to appear patriotic and loyal. In Big
Jim McLain, John Wayne stars as a HUAC investigator who travels to Hawaii to stamp
out communist activity there. Soviet and Western espionage was a common theme,
represented in movies such as The Third Man. Cold War hysteria leaked into the
science-fiction genre, in movies such as Red Planet Mars, Invasion of the Body
Snatchers and The Blob. All contained aliens who were shadowy forces hell-bent on
taking control of the world by stealth, an obvious metaphor for perceptions of
communism. Cold War themes were also revived in 1980s films such as Red
Dawn(where the US is subject to a joint Soviet-Cuban invasion) and Rocky IV (where
an American boxer does battle with a robotic Soviet fighter).
47
The bumbling but effective TV spy Maxwell Smart
Television. Television was still in its infancy in the 1950s. Most television programs
contained music, light entertainment and comedy, so anti-communist themes were
represented with more subtlety. American television in the 1950s promoted
conservative family values and the virtues of American society, particularly in its
situation comedies. Situation comedies like Leave it to Beaver and The Adventures of
Ozzie and Harriet emphasised the importance of education, work, obedience, respect
for your parents and the stability and prosperity enjoyed by American families. Cold
War espionage was explored in drama series like I Spy and The Man from UNCLE; it
was also parodied in the Mel Brooks-created series Get Smart. Even the villains in
childrens cartoons like Rocky and Bullwinkle (Boris and Natasha) and Roger
Ramjet(Noodles Romanoff) were nothing more than stereotypical European
communist agents. Television journalists occasionally influenced public attitudes,
such as Edward R. Murrows 1954 criticism of Joseph McCarthy, or Walter Cronkites
1968 editorial suggesting that the US should look to withdraw from Vietnam.
The United States and its allies tried to convince their citizens that they lived in the
best possible society. It may not have been as free, democratic or egalitarian as the
propaganda asserted, but it did boast free markets, limited government, the rule of
law, individualism and human rights. A system of selling these beliefs domestically
was successfully in place, despite the debunking efforts of its enemies at home and
abroad. According to Frederick C. Barghoorn, the Soviet Union attempted to sap the
faith of Americans in their leaders and their institutions, but failed.
Daniel Leab, historian
Literature. George Orwells 1984 expanded on the Cold War by envisioning a world
kept divided and obedient with fears of perpetual war. The spy novel genre was by
far the most prevalent in Cold War literature. Ian Flemings novels about a British spy,
James Bond, were written in the 1950s and were motivated by tensions with the Soviet
bloc. In The Spy who Loved Me, Bond does battle with SMERSH, a Soviet counter-
espionage agency. John le Carre (a pen-name for David Cornwell, a former employee
of British spy agency MI5) penned a number of novels such as The Spy Who Came
In from the Cold, set in East Germany. The 1950s and 1960s also saw the production
of hundreds of cheap pulp-fiction novels, often with lewd themes or excessive
violence. Purgatory of the Conquered showed an America taken over by communist
forces; Red Rape told of a Soviet-run operation to capture Western women for the
purposes of sexual slavery.
The Arts. Cold War tensions fuelled competition and shaped the content of art forms
as diverse as music and ballet. American and Soviet dance companies performed
regularly around the world, attempting to demonstrate cultural superiority. This
competition led to a dramatic rise in US government funding for the arts. A critical
moment came in 1961 when Soviet dancer Rudolf Nureyev defected to the West to
perform with Britains Royal Ballet; Russian leader Nikita Khrushchev later signed a
death warrant for Nureyev, should he ever return to Russia. The US provided funds to
allow several orchestras, jazz bands and solo musicians to tour the USSR, in an
attempt to demonstrate the artistic advantages of capitalism. The superpowers also
engaged in chess competitions to prove whose strategies were more effective.
48
Sport. Cold War rivalry was also reflected in sporting events. The 1956 Olympic
Games in Melbourne were held just days after Soviet forces had crushed a pro-
democratic uprising in Hungary, prompting the withdrawal of Holland, Spain and
Switzerland from the games. These tensions spilled over into a water polo match
between Hungary and the USSR, where players exchanged punches and one left the
pool bleeding. The game was called off after the pro-Hungarian crowd threatened to
riot. The 1972 Olympic gold medal basketball match between the US and USSR also
ended in controversy, with the defeated Americans refusing to accept the silver medal.
The 1980 Olympics were held in Moscow and were boycotted by the US, West
Germany, Japan and several other nations. The Soviets reciprocated by refusing to
attend the 1984 Los Angeles Olympics.
Education. In both hemispheres, education was harnessed for Cold War purposes
and to instil the political values of each system. Education systems in both the US and
USSR received dramatic boosts in funding, particularly in the maths and sciences.
Humanities subjects like History and English became steeped in patriotism and
political values. In 1952 the American Pledge of Allegiance, widely chanted by
schoolchildren, was altered to include the words under God. Many American
students were also subject to social hygiene or mental health films in high school.
These 10-20 minute single-reel movies focused on what might now be called personal
development: hygiene, manners, respect for others, appropriate behaviour and sexual
conduct. Many examples contained an obvious political message or subtext, such as
one titled How to Spot a Communist. There were also the ubiquitous instructions and
duck and cover drills to show what to do in the event of a nuclear attack.
Propaganda Poster Examples:
49
50
51
Appendix 2:
Korean War Timeline
Date Event
May 1945 Korea is divided into two countries.
After World War II, Korea is divided into communist North Korea and
anti-communist South Korea at a spot called the 38th parallel. Russia
controls North Korea and the U.S. controls South Korea.
March 12, Harry Truman promises to fight Communism.

1947
President Harry Truman gives a speech and says that that the U.S.
will help any country that is threatened by communism. The speech is
called the Truman Doctrine.
June 25, North Korea invades South Korea.

1950
With permission from Russia, North Korea invades South Korea and
continues on to the capital of Seoul. South Korea does not have a
strong enough army to stop it.
June 25, South Korean President Syngman Rhee executes 100,000

1950 people.
Worried that South Koreans will join the communists, President

Syngman Rhee starts the Summer of Terror and orders over 100,000
people killed.
June 27, The United States joins the Korean War.

1950
President Harry Truman sends U.S. troops to Korea. The U.S. and
other countries in the United Nations join the war because they want
to stop communism from spreading to South Korea.
July 4, 1950 The United States is defeated at Osan.
American troops fight North Korean troops in Osan. The Americans

expected an easy victory, but are surprised to find out that they are
no match for the North Korean army.
September The United States gets a victory at Inchon.

15, 1950
General Douglas MacArthur leads an invasion into South Korea at the
city of Inchon. From there, the United Nations troops go to Seoul and
take it back from North Korea.
October 20, United States troops reach the capital of North Korea.
1950
U.S. troops push their way into Pyongyang, the capital of North
Korea. Soldiers believe that the war will be over soon and start to
take bets on what day the war will officially end.
52
October China joins the Korean War.
1950
China joins the war to fight on the side of North Korea. China's army,
called the People's Volunteer Army, wins several important victories
and pushes the U.S. and South Korean troops back across the 38th
parallel.
November The United Nations forces launch the "Home by Christmas"

24, 1950 offensive.
General MacArthur orders the United Nations forces to move to the

Yalu River, the border between North Korea and northeast China.
MacArthur said the UN troops would be home by Christmas, but they
are attacked by 180,000 Chinese soldiers and have to retreat.
February 1, Peace talks begin.

1951
With neither side gaining ground, peace talks begin. However, it
takes two years to come to an agreement as the war drags on.
April 1951 General Douglas MacArthur is fired.
After General MacArthur publicly disagrees with President Truman

about whether or not to bomb China, MacArthur is fired. Truman
believed that bombing China would have led to a much bigger war.
September The Battle of Heartbreak Ridge begins.

13, 1951
American and French troops start a battle with North Korean and
Chinese troops in a part of South Korea known as the Punchbowl. The
U.S. and France win the month-long battle. Over 25,000 Chinese and
North Korean soldiers die.
November 4, Dwight Eisenhower is elected president.

1952
General Dwight Eisenhower defeats Illinois Senator Adlai Stevenson
to become president of the United States. During his campaign,
Eisenhower said he would end the war in Korea.
July 27, North Korea and South Korea agree to a truce.

1953
North Korea and South Korea sign an agreement to stop fighting.
Korea is still divided, but the two countries agree to create a neutral
zone called the Demilitarized Zone to separate the countries.
April 1954 Talks at Geneva fail to unite Korea.
Representatives from the United States and China meet in Geneva to

talk about uniting Korea. However, the countries cannot come to an
agreement and Korea remains divided.
53
Korean War Comics:
54
55
Appendix 3:
Lester B. Pearson
Lester Bowles "Mike" Pearson, prime minister 1963 68, statesman, politician, public
servant, professor (born 23 April 1897 in Newtonbrook, ON; died 27 D ecember 1972 in
Ottawa, ON).
Pearson, Lester B.
Displaying the Nobel Prize that he won for his role in the Suez
Crisis (courtesy Library and Archives Canada/C-94168).
56
Prime Ministers of Canada
Pearson, Lester Bowles

For all its superficial chaos, the Pearson government left
behind a notable legacy of legislation (Library and Archives
Canada / C-010435).
Lester Bowles "Mike" Pearson, prime minister 196368,
statesman, politician, public servant, professor (born 23 April
1897 in Newtonbrook, ON; died 27 December 1972 in Ottawa,
ON). Pearson was Canada's foremost diplomat of the 1950s and
1960s, and formulated its basic post-WWII foreign policy. A
skilled politician, he rebuilt the Liberal Party and as prime
minister strove to maintain Canada's national unity. Under his
leadership, the government implemented a Canada Pension Plan,
a universal medicare system, a unified armed force, and a
57
new flag. In 1957, he received the Nobel Peace Prize for his
diplomatic efforts in facilitating Britain and Frances departure
from Egypt during the Suez Crisis.
Early Life and Career

Son of a Methodist parson, Pearson spent his childhood moving
from one parsonage to another before enrolling in history at
the University of Toronto. With the outbreak of the First World
War, he enlisted in the Canadian Army Medical Corps and in
1915 was shipped to Greece to join the Allied armies fighting the
Bulgarians. After two years of stretcher-bearing, he transferred
to the Royal Flying Corps in England. His military career came
to a sudden end when he was run over by a London bus and
invalided home.
After earning his BA at the University of Toronto in 1919,
Pearson was undecided on a career. He tried law and business,
won a fellowship to Oxford, and was hired by the University of
Toronto to teach history, which he combined with tennis and
coaching football. Pearson also married and soon had children.
Finding a professor's salary insufficient, he joined the
Department of External Affairs (now Foreign Affairs, Trade and
Development). By 1928 he had trained himself as a perceptive
observer and an able writer, both useful qualities in his work.
Pearson quickly attracted the attention of his deputy
minister,O.D. Skelton.
Representing Canada Abroad

In 1935 he was sent to London as first secretary in the Canadian
High Commission, giving him a front-row seat as Europe drifted
58
towards the Second World War. He was profoundly influenced
by what he saw and thereafter attached great importance to
collective defence in the face of dictatorships and aggression. In
1941 Pearson returned to Canada. He was sent to Washington as
second-in-command at the Canadian Legation in 1942, where his
easygoing personality and personal charm made him a great
success, particularly with the press. In 1945, he was named
Canadian ambassador to the United States and attended the
founding conference of the United Nations (UN) at San
Francisco.
Deputy Minister of External Affairs

In September 1946, Pearson was summoned home by Prime
MinisterMackenzie King to become deputy minister (or
undersecretary) of external affairs. He continued to take a strong
interest in the UN but also promoted a closer political and
economic relationship between Canada and its principal allies,
the US and the United Kingdom. Pearson's work culminated in
Canada's joining the North Atlantic Treaty Organization
(NATO) in 1949. He strongly supported a Western self-defence
organization, although he hoped that its existence would
persuade the Soviet Union (what is now largely Russia) that
aggression would be futile.
Minister of External Affairs

By the time NATO was in place, Pearson had left the civil
service for politics. In September 1948, he became minister of
external affairs and subsequently represented Algoma
East, Ontario, in the House of Commons. As minister, he helped
59
lead Canada into the Korean Waras a contributor to the UN army
and, in 1952, served as president of the UN General Assembly,
where he tried to find a solution to the conflict. His efforts
displeased the Americans, who considered him too inclined to
compromise on difficult points of principle. His greatest
diplomatic achievement came in 1956, when he proposed a
UN peacekeeping force as means for easing the British and
French out of Egypt during the Suez Crisis. His plan was
implemented, and as a reward he received the Nobel Peace Prize
in 1957.
Leader of the Liberal Party

By then Pearson was no longer in office. He and the St-
Laurentgovernment were widely blamed for not standing by
Britain in 1956. The Liberals were defeated, St-Laurent resigned
as leader, and at a convention in January 1958 Pearson
defeated Paul Martin, Sr. to become party leader. The Liberals
faced a minority Conservative government under John
Diefenbaker, and in his first act as leader of the opposition
Pearson challenged Diefenbaker to resign and turn the
government over to him. Diefenbaker ridiculed the idea and in
the subsequent general election the Liberals were reduced to 49
of the 265 seats in the Commons. Pearson began the slow task of
rebuilding the party. With the assistance of parliamentary
debaters such as Paul Martin and J.W. Pickersgill, and party
workers such as Walter Gordon,Mitchell Sharp and Maurice
Lamontagne, he re-established the Liberals as a national party. In
the 1962 general election, Pearson raised the party's total to 100
seats. In 1963, the Diefenbaker government collapsed over the
60
issue of nuclear weapons and in the subsequent election the
Liberals won 128 seats to form a minority government.
Prime Minister 196368

Pearson took office on 22 April 1963. His government was
expected to be more businesslike than Diefenbaker's but proved
instead to be accident-prone, effectively aborting its first budget.
Much of Parliament's time was spent in bitter partisan and
personal wrangling, culminating in the interminable flag
debate of 1964. In 1965, Pearson called a general election but
again failed to secure a majority. In the next year, the Munsinger
scandal erupted with even more partisan bitterness.
The year 1965 marked a dividing line in his administration, as
Finance Minister Walter Gordon departed, and Jean
Marchand and Pierre Trudeau from Qubec became prominent in
the Cabinet. Pearson's attempts in his first term to conciliate
Qubec and the other provinces with "co-operative federalism"
and "bilingualism and biculturalism" were superseded in his
second term by a firm federal response to provincial demands
and by the Qubec government's attempts to usurp federal roles
in international relations. When, during his centennial visit,
French president Charles de Gaulle uttered the separatist slogan
"Vive le Qubec libre" to a crowd in Montral, Pearson issued an
official rebuke and de Gaulle promptly went home. In December
1967, Pearson announced his intention to retire and in April
1968 a Liberal convention picked Pierre Trudeau as his
successor.
61
Legacy
For all its superficial chaos, the Pearson government left behind
a notable legacy of legislation: a Canada Pension Plan, a
universalmedicare system, a unified armed force, and a new flag.
However, its approach to the problem of Canada's economically
disadvantaged regions was less successful and its legacy, which
included the Glace Bay heavy-water plant, was decidedly mixed.
Not all of these initiatives proved fruitful and some were costly,
but they represented the high point of the Canadian welfare
state that generations of social thinkers had dreamed about. In
retirement, Pearson worked on his memoirs and on a study of
international aid for the World Bank.
62
Suez Canal Crisis
Lester B. Pearson pulls the world back from the brink of war and wins the
Nobel Peace Prize
In 1956, a brilliant diplomat named Lester B. Pearson led Canada into

middle power respectability when he pulled the world back from the
brink of war in the Middle East.
The son of a Methodist minister, Pearson grew up in Newtonbrook,

Ontario and earned his diplomatic stripes with postings in wartime
Washington and London. By the end of the Second World War, Pearson
and the rest of the world faced a new diplomatic challenge, as the Cold
War between the United States and the Soviet Union emerged.
The chill between the two superpowers left little room for Canada to
have a voice in international relations. Now the External Affairs
Minister in the Liberal cabinet of Louis St. Laurent, Pearson believed
Canada could be an independent force for international peace and
goodwill. But as the Cold War locked Canada into the American orbit,
Lester Pearson feared his dream was threatened.
"We are constantly faced with the problem of trying to influence United
States policy in a manner which will protect our own interests and our
conception of what is good for the world, but which will not involve us
in public quarrels with a great and friendly neighbour."
But in the mid-1950s events would unfold in the Middle East that
finally gave Pearson a chance to realize his vision for Canada's place in
the new world order.
In the post-war world, Egypt was growing closer to the Moscow and
accepting Soviet arms.
In the summer of 1956, Egyptian leader Gamal Abdel Nasser seized

control of the Suez Canal, a critical shipping route, which was run by
French and British interests. Nasser had acted in response to the two
countries withdrawing foreign investment funds to build a dam on the
Nile River.
In October, despite American opposition, Britain and France, together

with Israel launched attacks on Egypt. Nasser appealed to Soviet
leader Khrushchev, who threatened to shower the west with nuclear
63
weapons if the British and French didn't withdraw. The world
appeared to be on the brink of war.
At the United Nations, Pearson proposed a striking solution. The plan

called for the British and French to withdraw but would allow for a
United Nations force to remain in the area, stabilizing the situation.
"A United Nations force large enough to keep those borders at peace
while a political settlement is being worked out."
The British were unhappy with the proposal, but when it was tabled, all
57 member nations voted for it. There were some in Canada who were
critical of it as well, angry that Canada had not sided with Britain.
It was the first large international peacekeeping force. It included 6000

men from ten countries under the command of a Canadian General
E.L.M. Burns. It helped to keep peace in the Middle East until Egypt
demanded that it leave the area in 1967.
Pearson emerged from the Suez crisis as hero, winning the Nobel
Peace Prize for his role. He had also fulfilled his dream to give Canada
an independent place on the world stage.
Pearson would be elected Prime Minister in 1963 and Canada's

peacekeeping operation would continue to grow and flourish under his
leadership.
To date, Canada has been part of every major peacekeeping

operation. About 80,000 Canadian servicemen and servicewomen have
served in peacekeeping operations in the Middle East, Africa, South
Asia, and Latin America.
64
Part II: 1960-1975
At The Height of Cold War Politics
I. HOOKS
HOOK 1: Ich bin ein Berliner Speech
This hook will be used to introduce the class to John F. Kennedy and the policies of the
United States at the beginning of the 1960s. As one of the most memorable speeches in
U.S. and World History, it will set the political tone of the Cold War at the time. The
speech famously declares the barrier between the "free world" and the "Communist
world". Kennedy addresses the division caused by the Berlin wall and declares it a
physical representation of the "evil" of Communism and a violation of human rights. He
declares that West of the wall, that all citizens are free and that West Berlin is the
frontline of democracy against the enslavement of Communism. Through the speech,
students should be able to interpret the climate of the Cold War at the time and the
significance of the Berlin Wall in intensifying the conflict between East and West.
Procedure:
When students have entered and taken their seats, the teacher will play the
youtube clip of JFK's speech.
At the end of the video, the teacher will distribute a transcript of the speech and
ask the students to read over it once more.
When students are ready, the teacher will ask them to discuss what they found
interesting about the speech or to ask any questions they have about it.
Teacher can guide the discussion by asking:
-What ideals does this speech promote?
-How does this speech differentiate between East and West?
-Do you think this speech is accurate in its representations of East and West?
-What biases do you find obvious within the speech? Do you think them unfair?
The goal of this discussion is to have students actively think about the division
caused by the Cold War and to be reflective of what democracy truly is in both
the context of the Cold War and within their own lives.
HOOK 2: "Who Cares about the Cuban Missile Crisis?" Video Series
The purpose of this hook is to give students a simple introduction to the three viewpoints
of the Cuban Missile Crisis: Russia, Cuba, and America. It provides a background for the
climate which conciliated such a crisis and how each country approached the issue. It
65
requests that students consider the reality and possibility of nuclear war and the
motivations which drove each leader to act in the way they did during the crisis.
Procedure:
Distribute handout for students to fill out while watching videos and during
discussions.
Show each video one at a time, stopping for discussion between each.
After the first, ask students:
- How they think a nuclear war would have affected the progression of the Cold
War?
- In the current political context, is nuclear war still a threat? Why? How?
For Castro, Kennedy, and Kruschev videos, ask:
-Why would this leader want nuclear war? Why wouldn't they?
- How were they pushed towards the crisis which ensued? Were their actions
justified?
The purpose of this hook is to have students consider the political atmosphere of
the Cuban Missile Crisis and to understand how such a situation arose. Students
will be expected to consider more than one perspective of the Crisis by thinking
critically about the contexts of the U.S., Russia, and Cuba.
Students should also consider the parallels between the Cuban Missile Crisis in
relation to the contemporary international politics and the proliferation of nuclear
weapons.
HOOK 3: "Deconstructing History: Vietnam" Video
This video provides a brief overview of Vietnam's history and culture. As a hook, it will
allow the teacher to introduce the issue of the Vietnam War from a more holistic
perspective.
Procedure:
Teacher will play the video for students.

The teacher will ask the students if they learned anything interesting from the
video.
Following discussion, the teacher will explain the significance of Vietnam in the
Cold War and why the conflict erupted.
-Ideally, the teacher will begin with the Vietnamese context before discussing
American involvement and its implications for the country.
Students will be expected to understand the political foundations of the war in
both national and international contexts.
Student should also consider the consequences of American involvement on the
local population and culture of Vietnam.
66
II. ACTIVITIES
ACTIVITY 1: Berlin Wall Simulation
Students will already have been briefed on the building of the Berlin wall and the
division of East and West during the Cold War. This simulation should be completed
over one or two periods.
For this activity, students will first be tasked with physically building a wall dividing the
class in two using materials including desks, paper, cardboard, chairs, and anything else
available in the classroom. After the wall is built, the students will be divided into two
groups and put on either side of the wall. One side will be declared West Berlin and the
other East Berlin.
On the East side of the wall, students will be told not to go near the wall on the penalty of
being "shot" or in this case, cordoned off in a designated corner. Students will be asked to
write about their experience on the East side through journal entries or letters to their
Western counterparts.
On the West side, students will be encouraged to approach the wall and to draw graffiti
on it [present pictures of grafitti on the Berlin Wall as examples]. Letters from students
on the Eastern side will be delivered and the West will read about the pros and cons of
Communism included within.
As a final task, the teacher will hand out candies to the classroom according to their side
of the wall. The East will get one candy per student, everyone the same flavour, and
nothing more. The West will have their candy tossed in the air for grabs and will fend for
themselves in the ensuing grab. The East students will be forced to consider their equality
and yet may be displeased with only getting one candy and nothing more while those in
the West could potentially have more than one. The West, however, may experience its
own issue as some students may not have gotten a candy while others would have gotten
more than one piece.
After this final simulation, have the class reconvene and discuss what they liked or
disliked on their side of the wall. Discuss with them as closure, the pros and cons of
capitalism and communism and what they thought about the wall as both a physical and
mental barrier.
67
ACTIVITY 2: Debate - Cuban Missile Crisis
This activity should take one period of class in which students are tasked with role-
playing the USSR and the USA in a debate on the issue of the Cuban Missile Crisis. The
students will have learned about the events which led up to the Crisis and thus will be
tasked with attempting to divert a nuclear war.
For this debate, students will be provided with letters exchanged between Kruschev and
Kennedy during the Crisis. Furthermore, they will be given an excerpt from JFK's
October 22 statement. After reading through the letters, students will write their own
letters as a group to present as an opening to the debate. Each letter will be written from
the perspective of their side and one student from each will be chosen to lead their group
as either Kruschev or Kennedy.
In the debate, the students will discuss the actions taken by both sides and JFK's proposed
action/quarantine against the crisis from their respective viewpoints. In doing so, students
will be expected to come up with a peaceful solution, though the possibility of a nuclear
war will still exist. The debate should thus end in either non-action or nuclear conflict.
After the debate, the teacher should the outcome of the Crisis while discussing the effects
it had on the future of the Cold War and the relationship between East and West.
ACTIVITY 3: An Ethical Dilemma
This activity should only take half a period to complete though it could stretch to and
entire class if the teacher decides to discuss answers in class. For this activity, students
will have already discussed the causes of the Vietnam War and the nature of the conflict.
The students will be provided with a worksheet which presents them with an ethical
dilemma as they are tasked with taking on the role of an American soldier in the war.
Students are expected to answer the attached questions independently. This activity
focuses on their ability to think critically and to apply their own attitudes to a historic
situation.
As an optional enhancement, the teacher can invite students to discuss their answers
aloud with the class when they are done.
68
III. ASSESSMENT
Witness to History Journal Entry
For this assessment, students will be expected to demonstrate a working knowledge of

Cold War politics between 1960-1975. Students will be asked to write original journal
entries discussing one of the political events listed below. Journals may include images as
well as writing in an effort to encourage creativity and in depth thinking.
Write a Journal Entry from the perspective of a witness to either of the events listed:
1. A citizen of West or East Berlin and their experience during the building of the
Berlin Wall and their lives after its completion.
2. An American during the Cuban Missile Crisis preparing for a nuclear war. They
could be preparing a bomb shelter or merely following the events through the
media.
3. A soldier in the Vietnam War or a draft dodger avoiding enlistment.
4. A returning veteran of the Vietnam War or a Vietnamese civilian.
69
IV. APPENDIX
HOOK 1:
Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0GKd50lrROc
Source: http://millercenter.org/president/speeches/speech-3376
JFK, "Ich bin ein Berliner"
I am proud to come to this city as the guest of your distinguished Mayor, who has
symbolized throughout the world the fighting spirit of West Berlin. And I am proud to
visit the Federal Republic with your distinguished Chancellor who for so many years has
committed Germany to democracy and freedom and progress, and to come here in the
company of my fellow American, General Clay, who has been in this city during its great
moments of crisis and will come again if ever needed.
Two thousand years ago the proudest boast was "civis Romanus sum." Today, in the
world of freedom, the proudest boast is "Ich bin ein Berliner."
I appreciate my interpreter translating my German!
There are many people in the world who really don't understand, or say they don't,
what is the great issue between the free world and the Communist world. Let them come
to Berlin. There are some who say that communism is the wave of the future. Let them
come to Berlin. And there are some who say in Europe and elsewhere we can work with
the Communists. Let them come to Berlin. And there are even a few who say that it is
true that communism is an evil system, but it permits us to make economic progress.
Lass' sic nach Berlin kommen. Let them come to Berlin.
Freedom has many difficulties and democracy is not perfect, but we have never had
to put a wall up to keep our people in, to prevent them from leaving us. I want to say, on
behalf of my countrymen, who live many miles away on the other side of the Atlantic,
who are far distant from you, that they take the greatest pride that they have been able to
share with you, even from a distance, the story of the last 18 years. I know of no town, no
city, that has been besieged for 18 years that still lives with the vitality and the force, and
the hope and the determination of the city of West Berlin. While the wall is the most
obvious and vivid demonstration of the failures of. the Communist system, for all the
world to see, we take no satisfaction in it, for it is, as your Mayor has said, an offense not
only against history but an offense against humanity, separating families, dividing
husbands and wives and brothers and sisters, and dividing a people who wish to be joined
together.
70
What is true of this city is true of Germanyreal, lasting peace in Europe can never
be assured as long as one German out of four is denied the elementary right of free men,
and that is to make a free choice. In 18 years of peace and good faith, this generation of
Germans has earned the right to be free, including the right to unite their families and
their nation in lasting peace, with good will to all people. You live in a defended island of
freedom, but your life is part of the main. So let me ask you, as I close, to lift your eyes
beyond the dangers of today, to the hopes of tomorrow, beyond the freedom merely of
this city of Berlin, or your country of Germany, to the advance of freedom everywhere,
beyond the wall to the day of peace with justice, beyond yourselves and ourselves to all
mankind.
Freedom is indivisible, and when one man is enslaved, all are not free. When all are
free, then we can look forward to that day when this city will be joined as one and this
country and this great Continent of Europe in a peaceful and hopeful globe. When that
day finally comes, as it will, the people of West Berlin can take sober satisfaction in the
fact that they were in the front lines for almost two decades.
All free men, wherever they may live, are citizens of Berlin, and, therefore, as a free man,
I take pride in the words "Ich bin ein Berliner!"
HOOK 2:
Videos: Who Cares?:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?list=PL79pes3tibC5u5Ov1hBayhME_mg51TAmm&v=
zObCklM5LPw
Castro:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NHVpuhApSC0&index=2&list=PL79pes3tibC5u5O
v1hBayhME_mg51TAmm
Kennedy:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KJuKpf_8IJ0&list=PL79pes3tibC5u5Ov1hBayhME
_mg51TAmm&index=3
Kruschev:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N8hLWDdvBm8&list=PL79pes3tibC5u5Ov1hBayh
ME_mg51TAmm&index=4
Handout: http://www.choices.edu/resources/twtn/documents/choices-twtn-cuba-
organizer.pdf
71
72
HOOK 3:
Video: http://www.history.com/shows/vietnam-in-hd/videos/deconstructing-history-
vietnam
ACTIVITY 1:
Source: http://academic.mu.edu/meissnerd/berlin-wall1.gif
Source: http://www.eurozine.com/UserFiles/illustrations/Kimvall_1.gif
73
ACTIVITY 2:
Source: http://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1961-63v06/comp1
Document 1
Letter From President Kennedy to Chairman Khrushchev Washington, October

22, 1962
DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: A copy of the statement I am making tonight concerning
developments in Cuba and the reaction of my Government thereto has been handed to
your Ambassador in Washington.1 In view of the gravity of the developments to which I
refer, I want you to know immediately and accurately the position of my Government in
this matter.
In our discussions and exchanges on Berlin and other international questions, the one
thing that has most concerned me has been the possibility that your Government would
not correctly understand the will and determination of the United States in any given
situation, since I have not assumed that you or any other sane man would, in this nuclear
age, deliberately plunge the world into war which it is crystal clear no country could win
and which could only result in catastrophic consequences to the whole world, including
the aggressor.
At our meeting in Vienna and subsequently, I expressed our readiness and desire to find,
through peaceful negotiation, a solution to any and all problems that divide us. At the
same time, I made clear that in view of the objectives of the ideology to which you
adhere, the United States could not tolerate any action on your part which in a major way
disturbed the existing over-all balance of power in the world. I stated that an attempt to
force abandonment of our responsibilities and commitments in Berlin would constitute
such an action and that the United States would resist with all the power at its command.
It was in order to avoid any incorrect assessment on the part of your Government with
respect to Cuba that I publicly stated that if certain developments in Cuba took place, the
United States would do whatever must be done to protect its own security and that of its
allies.
Moreover, the Congress adopted a resolution expressing its support of this declared
policy.2 Despite this, the rapid development of long-range missile bases and other
offensive weapons systems in Cuba has proceeded. I must tell you that the United States
is determined that this threat to the security of this hemisphere be removed. At the same
time, I wish to point out that the action we are taking is the minimum necessary to
remove the threat to the security of the nations of this hemisphere. The fact of this
minimum response should not be taken as a basis, however, for any misjudgment on your
part.
74
I hope that your Government will refrain from any action which would widen or deepen
this already grave crisis and that we can agree to resume the path of peaceful
negotiations.
Sincerely, JFK
Document 2
Telegram From the Embassy in the Soviet Union to the Department of State
Moscow, October 23,
1962, 5 p.m.
Mr. President.
I have just received your letter, and have also acquainted myself with text of your speech
of October 22 regarding Cuba.
I should say frankly that measures outlined in your statement represent a serious threat to
peace and security of peoples. United States has openly taken path of gross violation of
Charter of United Nations, path of violation of international norms of freedom of
navigation on high seas, path of aggressive actions both against Cuba and against Soviet
Union.
Statement of Government of United States America cannot be eval-uated in any other

way than as naked interference in domestic affairs of Cuban Republic, Soviet Union, and
other states. Charter of United Nations and international norms do not give right to any
state whatsoever to establish in international waters control of vessels bound for shores of
Cuban Republic.
It is self-understood that we also cannot recognize right of United States to establish

control over armaments essential to Republic of Cuba for strengthening of its defensive
capacity.
We confirm that armaments now on Cuba, regardless of classification to which they

belong, are destined exclusively for defensive purposes, in order to secure Cuban
Republic from attack of aggressor.
I hope that Government of United States will show prudence and renounce actions
pursued by you, which could lead to catastrophic consequences for peace throughout
world.
Viewpoint of Soviet Government with regard to your statement of October 22 is set forth
in statement of Soviet Government, which is being conveyed to you through your
Ambassador in Moscow.
N. Khrushchev.
75
Document 3:
Telegram From the Department of State to the Embassy in the Soviet Union
Washington, October 23, 1962, 6:51 p.m.
Dear Mr. Chairman:
I have received your letter of October twenty-third. I think you will recognize that the
steps which started the current chain of events was the action of your Government in
secretly furnishing offensive weapons to Cuba. We will be discussing this matter in the
Security Council. In the meantime, I am concerned that we both show prudence and do
nothing to allow events to make the situation more difficult to control than it already is.
I hope that you will issue immediately the necessary instructions to your ships to observe
the terms of the quarantine, the basis of which was established by the vote of the
Organization of American States this afternoon, and which will go into effect at 1400
hours Greenwich time October twenty-four.
Sincerely, JFK.
Document 4:
Letter From Chairman Khrushchev to President Kennedy

Moscow, October 24, 1962.
DEAR MR. PRESIDENT: I have received your letter of October 23, 1 have studied it,
and am answering you.
Just imagine, Mr. President, that we had presented you with the conditions of an
ultimatum which you have presented us by your action. How would you have reacted to
this? I think that you would have been indignant at such a step on our part. And this
would have been understandable to us.
In presenting us with these conditions, you, Mr. President, have flung a challenge at us.
Who asked you to do this? By what right did you do this? Our ties with the Republic of
Cuba, like our relations with other states, regardless of what kind of states they may be,
concern only the two countries between which these relations exist. And if we now speak
of the quarantine to which your letter refers, a quarantine may be established, according
to accepted international practice, only by agreement of states between themselves, and
not by some third party. Quarantines exist, for example, on agricultural goods and
products. But in this case the question is in no way one of quarantine, but rather of far
more serious things, and you yourself understand this.
You, Mr. President, are not declaring a quarantine, but rather are setting forth an
ultimatum and threatening that if we do not give in to your demands you will use force.
76
Consider what you are saying! And you want to persuade me to agree to this! What
would it mean to agree to these demands? It would mean guiding oneself in ones
relations with other countries not by reason, but by submitting to arbitrariness. You are
no longer appealing to reason, but wish to intimidate us.
No, Mr. President, I cannot agree to this, and I think that in your own heart you recognize
that I am correct. I am convinced that in my place you would act the same way.
Reference to the decision of the Organization of American States cannot in any way
substantiate the demands now advanced by the United States. This Organization has
absolutely no authority or basis for adopting decisions such as the one you speak of in
your letter. Therefore, we do not recognize these decisions. International law exists and
universally recognized norms of conduct exist. We firmly adhere to the principles of
international law and observe strictly the norms which regulate navigation on the high
seas, in international waters. We observe these norms and enjoy the rights recognized by
all states.
You wish to compel us to renounce the rights that every sovereign state enjoys, you are
trying to legislate in questions of international law, and you are violating the universally
accepted norms of that law. And you are doing all this not only out of hatred for the
Cuban people and its government, but also because of considerations of the election
campaign in the United States. What morality, what law can justify such an approach by
the American Government to international affairs? No such morality or law can be found,
because the actions of the United States with regard to Cuba constitute outright banditry
or, if you like, the folly of degenerate imperialism. Unfortunately, such folly can bring
grave suffering to the peoples of all countries, and to no lesser degree to the American
people themselves, since the United States has completely lost its former isolation with
the advent of modern types of armament.
Therefore, Mr. President, if you coolly weigh the situation which has developed, not
giving way to passions, you will understand that the Soviet Union cannot fail to reject the
arbitrary demands of the United States. When you confront us with such conditions, try to
put yourself in our place and consider how the United States would react to these
conditions. I do not doubt that if someone attempted to dictate similar conditions to
youthe United Statesyou would reject such an attempt. And we also sayno.
The Soviet Government considers that the violation of the freedom to use international
waters and international air space is an act of aggression which pushes mankind toward
the abyss of a world nuclear-missile war. Therefore, the Soviet Government cannot
instruct the captains of Soviet vessels bound for Cuba to observe the orders of American
naval forces blockading that Island. Our instructions to Soviet mariners are to observe
strictly the universally accepted norms of navigation in international waters and not to
77
retreat one step from them. And if the American side violates these rules, it must realize
what responsibility will rest upon it in that case. Naturally we will not simply be
bystanders with regard to piratical acts by American ships on the high seas. We will then
be forced on our part to take the measures we consider necessary and adequate in order to
protect our rights. We have everything necessary to do so.
Respectfully,
N. Khrushchev
Excerpt from JFK's Cuban Missile Speech, October 22, 1962
Source: http://www.jfklibrary.org/Asset-Viewer/sUVmCh-sB0moLfrBcaHaSg.aspx
Acting, therefore, in the defense of our own security and of the entire Western
Hemisphere, and under the authority entrusted to me by the Constitution as endorsed by
the resolution of the Congress, I have directed that the following initial steps be taken
immediately:
First: To halt this offensive buildup, a strict quarantine on all offensive military
equipment under shipment to Cuba is being initiated. All ships of any kind bound for
Cuba from whatever nation or port will, if found to contain cargoes of offensive weapons,
be turned back. This quarantine will be extended, if needed, to other types of cargo and
carriers. We are not at this time, however, denying the necessities of life as the Soviets
attempted to do in their Berlin blockade of 1948.
Second: I have directed the continued and increased close surveillance of Cuba and its
military buildup. The foreign ministers of the OAS, in their communique of October 6,
rejected secrecy in such matters in this hemisphere. Should these offensive military
preparations continue, thus increasing the threat to the hemisphere, further action will be
justified. I have directed the Armed Forces to prepare for any eventualities; and I trust
that in the interest of both the Cuban people and the Soviet technicians at the sites, the
hazards to all concerned in continuing this threat will be recognized.
Third: It shall be the policy of this Nation to regard any nuclear missile launched from
Cuba against any nation in the Western Hemisphere as an attack by the Soviet Union on
the United States, requiring a full retaliatory response upon the Soviet Union.
Fourth: As a necessary military precaution, I have reinforced our base at Guantanamo,

evacuated today the dependents of our personnel there, and ordered additional military
units to be on a standby alert basis.
78
Fifth: We are calling tonight for an immediate meeting of the Organ of Consultation
under the Organization of American States, to consider this threat to hemispheric security
and to invoke articles 6 and 8 of the Rio Treaty in support of all necessary action. The
United Nations Charter allows for regional security arrangements--and the nations of this
hemisphere decided long ago against the military presence of outside powers. Our other
allies around the world have also been alerted.
Sixth: Under the Charter of the United Nations, we are asking tonight that an emergency
meeting of the Security Council be convoked without delay to take action against this
latest Soviet threat to world peace. Our resolution will call for the prompt dismantling
and withdrawal of all offensive weapons in Cuba, under the supervision of U.N.
observers, before the quarantine can be lifted.
Seventh and finally: I call upon Chairman Khrushchev to halt and eliminate this
clandestine, reckless and provocative threat to world peace and to stable relations
between our two nations. I call upon him further to abandon this course of world
domination, and to join in an historic effort to end the perilous arms race and to transform
the history of man. He has an opportunity now to move the world back from the abyss of
destruction--by returning to his government's own words that it had no need to station
missiles outside its own territory, and withdrawing these weapons from Cuba--by
refraining from any action which will widen or deepen the present crisis--and then by
participating in a search for peaceful and permanent solutions.
79
ACTIVITY 3:
Source: https://www.polk-fl.net/staff/teachers/tah/documents/MicrosoftWord-Klippel-
DraftDodgerDBQ.pdf
An Ethical Dilemma
Name_________________________________________________
Date_______________
Directions: Soldiers shipped out to Vietnam were quickly confronted with ethical
dilemmas. Their overriding objective was to work to contain the spread of Communism
from North Vietnam into South Vietnam. How to successfully achieve that objective, win
the hearts and minds of the South Vietnamese people, as well as protecting our troops
could be difficult. The below scenario is crafted from historical events. Take on the role
of the soldier involved, and write a short explanation for each question.
It is your first day as a soldier in Vietnam. It is 1500 hours (3:00 p.m.), on August 3,
1965. You are part of a unit of United States Marines who are assigned to protect the area
in and around the Da Nang airbase in South Vietnam. This key installation had been
repeatedly attacked by Communist Viet Cong forces who have infiltrated small villages
in the area. The Viet Cong carry out their raids, and then fall back to the villages, where
they receive the protection of sympathizers.
In July, a unit of nearly 100 Viet Cong soldiers made a successful raid on the airbase,
using automatic weapons and mortars. They destroyed 3 planes, and damaged 3 others
before retreating into nearby villages. One such village was Cam Ne, located a few miles
southwest of the airbase. American intelligence considers the village and its residents to
be long-time Communist sympathizers.
Earlier, at 1000 hours (10:00 a.m.) on this day, three platoons of Marines came under
small arms fire from a tree line near the village. Those Marines returned fire with small
arms and 3.5-inch rockets. In the firefight between the Marines and the Viet Cong, 3
American soldiers were killed and 27 were wounded. Additionally one 10 year-old boy
was killed and four villagers were wounded when they were caught in the shootout.
Seven Viet Cong soldiers were killed before the remainder fled the village and retreated
to the forest outside of the little hamlet. The Marines located more than 300 homemade
booby traps and 6 mines in the area, along with 38 trenches, tunnels, and prepared
positions.
The area commander, issues orders to search out the VC (Viet Cong forces) and to
destroy them, their positions, and their fortifications. In interpretation of this order, your
80
company commander has instructed you to overcome and destroy any position,
including huts, from which the fire (weapons fire against the Marines) was received.
Your platoon leader describes Cam Ne as an extensively entrenched and fortified

hamlet. He tells your platoon In many instances, burning huts is the only way to ensure
that the houses do not become an active Viet Cong military installation, after our troops
have moved on past them. The village must be punished. As you enter the small village
of Cam Ne, you are not under fire from the enemy. By all appearances, any Viet Cong
soldiers who had been there are long gone.
As you enter the village, the citizens are ordered out of their homes. No Viet Cong
soldiers are found hiding in the huts. The platoon leader announces that he is going to
burn the village to the ground. To the villagers of Cam Ne, this is ancestral land. They are
simple farmers. Their parents are buried nearby. While some are supportive of the Viet
Cong, others cooperate out of intimidation and brutality.
Old men, women and children from the village plead with your platoon leader not to burn
the village. He refuses. They ask him to at least delay, so at least they can remove their
possessions can be removed from their huts. He again refuses. Another Marine leans over
and tells you Welcome to Viet Nam. Here everyone is treated like an enemy until hes
proven innocent. Thats the only way we can do it. The Marine hands you a zippo
lighter and tells you to get busy. What will you do? A U.S. Marine uses his Zippo lighter
to set a Vietnamese hut on fire.
Questions:
1. Would you follow orders and help torch the village of Cam Ne? Explain why you
would or would not follow those orders.
2. If you refuse to follow those orders, what do you think will happen to you?
3. How do you think Americans back home will view these actions as necessary to
protect the democratic freedoms of the people of South Vietnam?
4. Is treating everyone as if they are an enemy first the only way to succeed in this
situation? Can you offer any other suggestions for dealing with this problem? Explain
why or why not.
81
ASSESSMENT:
Witness to History Journal Entry Rubric
Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4

Knowledge and
Understanding Demonstrates Demonstrates Demonstrates Demonstrates
-demonstrates a limited some considerable thorough
working knowledge knowledge knowledge and knowledge and
knowledge and and and understanding of understanding
understanding of understanding understanding historical facts of historical
facts and of historical of historical and concepts. facts and
concepts facts and facts and concepts.
discussed in class. concepts. concepts.
Thinking and
Inquiry -Use of -Use of some Use of relevant Use of relevant
-investigates and relevant relevant information is information is
analyzes relevant information is information. considerable. thorough.
information. limited. -Provides -Provides -Provides
-produces -Provides conclusion conclusion with conclusion with
coherent conclusion with some sufficient high degree of
conclusions. with little effectiveness. effectiveness. effectiveness.
effectiveness.
Communication
-articulates ideas -Limited use -Some notable -Proper use of -Thorough use
clearly. of proper grammar and grammar and of proper
-uses proper grammar and spelling spelling with few grammar and
grammar/spelling. spelling. issues. exceptions. spelling.
-Ideas are -Ideas are -Ideas are -Ideas are
presented with presented with presented with presented with
limited clarity. some clarity. considerable effective clarity.
clarity.
Application
-makes -Limited -Some -Considerable -Sophisticated
connections connection connection connection connection
between historical between between between historical between
facts and historical facts historical facts facts and historical facts
arguments. and and arguments. and arguments.
-viewpoint of arguments. arguments. -Efficient -Thorough
journal is -Limited -Some consistency with consistency
consistent with consistency consistency historical facts. with historical
the historical with historical with historical facts.
context. facts. facts.
82
A Time of Technological Innovation
I. HOOKS:
HOOK 1: The Man on the Moon
This hook will be used to introduce students to the topic of the space race. As the
culmination of the space race between the U.S. and the U.S.S.R., the teacher will us a
video to introduce the groundbreaking event and what led up to it. Thus the teacher
should be able to work backwards from or towards the moon landing by discussing the
technological advances which were made in the decade leading up to the event.
Procedure:
After students are settled, the teacher will show video clip of the moon landing.
Following video, the teacher will ask:
-Why was the moon landing a significant event for human kind? Politically?
Technologically?
-There are conspiracies which say that the moon landing was faked, do you think
that it was? Why or why not? What would be the motivation for faking the
landing?
The purpose of this hook is to convey to students the significance of the moon
landing in the Cold War and how the space race was as political as it was
technological.
Students will also be challenged to think critically by considering the conspiracies
and the possible manipulation of media.
HOOK 2: Drones vs. Napalm
For this hook, the teacher will present two videos to the class. The first about the current
use of drones in the war in the Middle East and the second about the use of Napalm
during the Vietnam War.
Procedure:
After students enter, the teacher will play the first video, pausing afterwards for a
brief discussion on its content.
The teacher will play the second video following the discussion and once more
follow up with another class discussion.
The teacher should encourage the students to compare the contemporary use of
drones and the controversial use of napalm in the Vietnam War.
The purpose of this hook is for students to think critically in creating parallels
between issues of war technology in the present and in the past.
83
Students should consider the ethical issues of these weapons and the broader
controversies of the Vietnam War.
HOOK III: Nuclear Bomb Map
This hook is intended as an introduction to the development of nuclear bombs through the
1960s and the early 1970s. The video should allow the teacher to provide a visual and
tangible demonstration of the increase in nuclear technology around the world.
Procedure:
After students enter, the teacher will play the interactive map and students will
watch.
Following the video, the teacher will ask students if they noticed anything
interesting about the map.
The teacher can also ask students about the consequences of the nuclear bomb
tests and their opinions on the necessity of so many.
This hook is intended to show students the significance of nuclear bombs and the
emphasis on testing during the era.
By showing the proliferation of nuclear weapons across the world, students
should also understand how the development of the arms affected the climate of
the Cold War itself.
II. ACTIVITIES:
ACTIVITY 1: Space Race Trivia
Students will have already learned about the events and technology of the Space Race for
this activity. They may use their notes during the contest and the activity should take one
period to complete.
This activity will have students in groups and each group will be provided with the parts
to build a toy rocket. The teacher will lead the class in a trivia competition based on
questions about the Space Race and information taught in class. For each correct answer
a group gets, they can put another piece together. The winning group will have completed
their rocket first and will receive a prize.
As closure, the teacher can provide the list of questions used for the trivia as an extra
resource for their students.
ACTIVITY 2: To War! To War? Debate
In preparation for this activity, students should have already learned about the events
leading up to the Vietnam War such as the conflict between North and South Vietnam as
well as the motivations of China and the US concerns over the conflict.
84
This activity will have students divided into four groups: US, China, South Vietnam, and
North Vietnam. South Vietnam and China will be on the same side of the room as the US
and North Vietnam take the other. Groups make work together through message sent
between using messengers, but the US and China will be given powers to overrule the
Vietnamese groups. This inequality will show how the more powerful countries were
able to manipulate the local conflict to their own agendas.
Ethical issues will be discussed and students will be provided with documents throughout
the debate to enable their discussion. Issues such as American military intervention, the
use of napalm, and the provision of weapons will be included in the debate. The teacher
will be expected to guide the debate along these basic topics. Most information will
already have been discussed in previous classes.
The debate should end with decision made about whether the US will become involved in
the war, if napalm should be used a tactical weapon, and the legality of countries
providing weapons to North Vietnam.
ACTIVITY 3: Stocking Your Fallout Shelter
For this activity, students will have learned about the nuclear scare and the threat of
fallout. Students will be shown examples of fallout shelters and tasked with creating a
stock list of what they would put in their own bomb shelters.
Students will be put into pairs and given a sheet of newsprint for them to list the supplies
they would include in their fallout shelter. After they finish their list, the will be asked to
present it to the class and explain why they brought the items they did. Other students
will be able to ask questions about others list and any exclusions they observe.
This activity should encourage critical thinking and practical knowledge while allowing
students to discuss and practice survival skills.
85
III. ASSESSMENT
Letters from the Past:
For this assessment, students will be expected to demonstrate their understanding of the
impact of technological changes on everyday life. Students will be tasked with writing
letters from the perspective of one of the following in which they connect information
learned in class to the historical context. Students will be challenged to think critically
and creatively about how technological change affects humanity as well as their own
lives.
Write a letter from the perspective of one of the following:
1. An American hiding in their fallout shelter during a nuclear drill.

2. One of the astronauts sent into space during the Space Race (American or Soviet).
3. A Vietnam civilian who had witnessed a napalm drop.
4. An American who lives near a nuclear testing site.
86
IV. APPENDIX
HOOK 1:
Moon Landing Video: http://www.teachertube.com/video/first-moon-landing-1969-

136554
HOOK 2:
Videos:
The Ethics of Drones: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=82_h5k24e_8
Napalm and the Vietnam War: http://www.teachertube.com/video/napalm-bombing-

13723
HOOK 3:
Nuclear Bomb Map Video (1960-75) [Play from 4:15-7:27]:

http://www.ctbto.org/specials/1945-1998-by-isao-hashimoto/
87
ACTIVITY 1:
Trivia Questions:
1. On October 4, 1957, the Soviet Union started the Space Race by launching what
satellite into space?
A: Sputnik I
2. Which type of animal was launched into space by the USSR on Sputnik II?
A: A dog
3. What was the dog's name?
A: Laika
4. On January 31, 1958, the USA launched their first satellite. What was it called?
A: Explorer I
5. What year was the organization known as NASA formed?
A: 1958
6. Who was the first man sent into space?
A: Yuri Gagarin
7. What year was the first man sent into space?
A: 1961
8. Who was the first woman in space?
A: Valentina Tereshkova
9. What year was she sent into space?
A: 1963
10. True or False: Valentina Tereshkova was a professional astronaut.
A: False
11. Who performed the first spacewalk in history?
A: Alexei Leonov
12. True or False: Apollo 11 was the first spacecraft to soft-land on the moon.
A: False
13. On July 20, 1969, two men became the first to walk on the moon, can you name
them?
A: Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin
14. Which leader made the claim that the U.S. would reach the moon before the end
of the 1960s?
A: JFK
15. A dog named Arrow was among two sent to space who survived their flight.
Nikita Kruschev gifted one of Arrow's pups to which American?
A: Jacqueline Kennedy
16. Who was the first American in space?
A: Alan Shepard
88
ACTIVITY 2:
Source: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/vietnam/psources/index.html
Document 1:
Eisenhower to Ngo Dinh Diem

October 23, 1954
Dear Mr. President,

I have been following with great interest the course of developments in Vietnam,
particularly since the conclusion of the conference at Geneva. The implications of the
agreement concerning Vietnam have caused grave concern regarding the future of the
country temporarily divided by an artificial military grouping, weakened by a long and
exhausting war, and faced with enemies without and by their subversive collaborators
within.
Your recent requests for aid to assist in the formidable project of the movement of
several hundred thousand loyal Vietnamese citizens away from areas which are passing
under a de facto rule and political ideology which they abhor, are being fulfilled. I am
glad that the United States is able to assist in this humanitarian effort.
We have been exploring ways and means to permit our aid to Vietnam to be more
effective and to make a greater contribution to the welfare and stability of the
Government of Vietnam. I am, accordingly, instructing the American Ambassador to
Vietnam [Donald R. Heath] to examine with you in your capacity as Chief of
Government, how an intelligent program of American aid given directly to your
Government can serve to assist Vietnam in its present hour of trial, provided that your
Government is prepared to give assurances as to the standards of performance it would be
able to maintain in the event such aid were supplied.
The purpose of this offer is to assist the Government of Vietnam in developing
and maintaining a strong, viable state, capable of resisting attempted subversion or
aggression through military means. The Government of the United States expects that
this aid will be met by performance on the part of the Government of Vietnam in
undertaking needed reforms. It hopes that such aid, combined with your own continuing
efforts, will contribute effectively toward an independent Vietnam endowed with a strong
Government. Such a Government would, I hope, be so responsive to the nationalist
aspirations of its people, so enlightened in purpose and effective in performance, that it
will be respected at home and abroad and discourage any who might wish to impose a
foreign ideology on your free people.
89
Document 2:
Kennedy to Ngo Dinh Diem

December 14, 1961
Dear Mr. President,

I have received your recent letter in which you described so cogently the
dangerous conditions caused by North Vietnam's effort to take over your country. The
situation in your embattled country is well known to me and to the American people. We
have been deeply disturbed by the assault on your country. Our indignation has mounted
as the deliberate savagery of the Communist programs of assassination, kidnapping, and
wanton violence became clear.
Your letter underlines what our own information has convincingly shown - that
the campaign of force and terror now being waged against your people and your
Government is supported and directed from outside by the authorities at Hanoi. They
have thus violated the provisions of the Geneva Accords designed to ensure peace in
Vietnam and to which they bound themselves in 1954.
At that time, the United States, although not a party to the Accords, declared that
it "would view any renewal of the aggression in violation of the Agreements with grave
concern and as seriously threatening international peace and security." We continue to
maintain that view.
In accordance with that declaration, and in response to your request, we are
prepared to help the Republic of Vietnam to protect its people and to preserve its
independence. We shall promptly increase our assistance to your defense effort as well as
help relieve the destruction of the floods which you describe. I have already given the
orders to get these programs underway.
The United States, like the Republic of Vietnam, remains devoted to the cause of
peace and our primary purpose is to help your people maintain their independence. If the
Communist authorities in North Vietnam will stop their campaign to destroy the Republic
of Vietnam, the measures we are taking to assist your defense efforts will no longer be
necessary. We shall seek to persuade the Communists to give up their attempts to force
and subversion. In any case, we are confident that the Vietnamese people will preserve
their independence and gain the peace and prosperity for which they have sought so hard
and so long.
90
Document 3:
The Tonkin Gulf Incident
President Johnson's Message to Congress

August 5, 1964
Last night I announced to the American people that the North Vietnamese regime
had conducted further deliberate attacks against U.S. naval vessels operating in
international waters, and I had therefore directed air action against gunboats and
supporting facilities used in these hostile operations. This air action has now been carried
out with substantial damage to the boats and facilities. Two U.S. aircraft were lost in the
action.
After consultation with the leaders of both parties in the Congress, I further
announced a decision to ask the Congress for a resolution expressing the unity and
determination of the United States in supporting freedom and in protecting peace in
southeast Asia.
These latest actions of the North Vietnamese regime has given a new and grave
turn to the already serious situation in southeast Asia. Our commitments in that area are
well known to the Congress. They were first made in 1954 by President Eisenhower.
They were further defined in the Southeast Asia Collective Defense Treaty approved by
the Senate in February 1955.
This treaty with its accompanying protocol obligates the United States and other
members to act in accordance with their constitutional processes to meet Communist
aggression against any of the parties or protocol states.
Our policy in southeast Asia has been consistent and unchanged since 19554. I
summarized it on June 2 in four simple propositions:
1. America keeps her word. Here as elsewhere, we must and shall honor our
commitments.
2. The issue is the future of southeast Asia as a whole. A threat to any nation in
that region is a threat to all, and a threat to us.
3. Our purpose is peace. We have no military, political, or territorial ambitions in
the area.
4. This is not just a jungle war, but a struggle for freedom on every front of
human activity. Our military and economic assistance to South Vietnam and Laos
in particular has the purpose of helping these countries to repel aggression and
strengthen their independence.
The threat to the free nations of southeast Asia has long been clear. The North
Vietnamese regime has constantly sought to take over South Vietnam and Laos. This
Communist regime has violated the Geneva accords for Vietnam. It has systematically
conducted a campaign of subversion, which includes the direction, training, and supply of
personnel and arms for the conduct of guerrilla warfare in South Vietnamese territory. In
Laos, the North Vietnamese regime has maintained military forces, used Laotian territory
for infiltration into South Vietnam, and most recently carried out combat operations - all
in direct violation of the Geneva Agreements of 1962.
In recent months, the actions of the North Vietnamese regime have become
steadily more threatening...
91
As President of the United States I have concluded that I should now ask the
Congress, on its part, to join in affirming the national determination that all such attacks
will be met, and that the United States will continue in its basic policy of assisting the
free nations of the area to defend their freedom.
As I have repeatedly made clear, the United States intends no rashness, and seeks
no wider war. We must make it clear to all that the United States is united in its
determination to bring about the end of Communist subversion and aggression in the
area. We seek the full and effective restoration of the international agreements signed in
Geneva in 1954, with respect to South Vietnam, and again in Geneva in 1962, with
respect to Laos...
Document 4:
Joint Resolution of Congress

H.J. RES 1145
August 7, 1964
Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in
Congress assembled,
That the Congress approves and supports the determination of the President, as
Commander in Chief, to take all necessary measures to repel any armed attack against the
forces of the United States and to prevent further aggression.
Section 2. The United States regards as vital to its national interest and to world peace the
maintenance of international peace and security in southeast Asia. Consonant with the
Constitution of the United States and the Charter of the United Nations and in accordance
with its obligations under the Southeast Asia Collective Defense Treaty, the United States
is, therefore, prepared, as the President determines, to take all necessary steps, including
the use of armed force, to assist any member or protocol state of the Southeast Asia
Collective Defense Treaty requesting assistance in defense of its freedom.
Section 3. This resolution shall expire when the President shall determine that the peace
and security of the area is reasonably assured by international conditions created by
action of the United Nations or otherwise, except that it may be terminated earlier by
concurrent resolution of the Congress.
92
ACTIVITY 3:
Source: https://www.orau.org/ptp/Library/cdv/h-6.pdf
93
94
Source:
http://cdn.knoxblogs.com/atomiccity/wpcontent/uploads/sites/11/2012/03/bombshelter1.j
pg
95
ASSESSMENT:
Letters from the Past Rubric

Knowledge and
-demonstrates a limited some considerable thorough
working knowledge knowledge knowledge knowledge and
knowledge and and and and understanding of
understanding of understanding understanding understanding historical facts
facts and of historical of historical of historical and concepts.
concepts facts and facts and facts and
discussed in class. concepts. concepts. concepts.
Thinking and
Inquiry -Use of -Use of some Use of Use of relevant
-investigates and relevant relevant relevant information is
analyzes relevant information is information. information is thorough.
information. limited. -Provides considerable. -Provides
-produces -Provides conclusion -Provides conclusion with
coherent conclusion with some conclusion high degree of
conclusions. with little effectiveness. with sufficient effectiveness.
effectiveness. effectiveness.
Communication
-articulates ideas -Limited use -Some notable -Proper use of -Thorough use of
clearly. of proper grammar and grammar and proper grammar
-uses proper grammar and spelling spelling with and spelling.
grammar/spelling. spelling. issues. few -Ideas are
-Ideas are -Ideas are exceptions. presented with
presented with presented with -Ideas are effective clarity.
limited clarity. some clarity. presented with
considerable
clarity.
Application
between historical between between between between
facts and historical facts historical facts historical facts historical facts
arguments. and and and and arguments.
-viewpoint of arguments. arguments. arguments. -Thorough
letter is consistent -Limited -Some -Efficient consistency with
with the historical consistency consistency consistency historical facts.
context. with historical with historical with historical
facts. facts. facts.
96
The Times They Are A Changin:
Culture and Media in The Cold War
I. HOOKS
HOOK 1: Anti-War Music
This hook will use the medium of music to present the culture of the anti-war movement
to students. It will convey how society and culture was deeply impacted by the nuclear
arms race and specifically the conflict in Vietnam. One or more songs could be used in
this hook.
Procedure:
After students are seated, the teacher will play selected song[s] to the class.
Following the music, the teacher will hand out a sample of the lyrics.
The teacher will ask her students what they think the song is saying.
The teacher can also ask the students to name contemporary music that they
consider to be forms of protest or activism.
The purpose of this hook is to have students think about how media like music
can be used as a form of activism and also last as a piece of cultural history.
HOOK 2: Dr. Strangelove War Room Scene
For this hook, students will watch a scene from the 1964 film Dr. Strangelove or: How I
Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb. Students will consider how film was used
as a form of commentary on the nuclear arms race and other political issues of the Cold
War. This hook will introduce students to how prominent the Cold War was in society
and everyday culture and how the division of East and West and the paranoia which
accompanied it were propogated and heightened by such issues.
Procedure:
After the students enter, the teacher will play the video clip.
Following the viewing, the teacher will begin a discussion on the video clip.
The teacher should explain how the video refers to the Cuban Missile Crisis and
how the threat of nuclear war heightened the climate of the Cold War during the
1960s.
The teacher will ask students:
-What is this clip saying about the Cold War and nuclear weapons?
-Do you think this movie was controversial in its time? Why or why not?
The purpose of this hook is to have students think critically about media and its
political intentions.
97
Student will also be encouraged to be more reflective on the media they encounter
everyday as political and social commentary.
HOOK 3: Playing Games in the Cold War
This hook will have students watching a video about the 1972 chess match between
Bobby Fischer and Boris Spassky. This will further aid students in understanding how the
Cold War affected every aspect of society, including games and sports. Students should
consider how something as little as a chess match turned into a battle in the Cold War.
Procedure:
The teacher will play the video clip as soon as students are seated.
After the clip has finished, the teacher will go over the background of the chess
match and how it was important to the rivalry between the US and USSR.
The teacher will ask:
-Why do you think something as small as a chess match made news at such a
time?
-How do you think this affected the tensions of the Cold War?
-Do you think something like the chess match could happen today? Which
countries would it involve?
98
II. ACTIVITIES
ACTIVITY 1: Writing Your Own Protest Song
For this activity, students will be tasked with writing their own protest song in groups.
Ideally, this will continue from HOOK 1 in which students listened to and discussed
protest songs. For their songs, student will be asked to select a contemporary issue and
write lyrics about it.
After students finish writing their songs, they will be asked to present them to the class
and explain what their topic is and their stance on it. Other students may ask questions
about the lyrics and why they have chosen their perspective on the issue. At the end, the
teacher can display the lyrics in their classroom for all to see.
This activity will encourage students to think critically about contemporary politics while
paralleling them with those of the Cold War and specifically, the Vietnam War. Students
will also have the freedom to effectively and creatively express themselves through the
genre of music.
ACTIVITY 2: Journalism in the Vietnam War: Photo Analysis
In this activity, students will be tasked with analyzing and interpreting photos taken
during the Vietnam War. They will be divided into groups and given a photo and a
handout for them to fill out according to their image. They will complete the handout and
then present it to the class, explaining how they interpreted their photo and why.
This activity will allow students to apply previously learned knowledge to the media of
photography. It will also allow them to think about how images can be and are used by
journalists to present events to the public. This activity encourages critical thinking and
practice working with primary sources.
ACTIVITY 3: A Truly Cold War: The Summit Series of 1972
For this activity, students will be expected to use primary sources to examine the 1972
hockey series between the USSR and Canada. Through various newspaper articles, they
will be asked to interpret the relation of the sports event to the broader context of the
Cold War. Students will be also provided with a fact sheet to explain the background of
the tournament.
Students will then be asked by the teacher to share their opinions on the series and
whether they think it is truly important to the history of the Cold War. Students will
probe the relation of sports to wider culture and to the climate of contemporary politics.
99
As an activity, this should allow many students to understand historical facts through
something they are familiar with: hockey. Furthermore, they will be encouraged to think
critically about how the Cold War inhibited almost every instance of international
interaction. It will also provide students practice in interpreting primary sources such as
newspapers.
III. ASSESSMENT
Reporting on the Watergate Scandal
For this assessment, students will be asked to produce a cartoon, video news report, or
brief newspaper article on the Watergate Scandal. This is an individual assignment for
students and they will be expected to perform their own research, although the topic
should be discussed in class beforehand.
1. Cartoons and video reports should be accompanied by a half page summary of the
image/footage. The students should explain how their picture/presentation relates to the
social culture of the time and how it reflects the attitudes towards Richard Nixon and the
Watergate Scandal.
2. Written articles should be at least one page and should include sufficient evidence of
research. Photos may be included as headers for the article but must be connected to the
content of the article.
100
IV. APPENDIX
HOOK 1:
American Woman by The Guess Who, 1969
American woman gonna mess your mind

American woman, she gonna mess your mind
Mmm, American woman gonna mess your mind
Say A, uh
Say M, uh
Say E
Say R
Say I, C
Say A, N, mmm
American woman gonna mess your mind

Uh, American woman gonna mess your mind
American woman, stay away from me

American woman, mama, let me be
Don't come a-hangin' around my door
I don't wanna see your face no more
I got more important things to do
Than spend my time growin' old with you
Now woman, I said stay away
American woman, listen what I say
American woman, get away from me

Don't come a-knockin' around my door
Don't wanna see your shadow no more
Coloured lights can hypnotize
Sparkle someone else's eyes
Now woman, I said get away
American woman, listen what I say, hey
American woman, said get away

American woman, listen what I say
Don't come a-hangin' around my door
101
Don't wanna see your face no more
I don't need your war machines
I don't need your ghetto scenes
Coloured lights can hypnotize
Sparkle someone else's eyes
Now woman, get away from me
Go, gotta get away

Gotta get away now go go go
I'm gonna leave you, woman
Gonna leave you, woman
Bye-bye
Bye-bye
Bye-bye
Bye-bye
You're no good for me

I'm no good for you
Gonna look you right in the eye
Tell you what I'm gonna do
You know I'm gonna leave
You know I'm gonna go
You know I'm gonna leave
You know I'm gonna go, woman
I'm gonna leave ya, woman

Goodbye, American woman
Fortunate Son by Creedence Clearwater Revival
Some folks are born, made to wave the flag

Ooo, they're red, white and blue
And when the band plays "Hail to the Chief"
Ooo, they point the cannon at you, Lord
It ain't me, it ain't me, I ain't no senator's son, son

It ain't me, it ain't me, I ain't no fortunate one, no
Some folks are born, silver spoon in hand

Lord, don't they help themselves, y'all
But when the taxman comes to the door
102
Lord, the house looks like a rummage sale, yeah
It ain't me, it ain't me, I ain't no millionaire's son, no, no

It ain't me, it ain't me, I ain't no fortunate one, no
Yeah, yeah
Some folks inherit star spangled eyes
Ooh, they send you down to war, Lord
And when you ask 'em, "How much should we give?"
Ooh, they only answer "More! More! More!", y'all
It ain't me, it ain't me, I ain't no military son, son

It ain't me, it ain't me, I ain't no fortunate one, one
It ain't me, it ain't me, I ain't no fortunate one, no, no, no
It ain't me, it ain't me, I ain't no fortunate son, no, no, no
HOOK 2:
Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vuP6KbIsNK4
HOOK 3:
Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i6WsuBZfr10
103
ACTIVITY 2:
Source: https://www.archives.gov/education/lessons/vietnam-photos/
Marines riding atop an M-48 tank, covering their ears, April 3, 1968.
104
Operation "Yellowstone" Vietnam. Following a hard day, a few members of Company A
gather around a guitar and play a few songs, January 18, 1968.
105
Operation "Oregon," a search and destroy mission conducted by infantry platoon of
Troop B. An infantryman is lowered into a tunnel by members of the reconnaissance
platoon, April 24, 1967.
106
A sky trooper from the 1st Cavalry Division keeps track of the time he has left on his
"short time" helmet, 1968.
107
Soldiers carry a wounded co Soldiers carry a wounded comrade through a swampy
area, 1969.
108
Marines of Company H walk through a punji-staked gully, January 28, 1966.
109
Wet going - A Marine keeps a battery pack dry as he wades through a muddy hole while
on a search mission.
110
A Marine stands watch in an observation tower as a chaplain holds mass on Hill 950, July
31, 1967.
111
"Home is where you dig" was the sign over a fighting bunker, 1968.
112
Handout Questions:
1. List the people, object, and actions you observe in this photo.
2. What can you infer from this photo? What is happening? What is the mood?
3. Does this photo raise any questions in your mind? Does it give you any answers?
4. Why do you think this photo was taken? Why would a journalist in the Vietnam War
have captured it?
5. How would the public react to the photo? How do you think it would affect their
opinion on the war?
113
ACTIVITY 3:
Source: http://www.1972summitseries.com/SimcoeReformer/newspaperclippings.html
August 22, 1972
114
August 24, 1972
115
August 30, 1972
116
September 6, 1972
Next Page: September 7, 1972
117
118
September 28, 1972
Next Page: September 29, 1972
119
120
ASSESSMENT:
Reporting on the Watergate Scandal Rubric

Knowledge and
-demonstrates limited some considerable thorough
understanding of understanding understanding understanding understanding of
historical facts in of historical of historical of historical historical facts.
their facts. facts. facts.
report/image.
Thinking and
Inquiry -Use of -Use of some Use of Use of relevant
-investigates and relevant relevant relevant information is
analyzes relevant information is information. information is thorough.
information. limited. -Provides considerable. -Provides
-produces -Provides conclusion -Provides conclusion with
coherent conclusion with some conclusion high degree of
conclusions. with little effectiveness. with sufficient effectiveness.
effectiveness. effectiveness.
Communication
-articulates ideas -Limited use -Some notable -Proper use of -Thorough use
clearly. of proper grammar and grammar and of proper
-uses proper grammar and spelling spelling with grammar and
grammar/spelling. spelling. issues. few spelling.
-Ideas are -Ideas are exceptions. -Ideas are
presented with presented with -Ideas are presented with
limited clarity. some clarity. presented with effective clarity.
considerable
clarity.
Application
between historical between between between between
facts and historical facts historical facts historical facts historical facts
arguments. and and and and arguments.
-viewpoint of arguments. arguments. arguments. -Thorough
report is -Limited -Some -Efficient consistency with
consistent with consistency consistency consistency historical facts.
the historical with historical with historical with historical
context. facts. facts. facts.
121
Part III 1976-1991:
Changes in Cold War Relationships
I. HOOKS
HOOK 1: The Butter Battle Book By Dr. Seuss.
This hook would be used to bring the previously discussed topic of the Arms Race and
see what has happened since the initial strategic arms limitation talks agreement carried
out by the Soviets and the United States. The book was written by Dr. Seuss in 1984,
during the cold war. The story is about two nations that are very similar in every aspect
(clothing and appearances) but live on opposite sides of a wall (similar to the Berlin
Wall). The two nations do not get along solely because the Yooks eat their bread butter
side up while the Zooks eat their bread butter facing down. The Yooks and Zooks enter
into an arms race and are heading towards mutually assured destruction. By reading the
childrens book, students will be able to draw connections between the Zooks and Yooks
and Russia and the United States. The students will also be given an opportunity to
understand the need of the armament control.
Procedure:
When the students have entered the classroom and have taken their seats, the
teacher will either read the book The Butter Battle Book out loud to the class,
have the students read the book (Appendix A) or play the YouTube audio version
(Appendix B)
When the clip is over, using an open-discussion, have the students name
similarities between the cold war and the Butter Battle Book
Once the students have discussed the similarities, have the students discuss within
their groups or with a partner
o Taking into consideration both the Yooks and Zooks and the US
and the Soviets, do you think conflicts can be easily solved?
o Do you think it is realistic to expect a nation to stop developing
weaponry when they cannot fully trust the other side?
o Do you think strategic arms limitation talks are useful?
Students will then share their ideas with the rest of the class with another open-
discussion.
The end goal of this hook is to have the students start to understand the
complications of the cold war and the continuous struggle of disarmament during
the cold war
122
HOOK 2: Cartoon Analysis
Cartoon #1- by Leslie Gibbard (Appendix C)
Cartoon #2- by Nicholas Garland (Appendix D)
This hook will introduce students to the collapse of the dtente and begin looking at the
Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. Students will be presented with three cartoons made by
British cartoonists during the period of the dtente.
Procedure:
Within their groups, students will be asked to visually analyze the different
cartoon images placed on their desks. They will be asked to consider the
following; (Appendix E)
o Which side is seen as the antagonist in the cartoons (US or the Soviets)
o Do the cartoon images show that both sides are still respecting the
dtente?
o What inferences can be drawn about US and Soviet relations from looking
at the cartoon
Students will then be asked to discuss their ideas with the class
The end goal of this hook is to get the students to start understanding the
complicating relationship between the two powers and how it resulted in the third
world countries invasion
123
HOOK 3: Quote Discussion
This hook will allow students to understand the impact of the collapse of the dtente as
well as the soviet invasion of Afghanistan.
Procedure:
The teacher will write the following quote on the board as the students walk into
the class
Im as patriotic as the next guy, but the patriotic thing to do is for us to send a
team over there and whip their ass.
Ask students to read the quote and discuss which nation (US or Russia) this quote
was referring to and in what context was the quote said
Explain to the students that as soon as the soviets invaded Afghanistan, Jimmy
Carter (President of the US) decided that the United States would boycott the
1980 Summer Olympic Games, which were to be held in Moscow. Although
55% of the American population supported the idea, Olympians did not think that
boycotting the Olympics would get Soviet troops out of Afghanistan.
Tell the students that the quote was said by Al Oerter, a four-time Olympic gold
medalist
Ask the students to discuss whether they would be for or against boycotting the
Olympics. As them to provide reasons for their answer.
The end goal of this hook is to have students understand the different implications
of the cold war and how one action by one nation could result in a very dramatic
response
124
II. ACTIVITIES
ACTIVITY 1: Debate- Invade or Stay Away?
This activity will take up one period but may extend into the next class. The students will
have prior knowledge of the invasion and the rationale behind why the Soviets felt it was
important to invade Afghanistan.
The students will first be provided with a worksheet (Appendix F) where they will
independently come up with arguments for and against the soviet invasion of
Afghanistan. Allow students to work on this for roughly around 15 minutes and then
divide the class into two groups. One group will take the side of invading Afghanistan
while the other will focus on staying away. When the students have been split into two
large groups, they will discuss their points for or against invasion (depending on which
side the teacher has given each group). The class will have 30 minutes to collaborate with
their group and go over arguments and possible counter-arguments. After the
collaboration is finished, the teacher will have students from the two opposing sides face
one another.
The debate can be organized to the teachers liking, however he/she can organize the
debate by allowing one side to outline their main arguments while the other side writes
down possible rebuttals. After the group has stated their points, the other side is will state
their position and their arguments while the other side writes down possible rebuttals.
Each side should be given around 5 minutes to present their arguments. After both sides
have discussed their points, another 5 minutes should be given to allow the groups to
collaborate once more and discuss their rebuttals. After each side has rebuttled, they will
then follow with concluding arguments.
After the debate, the class should have an open discussion about why Brezhnev in the end
decided to invade Afghanistan. Was his decision justified? Do you think he made the
right choice? Do you think other leaders would have chosen to invade Afghanistan if they
were facing similar situations?
125
ACTIVITY 2: What would you do?
This activity will allow students to demonstrate their understanding of the cold war
period during the late 70s to the early 80s. This activity will be done after students are
introduced to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan and it will allow students to view the
conflict from the American perspective.
For this activity, students will be advisors to the United States president Jimmy Carter.
You find out that the Soviets have successfully invaded Afghanistan and now you must
choose from a set of options and then will advise Jimmy Carter to take one. Students will
be provided with a worksheet (Appendix G) that will outline five options that you must
consider. For each option, you will jot down pros and cons. Students will then discuss
their ideas with a partner and then at the end choose one option and write a short
statement to persuade Carter that your plan is the most effective. When one student is
stating their option, the partner will be Jimmy Carter and will decide whether the option
will work out. The students will switch roles so the other student can present their option
as well.
ACTIVITY 3: Evil Empire Speech Analysis- Think, Pair, Share
This activity will allow students to analyze a primary document (Appendix H) and
discuss its relevance in the outcomes of what transpired during the 1980s between the
Soviets and the United States.
Students will be given a worksheet (Appendix I) with questions that must be answered
after reading through Ronald Reagans Evil Empire speech (15 minutes). Students will
work with their elbow partner or the teacher will assign groups (2-4 students) and will
amalgamate their answers/opinions onto a piece of chart paper (10 minutes). Students
will then present their analysis of the Evil Empire speech to the class. Presentations will
be short (5 minutes) and will summarize their answers. Below are the questions found on
the worksheet.
Does this speech mark a shift in Americas foreign policy during the Cold
War?
What was the danger in referring to the Soviets as evil?
What do you think was the reaction of the Soviet Union to this speech?
Do you think most Americans agreed with President Reagans viewpoint?
Explain your answer.
126
III. ASSESSMENT
ASSESSMENT 1: Propaganda Posters/Political Cartoon-
(Appendix J) This is an individual assessment where each student will be asked to make a
propaganda poster or a political cartoon that illustrates
(1) The failure of the SALT II and the subsequent increase in arms
OR
(2) US or Soviet stance on Afghanistan invasion
The visuals each student creates will be accompanied by a short reflection (250 words) in
which they will explain how their poster/cartoon reflects the political culture of either the
Soviets or the Americans during this period of the cold war. Students will be asked to
write what the poster is trying to convey along with whom the poster is trying to
persuade. They will be asked to describe the target audience.
If students chose the first option of creating a visual of the failure of the SALT II and the
increase of arms, they must choose one of the two viewpoints to frame their visuals. They
must represent either a pro-aggression stance (increasing arms) or an anti-aggression
stance (decreasing arms).
For this particular assessment, the artistic ability of each student will not be assessed;
rather the students ability to communicate their idea through their visual and their
comprehension and ability to make connections to the topic will be evaluated. The
reflection is what will be mainly used for evaluation and the student must explicitly
explain what the message is that the visual is trying to convey. An example of different
visuals will be provided to the class and are available (Appendix K). The evaluation
criteria can also be found in the appendix (Appendix L).
127
ASSESSMENT 2: Group Presentation
In groups of two that will be assigned by the teacher, students will choose a subject from
a list of important figures or events and will prepare a 10-minute PowerPoint
presentation. Students will be asked to discuss the importance of this figure/event and
how it effected the relations between the US and Soviets during the period of the 1970s to
early 1980.
Students will provide a quick biography of the individual or a quick summary of the
event and then consider the impact they/it had on the cold war. Possible topics for the
presentations include:
1970s the second Strategic Arms limitations talks leading to the collapse of
dtente
The Soviet invasion of Afghanistan
The Olympic boycott (either by the US in 1980 of by the Soviet Union in 1984)
Leonid Brezhnev
Jimmy Carter
Ronald Reagan
Students can decide on their own topic but must run it by the teacher before hand. The
rubric for the group presentation is attached in the Appendix M.
ASSESSMENT 3. Create your own ending!
This assessment draws back to the first Hook (Hook 1). Students will be asked to create
their own ending to Dr. Seuss childrens book, The Butter Battle Book. Students will have
two options and will be asked to choose one.
Option 1- Write an ending to the story. It must be written in two paragraphs. Students
should attempt to write in the style of Dr. Seuss (rhyme) however this is not required
Option 2- Students will draw an ending to the story. The picture must be on a standard
size white paper and should be accompanied by a paragraph that explains the ending and
talks about what the picture (that YOU have drawn) is attempting to show.
Regardless of which option students use, they must try to connect it back to the real cold
war and should not create an unrealistic story (i.e. Aliens come down and destruct both
sides).
Rubric is available in the Appendix N.
128
IV. APPENDIX
Appendix A.
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
Appendix B.
YouTube audio clip of The Butter Battle Book by Dr. Seuss

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AK027qfwyd4
Appendix C.
Appendix D.
142
Appendix E.
Cartoon Analysis
Analyze the two cartoon drawings and respond to the

following questions.
1. Which side is seen as the antagonist in the

cartoons? (US or Soviets)
2. Do the cartoon images show that both sides are

still respecting the dtente?
3. What inferences can be drawn about US and

Soviet relations from looking at the cartoons?
143
Appendix F.
Stay Away or Invade?

we have gone there to restore order at the request of the
Afghan Government- Brezhnev
Invasion
PROS CONS
Stay Away
PROS CONS
144
Appendix G.
What would you do?
You are one of the Presidents closest advisors. The US has just found out that the
Soviets have invaded Afghanistan. You are presented with the 5 options and must choose
one and advise President Carter to use the option you find most effective.
OPTIONS Pros Cons
Launch a military
invasion of Afghanistan
to aid the Mujahedeen
Have the CIA provide

weapons, funds and
training to the
Mujahedeen
Block trade to the Soviet

Union
End diplomatic Relations

with the Soviet Union
Maintain the Detente
145
Appendix H.
RONALD REAGAN, ADDRESS TO THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF EVANGELICALS

(EVIL EMPIRE SPEECH) (8 MARCH 1983)
[1] President Reagan: Thank you[Applause]Thank you very muchThank you very
much[Applause subsides]Thank you very muchand, Reverend Clergy all, and Senator
Hawkins, distinguished members of the Florida congressional delegation, and all of you:
[2] I cant tell you how you have warmed my heart with your welcome. Im delighted to be here
today.
[3] Those of you in the National Association of Evangelicals are known for your spiritual and
humanitarian work. And I would be especially remiss if I didnt discharge right now one personal
debt of gratitude. Thank you for your prayers. Nancy and I have felt their presence many times in
many ways. And believe me, for us theyve made all the difference.
[4] The other day in the East Room of the White House at a meeting there, someone asked me
whether I was aware of all the people out there who were praying for the President. And I, had to
say, Yes, I am. Ive felt it. I believe in intercessionary prayer. But I couldnt help but say to that
questioner after hed asked the question thator at least say to them that if sometimes when he
was praying he got a busy signal, it was just me in there ahead of him. [Laughter] I think I
understand how Abraham Lincoln felt when he said, I have been driven many times to my knees
by the overwhelming conviction that I had nowhere else to go.
[5] From the joy and the good feeling of this conference, I go to a political reception. Now,
[Laughter] I dont know why, but that bit of scheduling reminds me of a story[Laughter]which
Ill share with you:
[6] An evangelical minister and a politician arrived at Heavens gate one day together. And St.
Peter, after doing all the necessary formalities, took them in hand to show them where their
quarters would be. And he took them to a small, single room with a bed, a chair, and a table and
said this was for the clergyman. And the politician was a little worried about what might be in
store for him. And he couldnt believe it then when St. Peter stopped in front of a beautiful
mansion with lovely grounds many servants, and told him that these would be his quarters.
[7] And he couldnt help but ask, he said, But wait, howtheres something wronghow do I get
this mansion while that good and holy man only gets a single room? And St. Peter said, You
have to understand how things are up here. Weve got thousands and thousands of clergy. Youre
the first politician who ever made it. [Laughter and Applause]
[8] But I dont want to contribute to a stereotype. [Laughter] So I tell you there are a great many
God-fearing, dedicated, noble men and women in public life, present company included. And yes,
we need your help to keep us ever mindful of the ideas and the principles that brought us into the
public arena in the first place. The basis of those ideals and principles is a commitment to
freedom and personal liberty that, itself is grounded in the much deeper realization that freedom
prospers only where the blessings of God are avidly (mispronounces and corrects himself) sought
and humbly accepted.
[9] The American experiment in democracy rests on this insight. Its discovery was the great
triumph of our Founding Fathers, voiced by William Penn when he said: If we will not be
governed by God, we must be governed by tyrants. Explaining the inalienable rights of men,
Jefferson said, The God who gave us life, gave us liberty at the same time. And it was George
Washington who said that of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity,
religion and morality are indispensable supports.
[10] And finally, that shrewdest of all observers of American democracy, Alexis de Tocqueville,
put it eloquently, after he had gone on a search for the secret of Americas greatness and genius
146
and he said: Not until I went into the churches of America and heard her pulpits aflame with
righteousness did I understand the greatness and the genius of America. America is good. And if
America ever ceases to be good, America will cease to be great. [Applause]
[11] Well, Im [Applause] ..Well, Im pleased to be here today with you who are keeping
America great by keeping her good. Only through your work and prayers and those of millions of
others can we hope to survive this perilous century and keep alive this experiment in liberty, this
last, best hope of man.
[12] I want you to know that this administration is motivated by a political philosophy that sees
the greatness of America in you, her people, and in your families, churches, neighborhoods,
communitiesthe institutions that foster and nourish values like concern for others and respect for
the rule of law under God.
[13] Now, I dont have to tell you that this puts us in opposition to, or at least out of step with, a
a prevailing attitude of many who have turned to a modern-day secularism, discarding the tried
and time-tested values upon which our very civilization is based. No matter how well intentioned,
their value system is radically different from that of most Americans. And while they proclaim
that theyre freeing us from superstitions of the past, theyve taken upon themselves the job of
superintending us by government rule and regulation. Sometimes their voices are louder than
ours, but they are not yet a majority. [Applause]
[14] An example of that vocal superiority is evident in a controversy now going on in
Washington. And since Im involved, Ive been waiting to hear from the parents of young
America. How far are they willing to go in giving to government their prerogatives as parents?
[15] Let me state the case as briefly and simply as I can. An organization of citizens, sincerely
motivated, deeply concerned about the increase in illegitimate births and abortions involving girls
well below the age of consent, some time ago established a nationwide network of clinics to offer
help to these girls and, hopefully, alleviate this situation. Now, again, let me say, I do not fault
their intent. However, in their well-intentioned effort, these clinics decided to provide advice and
birth control drugs and devices to underage girls without the knowledge of their parents.
[16] For some years now, the federal government has helped with funds to subsidize these clinics.
In providing for this, the Congress decreed that every effort would be made to maximize parental
participation. Nevertheless, the drugs and devices are prescribed without getting parental consent
or giving notification after theyve done so. Girls termed sexually activeand that has replaced
the word promiscuousare given this help in order to prevent illegitimate worth/birth (quickly
corrects himself) eh or abortion.
[17] Well, we have ordered clinics receiving federal funds to notify the parents such help has
been given. [Applause] One of the nations leading newspapers has created the term squeal rule
in editorializing against us for doing this, and were being criticized for violating the privacy of
young people. A judge has recently granted an injunction against an enforcement of our rule. Ive
watched TV panel shows discuss this issue, seen columnists pontificating on our error, but no one
seems to mention morality as playing a part in the subject of sex. [Applause]
[18] Is all of Judeo-Christian tradition wrong? Are we to believe that something so sacred can be
looked upon as a purely physical thing with no potential for emotional and psychological harm?
And isnt it the parents right to give counsel and advice to keep their children from making
mistakes that may affect their entire lives? [Slight crescendo of voice and emphasisLong
Applause]
[19] Many of us in government would like to know what parents think about this intrusion in their
family by government. Were going to fight in the courts. The right of parents and the rights of
family take precedence over those of Washington-based bureaucrats and social engineers.
[Applause]
[20] But the fight against parental notification is really only one example of many attempts to
water down traditional values and even abrogate the original terms of American democracy.
Freedom prospers when religion is vibrant and the rule of law under God is acknowledged.
147
[Applause] When our founding fathers passed the First Amendment, they sought to protect
churches from government interference. They never intended to construct a wall of hostility
between government and the concept of religious belief itself. [Murmurs of agreement, Applause]
[21] The evidence of this permeates our history and our government. The Declaration of
Independence mentions the Supreme Being no less than four times. In God We Trust is
engraved on our coinage. The Supreme Court opens its proceedings with a religious invocation.
And the members of Congress open their sessions with a prayer. I just happen to believe the
schoolchildren of the United States are entitled to the same privileges as [Continues over
applause] Supreme Court Justices and Congressmen.
[22] Last year, I sent the Congress a constitutional amendment to restore prayer to public schools.
Already this session, theres growing bipartisan support for the amendment, and I am calling on
the Congress to act speedily to pass it and to let our children pray. [Applause]
[23] Perhaps some of you, read recently about the Lubbock school case, where a judge actually
ruled that it was unconstitutional for a school district to give equal treatment to religious and
nonreligious student groups, even when the group meetings were being held during the students
own time. The First Amendment never intended to require government to discriminate against
religious speech. [Applause]
[24] Senators Denton and Hatfield have proposed legislation in the Congress on the whole
question of prohibiting discrimination against religious forms of student speech. Such legislation
could go far to restore freedom of religious speech for public school students. And I hope the
Congress considers these bills quickly. And with your help, I think its possible we could also get
the constitutional amendment through the Congress this year. [Applause]
[25] More than a decade ago, a Supreme Court decision literally wiped off the books of fifty
states, statutes protecting the rights of unborn children. Abortion on demand now takes the lives
of up to one and a half million unborn children a year. Human life legislation ending this tragedy
will someday pass the Congress, and you and I must never rest until it does. [Applause] Unless
and until it can be proven that the unborn child is not a living entity, then its right to life, liberty,
and the pursuit of happiness must be protected. [Applause]
[26] YouYou may remember that when abortion on demand began, many, and indeed, Im sure
many of you, warned that the practice would lead to a decline in respect for human life, that the
philosophical premises used to justify abortion on demand would ultimately be used to justify
other attacks on the sacredness of human lifeinfanticide or mercy killing. Tragically enough,
those warnings proved all too true. Only last year a court permitted the death by starvation of a
handicapped infant.
[27] I have directed the Health and Human Services Department to make clear to every health
care facility in the United States that the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 protects all handicapped
persons against discrimination based on handicaps, including infants. [Applause] And we have
taken the further step of requiring that each and every recipient of federal funds who provides
health care services to infants must post and keep posted in a conspicuous place a notice stating
that discriminatory failure to feed and care for handicapped infants in this facility is prohibited
by federal law. It also lists a twenty-four-hour; toll-free number so that nurses and others may
report violations in time to save the infants life. [Applause]
[28] In addition, recent legislation introduced byin the Congressby Representative Henry Hyde
of Illinois not only increases restrictions on publicly financed abortions, it also addresses this
whole problem of infanticide. I urge the Congress to begin hearings and to adopt legislation that
will protect the right of life to all children, including the disabled or handicapped.
[29] Now, Im sure that you must get discouraged at times, but there youve done better than you
know, perhaps. Theres a great spiritual awakening in America, a [Applause]a renewal of the
traditional values that have been the bedrock of Americas goodness and greatness.
[30] One recent survey by a Washington-based research council concluded that Americans were
far more religious than the people of other nations; 95 percent of those surveyed expressed a
148
belief in God and a huge majority believed the Ten Commandments had real meaning in their
lives, and another study has found that an overwhelming majority of Americans disapprove of
adultery, teenage sex, pornography, abortion, and hard drugs, and this same study showed a deep
reverence for the importance of family ties and religious belief.
[31] I [Applause]I think the items that weve discussed here today must be a key part of the
nations political agenda. For the first time the Congress is openly and seriously debating and
dealing with the prayer and abortion issuesand thats enormous progress right there. I repeat:
America is in the midst of a spiritual awakening and a moral renewal. And with your biblical
keynote, I say today, Yes, let justice roll on like a river, righteousness like a never-failing
stream.
[32] Now, [Applause]obviously, much of this new political and social consensus Ive talked
about is based on a positive view of American history, one that takes pride in our countrys
accomplishments and record. But we must never forget that no government schemes are going to
perfect man. We know that living in this world means dealing with what philosophers would call
the phenomenology of evil or, as theologians would put it, the doctrine of sin.
[33] There is sin and evil in the world, and were enjoined by Scripture and the Lord Jesus to
oppose it with all our might. Our nation, too, has a legacy of evil with which it must deal. The
glory of this land has been its capacity for transcending the moral evils of our past. For example,
the long struggle of minority citizensfor equal rights, once a source of disunity and civil war is
now a point of pride for all Americans. We must never go back. There is no room for racism,
anti-Semitism, or other forms of ethnic and racial hatred in this country. [Long Applause]
[34] I know that youve been horrified, as have I, by the resurgence of some hate groups
preaching bigotry and prejudice. Use the mighty voice of your pulpits and the powerful standing
of your churches to denounce and isolate these hate groups in our midst. The commandment
given us is clear and simple: Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. [Applause]
[35] But whatever sad episodes exist in our past, any objective observer must hold a positive view
of American history, a history that has been the story of hopes fulfilled and dreams made into
reality. Especially in this century, America has kept alight the torch of freedom, but not just for
ourselves, but for millions of others around the world.
[36] And this brings me to my final point today. During my first press conference as president, in
answer to a direct question, I pointed out that, as good Marxist-Leninists, the Soviet leaders have
openly and publicly declared that the only morality they recognize is that which will further their
cause, which is world revolution. I think I should point out I was only quoting Lenin, their
guiding spirit, who said in 1920 that they repudiate all morality that proceeds from supernatural
ideasthats their name for religionor ideas that are outside class conceptions. Morality is
entirely subordinate to the interests of class war. And everything is moral that is necessary for the
annihilation of the old exploiting social order and for uniting the proletariat.
[37] Well, I think the refusal of many influential people to accept this elementary fact of Soviet
doctrine illustrates an historical reluctance to see totalitarian powers for what they are. We saw
this phenomenon in the 1930s. We see it too often today.
[38] This doesnt mean we should isolate ourselves and refuse to seek an understanding with
them. I intend to do everything I can to persuade them of our peaceful intent, to remind them that
it was the West that refused to use its nuclear monopoly in the forties and fifties for territorial
gain and which now pr-proposes 50 percent cut in strategic ballistic missiles and the elimination
of an entire class of land-based, intermediate-range nuclear missiles. [Applause]
[39] At the same time, however, they must be made to understand: we will never compromise our
principles and standards. We will never give away our freedom. We will never abandon our belief
in God. [Long Applause] And we will never stop searching for a genuine peace, but we can
assure none of these things America stands for through the so-called nuclear freeze solutions
proposed by some.
[40] The truth is that a freeze now would be a very dangerous fraud, for that is merely the illusion
149
of peace. The reality is that we must find peace through strength. [Applause]
[41] I would a-[Applause continuing]I would agree to a freeze if only we could freeze the
Soviets global desires. [Laughter, Applause] A freeze at current levels of weapons would remove
any incentive for the Soviets to negotiate seriously in Geneva and virtually end our chances to
achieve the major arms reductions which we have proposed. Instead, they would achieve their
objectives through the freeze.
[42] A freeze would reward the Soviet Union for its enormous and unparalleled military buildup.
It would prevent the essential and long overdue modernization of United States and allied
defenses and would leave our aging forces increasingly vulnerable. And an honest freeze would
require extensive prior negotiations on the systems and numbers to be limited and on the
measures to ensure effective verification and compliance. And the kind of a freeze that has been
suggested would be virtually impossible to verify. Such a major effort would divert us completely
from our current negotiations on achieving substantial reductions. [Applause]
[43] I, a number of years ago, I heard a young father, a very prominent young man in the
entertainment world, addressing a tremendous gathering in California. It was during the time of
the cold war, and communism and our own way of life were very much on peoples minds. And
he was speaking to that subject. And suddenly, though, I heard him saying, I love my little girls
more than anything And I said to myself, Oh, no, dont. You cant dont say that. But I
had underestimated him. He went on: I would rather see my little girls die now; still believing in
God, than have them grow up under communism and one day die no longer believing in God.
[Applause]
[44] There wereThere were thousands of young people in that audience. They came to their
feet with shouts of joy. They had instantly recognized the profound truth in what he had said,
with regard to the physical and the soul and what was truly important.
[45] Yes, let us pray for the salvation of all of those who live in that totalitarian darknesspray
they will discover the joy of knowing God. But until they do, let us be aware that while they
preach the supremacy of the State, declare its omnipotence over individual man, and predict its
eventual domination of all peoples on the earth, they are the focus of evil in the modern world.
[46] It was C.S. Lewis who, in his unforgettable Screwtape Letters, wrote: The greatest evil is
not done nowin those sordid dens of crime that Dickens loved to paint. It isnot even done
in concentration camps and labor camps. In those we see its final result, but it is conceived and
ordered; moved, seconded, carried and minuted in clear, carpeted, warmed, and well-lighted
offices, by quiet men with white collars and cut fingernails and smooth-shaven cheeks who do not
need to raise their voice.
[47] Well, because these quiet men do not raise their voices, because they sometimes speak
in soothing tones of brotherhood and peace, because, like other dictators before them, theyre
always making their final territorial demand, some would have us accept them at their word and
accommodate ourselves to their aggressive impulses. But if history teaches anything, it teaches
that simpleminded appeasement or wishful thinking about our adversaries is folly. It means the
betrayal of our past, the squandering of our freedom.
[48] So, I urge you to speak out against those who would place the United States in a position of
military and moral inferiority. You know, Ive always believed that old Screwtape reserved his
best efforts for those of you in the Church. So, in your discussions of the nuclear freeze proposals,
I urge you to beware the temptation of pridethe temptation of blithely..uh..declaring yourselves
above it all and label both sides equally at fault, to ignore the facts of history and the aggressive
impulses of an evil empire, to simply call the arms race a giant misunderstanding and thereby
remove yourself from the struggle between right and wrong and good and evil.
[49] I ask you to resist the attempts of those who would have you withhold your support for our
efforts, this administrations efforts, to keep America strong and free, while we negotiatereal and
verifiable reductions in the worlds nuclear arsenals and one day, with Gods help, their total
elimination. [Applause]
150
[50] While Americas military strength is important, let me add here that Ive always maintained
that the struggle now going on for the world will never be decided by bombs or rockets, by
armies or military might. The real crisis we face today is a spiritual one; at root, it is a test of
moral will and faith.
[51] Whittaker Chambers, the man whose own religious conversion made him a witness to one of
the terrible traumas of our time, the Hiss-Chambers case, wrote that the crisis of the Western
world exists to the degree in which the West is indifferent to God, the degree to which it
collaborates in communisms attempt to make man stand alone without God. And then he said,
for Marxism-Leninism is actually the second-oldest faith, first proclaimed in the Garden of Eden
with the words of temptation, Ye shall be as gods.
[52] The Western world can answer this challenge, he wrote, but only provided that its faith in
God and the freedom He enjoins is as great as communisms faith in Man.
[53] I believe we shall rise to the challenge. I believe that communism is another sad, bizarre
chapter in human history whose lastlast pages even now are being written. I believe this because
the source of our strength in the quest for human freedom is not material, but spiritual. And
because it knows no limitation, it must terrify and ultimately triumph over those who would
enslave their fellow man. For in the words of Isaiah: He giveth power to the faint; and to them
that have nomight He increased strength. But they that wait upon the Lord shall renew their
strength; they shall mount up with wings as eagles; they shall run, and not be weary. [Applause]
[54] Yes, change your world. One of our founding fathers, Thomas Paine, said, We have it
within our power to begin the world over again. We can do it, doing together what no one
church could do by itself.
[55] God bless you, and thank you very much. [Long Applause]
151
Appendix I.
The Evil Empire Speech Discuss Questions
Does this speech mark a shift in Americas foreign policy during the
cold war?
What was the danger in referring to the Soviets as evil?
What do you think was the reaction of the Soviet Union to this speech?
Do you think most Americans agreed with the speech and Presidents
viewpoint?
152
Appendix J.
Cold War Propaganda Posters/Political Cartoon Assignment Outline
Part A. Create an original propaganda poster or a political cartoon that would have been
used throughout the cold war period (focus on the late 70s and early 80s). Your poster
should reflect one of the two areas that we have discussed thoroughly in class.
(1) The failure of the SALT II and the subsequent increase in arms
OR
(2) US or Soviet stance on Afghanistan invasion
Your poster should have a definite purpose and must show one side of the issue. For
choice number one you will either take an anti-aggression or pro-aggression stance for
the increase of arms as a result of the failure of SALT II. You may take a look at the
propaganda posters online that were used during this time but your poster MUST be
original and unique. The posters can be created by hand or made digitally. You are free to
use existing images and graphics to create your poster. However you must make sure that
the images you choose to use must reflect the time period that this assignment is trying to
cover.
Must use a 8.5 x 11 sheet of paper for the final product

Posters must have a slogan or some form of text
Pictures on posters must support the overall message
Part B. Once you have created your poster, write a 250-word reflection (one page,
double spaced) explaining how your poster reflects the political culture of either the
Soviets or the Americans during this period of the cold war. You should discuss the
following in detail:
1. Purpose/Goal: what is the poster attempting to convey?
2. Target Audience: who is the poster being directed to?
3. Techniques: what sorts of techniques did you use to make your poster effective
(manipulating the truth, bias etc.)
153
Appendix K.
154
Appendix L.
Cold War Propaganda Poster/Political Cartoon Assessment Checklist
Poster/Cartoon-
1. Meets the assignment requirements
2. Has effectively communicated a pro or anti aggression
stance OR pro or anti invasion stance
3. Has the intent of influencing the reader
4. Has created an original poster
5. Is reflecting the time period
Reflections-
1. Has stated the intended point of view
2. Clearly explained how the elements in the poster
expresses a certain view
3. Has grasped the principles of effective propaganda
and has applied these principles creatively
4. Has exhibited a clear understanding of the
conflicts/issues and was able to address these
5. Clearly communicates and is free of grammatical and
spelling mistakes
155
Appendix M.
Total
Category Scoring Criteria Points Score
The PowerPoint is neatly organized and is 5
chronologically set up
Organization
Information is presented in a logical sequence. 5
(15 points)
Presentation appropriately cites requisite number of 5
references.
The information presented is relevant and the 5
biography of the individual or the background of the
event is connected to the cold war period.
Terms are presented in a relevant manner and the 5
information is concise and appropriate to the topic
Content
Presentation contains accurate information. 10
(45 points)
Material included is relevant to the overall 10
message/purpose.
Appropriate amount of material is prepared, and 10
points made reflect well their relative importance.
There is an obvious conclusion summarizing the 5
presentation.
Speaker maintains good eye contact with the audience 5
and is appropriately animated (e.g., gestures, moving
around, etc.).
Speaker uses a clear, audible voice. 5
Presentation Delivery is poised, controlled, and smooth. 5
(40 points) Good language skills and pronunciation are used. 5
Visual aids are well prepared, informative, effective, 5
and not distracting.
Length of presentation is within the assigned time 5
limits.
Information was well communicated. 10
Score Total Points 100
Additional Comments:
156
Appendix N.
Create Your Own Ending- Rubric

Knowledge/Understanding 5 4 3 2
1 0
- Demonstrates a working understanding of facts and concepts discussed in class
Thinking and
Inquiry 5 4 3 2
1 0
-Investigates and analyzes relevant information and produces coherent
conclusions
Communication
5 4 3 2
1 0
-Articulates ideas clearly and uses proper grammar
Application 5 4 3 2
1 0
- Makes connections between historical facts and arguments, story ending is
historically relevant
TOTAL SCORE _______ /15
157
Part III 1976-1991:
The Dissolution of the Soviet Union
I. HOOKS
HOOK 1: Chernobyl Stories
This hook introduces students to the worlds worst nuclear accident. This exercise will
allow students to understand the reality of nuclear reactors and the dangers they possess.
It will also allow students to realize the nuclear capabilities during the cold war. This
hook will be followed up by another activity (Activity #1)
Procedure:
Students will be asked to discuss their knowledge of Hiroshima and the effects of
the radiation found across Japan to this day
They will be asked if they are aware of any other disaster in our recent history that
affected millions of people and still is affecting people today
Students will be introduced to the Chernobyl disaster from the cold war and will
be asked to read a short handout (Appendix A)
After reading the handout, students will be asked to discuss what could have been
done to prevent this disaster and why this disaster occurred in the first place
The end goal of this hook is to have the students start to understand the complications
of the cold war and introduce the constant threat of possessing nuclear reactors.
HOOK 2: Proxy Wars Graph and Chart analysis
This hook will help with introducing of the new communist leader, Mikhail Gorbachev
into the classroom.
Procedure:
The teacher will begin by writing the words Proxy War on the
blackboard/whiteboard
Ask students to discuss with a partner (elbow partners will do), what the term is
and then to ask for at least two examples of a proxy war from the Cold War
(examples can be the Korean War, Vietnam War, Soviet invasion of Afghanistan)
Ask a few groups to share their ideas of what a proxy war is and some examples
from the Cold War. Once the students have a clear idea of the term, ask students
how supporting different Proxy Wars has impacted the Soviet Unions economy.
Then hand out the line graph (Appendix B) of that plots the rise and fall of the
Soviet economy and compares it to the US from 1946-1992 and chart (Appendix
C) of the Soviet Food situation
Have students discuss in groups or partners (elbow partners or groups students are
sitting in) what they think will happen to the Soviets if nothing changes
158
The end goal of this hook is to get the students thinking about how the new
communist leader improved or impacted the Soviet Union and what he had to do to
improve the Soviet economy.
HOOK 3: Tank Man- Photo Interpretation and Censorship
Students will be introduced to the Tiananmen Square Massacre and the international
response to this dramatic event.
Procedure:
Begin the class by asking students the question, What is Censorship and to
think of censorship in their own lives (for example, schools and parents
censoring internet access, censored lyrics etc.)
Ask students to discuss whether it is okay to censor some kinds of information
and why other sorts of information should never be censored
Students will be shown the YouTube video clip (raw footage) of the Tank Man
(Appendix D) and will also be provided with the Tank Man photo (Appendix E).
The video can also be shown after the completion of the activity below
Students will be placed into pairs and will be told to write two captions for this
photo. They will write a caption from the perspective of the Chinese government
and a second caption from the perspective of a pro-democracy protestor in China.
The captions should include what is happening the picture along with any other
background information they believe is related to it
Ask pairs to share their captions. Ask students if one caption more difficult to
write than the other? Is it possible that the image can be viewed differently
depending on the caption?
At the end tell the students that the image of the Tank man was not seen in China
until very recently because of censorship
This hook will begin a lesson on Chinas relations with the US and the Soviets during the
end of the Cold War and will address what the nations (communist and democratic)
thought of the protests that occurred in Tiananmen Square.
159
II. ACTIVITIES
ACTIVITY 1: The Chernobyl Disaster activity sheet
This activity will allow students to further their understanding of the Chernobyl disaster
in the Soviet Union. Students will be asked to try and understand the role of the
Chernobyl disaster in the fall of the Soviet Union.
Students will be taken to the computer lab for this activity and will be provided with a
worksheet (Appendix F) that must be completed by the end of the class. The first portion
of the hand out can be completed in the classroom with the help of a fact sheet (Appendix
G) that will be given to the students with the worksheet. This fact sheet will provide
background information of the Chernobyl disaster. Students may also look up this
information in the computer lab if they feel the fact sheet does not suffice. This activity
will allow students to work independently and will help students learn how to find
reliable research online.
ACTIVITY 2: Writing a Speech
This activity may be divided between two lessons if necessary. This activity will allow
students to be one of the great leaders of the Soviet Union. Students will be Mikhail
Gorbachev and make a speech to the citizens and communist party of the Soviet Union
explaining your three goals for the nation. Your goals must include dtente, glasnost and
perestroika.
Before students begin the speech however, they will complete a handout (Appendix H)
that summarizes each goal. You will need to create specific ideas that will go along with
each goal. For each idea that you have created, you must explain why you believe it will
work.
Students previous knowledge of the subject will suffice for this speech, however students
will be allowed to take this activity home if enough information is not obtained in class to
come up with ideas and to write the one page speech. Students will then present their
speeches to their classmates.
160
ACTIVITY 3: Letters from China
For this activity, students will imagine they are pro-democracy university students
protesting the Chinese communist party in Tiananmen Square. You will address your
letter to either Gorbachev or the President of the United States at the time, George H. W.
Bush. Within the letter, students will be asked to tell the leaders what their current
situation is, what problems they are facing and what should be done about it. Written in
the letter should be the students choice whether or not the foreign country should
provide aid to the student demonstrators or leave it as a Chinese internal affair.
If students decide to write to Gorbachev, they should include his visit prior to the June 4th
massacre and should explain why protestors (YOU) signed a petition to meet with
Gorbachev and why he was seen as someone who personified a new era of reforms and
openness.
If students decide to write to President Bush, they must include why they wheeled in a
statue that resembled the statue of Liberty (Goddess of democracy) into Tiananmen
Square.
The letter should be hand written and be handed in by the end of the class. Should not be
more than two pages.
161
IV. ASSESSMENTS
ASSESSMENT 1: Assessment of Reagans Moscow Speech
The goal of this assignment is to have students critically examine the speech by President
Ronald Reagan on May 31st, 1988 at Moscow State University, which will be provided to
each student (Appendix I). In his speech, Reagan set forth his vision for the expansion of
liberty across the world, not only in the United States. He highlighted the several
opportunities that come with freedom and entrepreneurship. Students should draw on
information taught during this portion of the course. This assignment is designed to allow
students build on their analytical and enquiry methods. Students will be asked to write
500-750 words on the Moscow Speech and should link this to the larger themes presented
in the course.
The assignment will be marked out of 30. The criteria for this assignment will include the
content provided and style features;
1. Content- students will give an in-depth analysis of the speech and focus on the
themes that were presented and link them to the themes discussed in class.
Students should include the Soviets stance and what they may have thought of the
Reagans speech as well. Content will incorporate 20 out of the 30 marks
2. Style- the students paper should be well written and should not contain
grammatical mistakes. The paper should be organized and flow well.
ASSESSMENT 2: Diary entries
The goal of this assignment is to get students to apply their knowledge of some events of
the Col War and create several diary entries. The diaries must explain the events/people
and your reaction to them. Each diary entry must also include a date that is
appropriate to the events the students are writing about. (For example, students should
not be writing about the space race in a 1984 entry.) Each student should be asked to
write 6 diary entries and each entry should span several years but should remain in the
years from 1976-1991. Students may talk about more than one topic in a single entry, if
they are chronologically appropriate. An example of the assignment handout can be
found in Appendix J. This assessment will allow the students to demonstrate their
knowledge of the cold war and the impact it had on a personal level. Students will be
marked following a rubric that can be found in Appendix K.
162
IV. APPENDICES
Appendix A.
CHERNOBYL STORIES
The Liquidators
Seven hundred thousand men were conscripted into the Chernobyl
area to liquidate or blot out the released radiation. The selfless
efforts of these liquidatorsminers, soldiers and firemenare
unparalleled in history. Sacrificing themselves, they prevented a
potential nuclear explosion that could have killed hundreds of
thousands.
Forty thousand died, and a further 70,000 are now disabled. Hailed
as heroes in 1986, they are now discarded and forgotten, their ill
health dismissed by the authorities as being unrelated to their
exposure to extraordinary levels of radiation and the lack of
adequate safety precautions.
Ivan, a fire-fighter and liquidator who survived the experience,
remembers:
After about 40, 50 minutes of fighting there were two more explosions.
There was a big black cloud, followed by an intense blue light. Then a ball
of fire covered the moon. I felt sick and fell unconscious. I woke up in the
hospital in Moscow with 40 other fire fighters. At first we joked about
163
radiation. Then we heard that a comrade had begun to bleed from his nose
and mouth and his body turned black and he died. That was the end of the
laughter.
Igor, who was conscripted to help evacuate families and strip
radioactive topsoil, recalls:
'We were told not to have children for five years because of our work. How
do you explain that to your wife or girlfriend? Most of us didn't and hoped
we'd be all right. We had to remove the top layers of soil and load it up on
trucks. I thought the burial dumps would be complicated engineering places
but they were like open pits, not even lined with anything! We lifted out the
topsoil in one big roll like a carpet with all the worms and bugs and spider
inside! But you can't skin the whole country; you can't take everything that
lives in the earth. We stripped thousands of kilometres not just of earth but
of orchards, houses, schools - everything. At night we drank so hard.
Otherwise we couldn't do it. We slept in tents in beds of straw, taken from
farms near the reactor!'
The bravery and courage of the liquidators saved Europe from a
very serious nuclear catastrophe. Next April marks the 30th
anniversary of the Chernobyl disaster. We ask you to take a
moment to remember their sacrifice.
- See more at: http://www.chernobyl-international.com/about-

chernobyl/chernobyl-story-details/the-
liquidators#sthash.WbR9YUTU.dpuf
164
Appendix B.
Appendix C.
165
Appendix D.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YeFzeNAHEhU
Appendix E.
166
Appendix F.
167
168
169
Appendix G.
The Chernobyl Disaster
When did the disaster happen? _________________

How many reactors were there at Chernobyl? ______
How many of the reactors exploded? _____________
The accident
Put the diagrams below in the correct order by writing numbers 1-4 next to them.
1) Compared to Hiroshima and Nagasaki, how much more radiation was

released?
2) Where was most of the fallout deposited?
3) Which countries in Europe were affected most?
4) What was the Soviet response to the disaster?
5) Do you think the accident caused the collapse of the USSR? Explain using
evidence.
170
Appendix H.
You are Mikhail Gorbachev. You must make a speech to the citizens and Communist
Party of the Soviet Union explaining your three goals for the nation: Dtente, glasnost,
and perestroika. Below you must summarize what each goal is and then write ideas of
how to go about change through these goals. Then write a speech explaining these ideas
to the people of the Soviet Union and for each idea, you must explain WHY you believe
it will work.
Dtente:

Idea #1:
__________________________________________________________________
________
__________________________________________________________________
_______________
__________________________________________________________________
_______________
__________________________________________________________________
_______________
Idea #2:
__________________________________________________________________
________
__________________________________________________________________
_______________
__________________________________________________________________
_______________
__________________________________________________________________
_______________
Glasnost:

171
Idea #1:
__________________________________________________________________
________
__________________________________________________________________
_______________
__________________________________________________________________
_______________
__________________________________________________________________
_______________
Idea #2:
__________________________________________________________________
________
__________________________________________________________________
_______________
__________________________________________________________________
_______________
__________________________________________________________________
_______________
Perestroika:
Idea #1:
__________________________________________________________________
________
__________________________________________________________________
_______________
__________________________________________________________________
_______________
172
__________________________________________________________________
_______________
__________________________________________________________________
_______________
Idea #2:
__________________________________________________________________
________
__________________________________________________________________
_______________
__________________________________________________________________
_______________
173
Appendix I.
PRESIDENT RONALD REAGAN
ADDRESS AT MOSCOW STATE UNIVERSITY
MAY 31, 1988
(abridged version from http://www.reagansheritage.org/html/reagan05_31_88.shtml)
Before I left Washington, I received many heartfelt letters and telegrams asking me to
carry here a simple message, perhaps, but also some of the most important business of
this summit. It is a message of peace and goodwill and hope for a growing friendship
and closeness between our two peoples.
First, I want to take a little time to talk to you much as I would to any group of university
students in the United States. I want to talk not just of the realities of today, but of the
possibilities of tomorrow.
You know, one of the first contacts between your country and mine took place between
Russian and American explorers. The Americans were members of Cook's last voyage
on an expedition searching for an Arctic passage; on the island of Unalaska, they came
upon the Russians, who took them in, and together, with the native inhabitants, held a
prayer service on the ice.
The explorers of the modern era are the entrepreneurs, men with vision, with the
courage to take risks and faith enough to brave the unknown. These entrepreneurs and
their small enterprises are responsible for almost all the economic growth in the United
States. They are the prime movers of the technological revolution. In fact, one of the
largest personal computer firms in the United States was started by two college
students, no older than you, in the garage behind their home.
Some people, even in my own country, look at the riot of experiment that is the free
market and see only waste. What of all the entrepreneurs that fail? Well, many do,
particularly the successful ones. Often several times. And if you ask them the secret of
their success, they'll tell you it's all that they learned in their struggles along the way --
yes, it's what they learned from failing. Like an athlete in competition, or a scholar in
pursuit of the truth, experience is the greatest teacher.
We are seeing the power of economic freedom spreading around the world -- places
such as the Republic of Korea, Singapore, and Taiwan have vaulted into the
technological era, barely pausing in the industrial age along the way. Low-tax agricultural
policies in the sub-continent mean that in some years India is now a net exporter of food.
Perhaps most exciting are the winds of change that are blowing over the People's
Republic of China, where one-quarter of the world's population is now getting its first
taste of economic freedom.
At the same time, the growth of democracy has become one of the most powerful
political movements of our age. In Latin America in the 1970s, only a third of the
174
population lived under democratic government. Today over 90 percent does. In the
Philippines, in the Republic of Korea, free, contested, democratic elections are the order
of the day. Throughout the world, free markets are the model for growth. Democracy is
the standard by which governments are measured.
We Americans make no secret of our belief in freedom. In fact, it's something of a

national pastime. Every four years the American people choose a new president, and
1988 is one of those years. At one point there were 13 major candidates running in the
two major parties, not to mention all the others, including the Socialist and Libertarian
candidates -- all trying to get my job.
About 1,000 local television stations, 8,500 radio stations, and 1,700 daily newspapers,
each one an independent, private enterprise, fiercely independent of the government,
report on the candidates, grill them in interviews, and bring them together for debates. In
the end, the people vote -- they decide who will be the next president.
But freedom doesn't begin or end with elections. Go to any American town, to take just
an example, and you'll see dozens of synagogues and mosques -- and you'll see
families of every conceivable nationality, worshipping together.
Go into any schoolroom, and there you will see children being taught the Declaration of
Independence, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights --
among them life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, that no government can justly
deny -- the guarantees in their Constitution for freedom of speech, freedom of assembly,
and freedom of religion.
Go into any courtroom and there will preside an independent judge, beholden to no
government power. There every defendant has the right to a trial by a jury of his peers,
usually 12 men and women -- common citizens, they are the ones, the only ones, who
weigh the evidence and decide on guilt or innocence. In that court, the accused is
innocent until proven guilty, and the word of a policeman, or any official, has no greater
legal standing than the word of the accused.
Go to any university campus, and there you'll find an open, sometimes heated
discussion of the problems in American society and what can be done to correct them.
Turn on the television, and you'll see the legislature conducting the business of
government right there before the camera, debating and voting on the legislation that will
become the law of the land. March in any demonstrations, and there are many of them --
the people's right of assembly is guaranteed in the Constitution and protected by the
police.
But freedom is more even than this: Freedom is the right to question, and change the
established way of doing things. It is the continuing revolution of the marketplace. It is
the understanding that allows us to recognize shortcomings and seek solutions. It is the
right to put forth an idea, scoffed at by the experts, and watch it catch fire among the
people. It is the right to stick - to dream - to follow your dream, or stick to your
conscience, even if you're the only one in a sea of doubters.
175
Freedom is the recognition that no single person, no single authority of government has
a monopoly on the truth, but that every individual life is infinitely precious, that every one
of us put on this world has been put there for a reason and has something to offer.
America is a nation made up of hundreds of nationalities. Our ties to you are more than
ones of good feeling; they're ties of kinship. In America, you'll find Russians, Armenians,
Ukrainians, peoples from Eastern Europe and Central Asia. They come from every part
of this vast continent, from every continent, to live in harmony, seeking a place where
each cultural heritage is respected, each is valued for its diverse strengths and beauties
and the richness it brings to our lives.
Recently, a few individuals and families have been allowed to visit relatives in the West.
We can only hope that it won't be long before all are allowed to do so, and Ukrainian-
Americans, Baltic-Americans, Armenian-Americans, can freely visit their homelands, just
as this Irish-American visits his.
Freedom, it has been said, makes people selfish and materialistic, but Americans are
one of the most religious peoples on Earth. Because they know that liberty, just as life
itself, is not earned, but a gift from God, they seek to share that gift with the world.
"Reason and experience," said George Washington in his farewell address, "both forbid
us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle. And it is
substantially true, that virtue or morality is a necessary spring of popular government."
Democracy is less a system of government than it is a system to keep government

limited, non-intrusive: A system of constraints on power to keep politics and government
secondary to the important things in life, the true sources of value found only in family
and faith.
I have often said, nations do not distrust each other because they are armed; they are
armed because they distrust each other. If this globe is to live in peace and prosper, if it
is to embrace all the possibilities of the technological revolution, then nations must
renounce, once and for all, the right to an expansionist foreign policy. Peace between
nations must be an enduring goal -- not a tactical stage in a continuing conflict.
I've been told that there's a popular song in your country -- perhaps you know it -- whose
evocative refrain asks the question, "Do the Russians want a war?" In answer it says,
"Go ask that silence lingering in the air, above the birch and poplar there; beneath those
trees the soldiers lie. Go ask my mother, ask my wife; then you will have to ask no more,
'Do the Russians want a war?'"
But what of your one-time allies? What of those who embraced you on the Elbe? What if
we were to ask the watery graves of the Pacific, or the European battlefields where
America's fallen were buried far from home? What if we were to ask their mothers,
sisters, and sons, do Americans want war? Ask us, too, and you'll find the same answer,
the same longing in every heart. People do not make wars, governments do -- and no
mother would ever willingly sacrifice her sons for territorial gain, for economic
advantage, for ideology. A people free to choose will always choose peace.
Americans seek always to make friends of old antagonists. After a colonial revolution
with Britain we have cemented for all ages the ties of kinship between our nations. After
176
a terrible civil war between North and South, we healed our wounds and found true unity
as a nation. We fought two world wars in my lifetime against Germany and one with
Japan, but now the Federal Republic of Germany and Japan are two of our closest allies
and friends.
Some people point to the trade disputes between us as a sign of strain, but they're the
frictions of all families, and the family of free nations is a big and vital and sometimes
boisterous one. I can tell you that nothing would please my heart more than in my
lifetime to see American and Soviet diplomats grappling with the problem of trade
disputes between America and a growing, exuberant, exporting Soviet Union that had
opened up to economic freedom and growth.
Is this just a dream? Perhaps. But it is a dream that is our responsibility to have come
true.
Your generation is living in one of the most exciting, hopeful times in Soviet history. It is
a time when the first breath of freedom stirs the air and the heart beats to the
accelerated rhythm of hope, when the accumulated spiritual energies of a long silence
yearn to break free.
We do not know what the conclusion of this journey will be, but we're hopeful that the
promise of reform will be fulfilled. In this Moscow spring, this May 1988, we may be
allowed that hope -- that freedom, like the fresh green sapling planted over Tolstoys
grave, will blossom forth at least in the rich fertile soil of your people and culture. We
may be allowed to hope that the marvelous sound of a new openness will keep rising
through, ringing through, leading to a new world of reconciliation, friendship, and peace.
Thank you all very much and da blagoslovit vas gospod! God bless you.
177
Appendix J.
Cold War Diary
You will write 6 diary entries from the point of view of a person living during the
Cold War (during the years of 1976-1991). You can focus your entries on a specific
event (Chernobyl disaster, Evil Empire Speech). You may also choose to write from
the perspective of akey figure that was alive during this time (Deng Xioping, Ronald
Reagan, etc) or from the view of a fictitious person. Each entry should be between
and 1 page long and can focus on either of the options stated above.
Your diaries must explain the events/people and your reaction to them. Each
diary entry must also include a date that is appropriate to the events youre
writing about. (For example, you should not be writing about the Space race in a
1984 entry.) Your 6-8 diary entries should span several years. You may talk about
more than one topic in a single entry, if they are chronologically appropriate.
This assignment will be marked out of /60

(10 marks per entry)
https://educatedteacher.wordpress.com/2010/03/29/cold-war-assessments/
Appendix K.
Journal Entry Rubric
Total: /10
178
Part III 1976-1991:
The End of the Cold War
I. HOOKS
HOOK 1: A new Soviet Union?
This hook will tap into the existing student knowledge about the key ideas from the cold
war after the 1980s and address the different ways in which Gorbachev was able to
change the lives of many Soviet citizens.
Procedure:
Teachers will first distribute a matching terms sheet that will allow students to
recall key ideas and people from previous classes (Appendix A)
Students will watch a short video clip (around 6 minutes) (Appendix B) in which
several Russians describe their experiences during the years of Gorbachevs
leadership. Students should be asked to take notes as they watch the video clip on
some of the ways that the Soviet Union changed from the time of Brezhnev to
Gorbachev.
Students will understand that when Gorbachev rose to power in the Soviet Union
in 1985, he brought with him many reforms that changed the lives of the citizens
of the Soviet Union.
Students will discuss their notes with the class to get a better understanding of
what was happening during this period
HOOK 2: The fall of the Wall
Students will discuss the fall of the berlin wall nearing the end of the cold war.
Procedure:
The teacher will provide each student with three pictures (Appendix C, D, E and
F)
Students will be asked to look at the picture with their elbow partners and answer
the following three questions
I. What is going on in each picture?
II. What does this suggest about the control of the Soviet Union?
III. Why might this have happened?
Students will be asked if they think that Gorbachevs visit was one of the main
reasons people decided they had enough of the wall and wanted it broken down
This hook will get students thinking about the falling of the wall and whether or not the
Germans were successfully reunited after it was opened.
179
HOOK 3: Cartoon Analysis
This hook begins the discussion of the end of the cold war
Procedure:
Students will be asked to analyze a cartoon image of a hammer and a sickle in
tears (Appendix G) with a partner
Students will be asked to answer the following questions
I. Describe the cartoons interpretation of events.
II. What do the symbols in the cartoon represent?
III. What event can the cartoon image be referring to?
Students will then share their ideas in an open discussion with the class
The teacher will then put students into small groups to discuss the question Why
did the Cold War End?
Students will be asked to write five points that address the question on a chart
paper
Each group will then present their points to the rest of the class
This activity will allow different ideas to be presented of why the cold war ended
II. ACTIVITY
ACTIVITY 1: Collage Timeline
This activity will allow students to remember the different topics discussed in the later
years of the cold war. In groups of four (which are assigned by the teacher), students will
make a collage timeline of the cold war years from 1976-1991. Students are not asked to
include every event that took place during these years that were linked to the cold war,
rather students will include five events that they perceive to be the most important in this
time period. Students can choose to include events such as the boycotting of the
Olympics, the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, the Chernobyl disaster, Gorbachev
becoming leader of the USSR etc.
Students must explain why they chose their events and why they felt that they were the
most important during this time. Each group will present their time line collage to the
class.
180
ACTIVITY 2: End of the cold war worksheet
Students will be provided with a worksheet (Appendix H) that includes the six
communist states. Three of them are left blank while the other three have information of
when the communist parties were ousted from government. Students will first work in
pairs to fill in the rest of the worksheet by including when the communist parties were
taken out of government in East Germany, Czechoslovakia and Hungary.
Students then will independently write a one-page response to the question, What were
the implications of the communist states electing democratic governments for the
USSR? They will then do a think/pair/share activity where they discuss their responses
with a partner
181
III. ASSESSMENTS
ASSESSMENT 1: Social media 1991 coup
This activity draws back to Hook #1 where students looked at the changes in the Soviet
Union because of Gorbachevs policies and goals. Students in this activity will illustrate
their ideas by creating historically based blog posts, Facebook posts, Tweets or Tumblr
posts about the August 1991 coup. It is important to realize that at this time social
media was non-existent because the coup had taken place in 1991, before the rise of
the Internet. Students should also discuss how access to information from around the
world and the freedom to communicate might have made it difficult to establish the old
Soviet Union system back. Students will write from the perspective of the Soviets in
Moscow and must ensure that any additional information they find is historically
accurate. For ideas, students will be provided with different protest tweets and blogs
from the Egyptian revolution (Appendix I, J, K and L).
Students will follow this small activity by writing a two to three page essay investigating
how social media tools have been used in recent political events along with how they
might have been used during the end of the Cold War. Students should draw on
examples of how social media was used in the recent Arab nations and how this can
have a dramatic effect on citizens of a country and how it can engage people in
elections, local causes and social or political movements.
The assessment will be done in two parts. The first social media portion will be out of 10
marks and students should ensure that their posts/blogs/tweets are historically
accurate and relevant. Students will be marked based on their insight on actual events
that occurred during this time and their ability to link these to their social media
portion.
The essay will be marked separately and will be out of 40 marks. Students should be
able to draw similarities between recent uprisings with the coup of 1991 in the Soviet
Union. Students should draw upon Gorbachevs policies and link them to their reasons
for anti-communist sentiments. A rubric is attached in the Appendix M.
182
IV. APPENDICES
Appendix A.
A. Lenin B. Stalin C. Gorbachev D. Perestroika E. Glasnost
Key People and Ideas

_____ Led the USSR from 1985 until its collapse in 1991. Sought
to reform the country with his policies of perestroika and glasnost.
_____ Restructuring of the Soviet political and economic

systems.
_____ Led the USSR from 1929 to 1953. Policies included five-
year plans, collectivization and massive purges and deportations.
_____ Openness that allowed greater freedom of the press and

public criticism of government, as well as greater access to
information.
_____ Led the 1917 October Revolution, formed the Soviet

Communist Party and founded the USSR, which he ruled until
1924. Ran a campaign of mass arrests and executions known as
Red Terror
Source: http://www.pbs.org/pov/myperestroika/lesson_plan.php
183
Appendix C.
184
Appendix D.
185
Appendix E.
186
Appendix F.
187
Appendix G.
188
Appendix H.
END OF THE COLD WAR WORKSHEET
In December 1988, Gorbachev announced that Communist ideology should play a

smaller role in Soviet foreign affairs- this meant that the USSR would no longer favour
trade with the communist nations over the democratic ones
He was keen for the Eastern European states to enjoy glasnost and perestroika
He withdrew troops from Eastern Europe to save the USSR some money
He did not intend to weaken communist control there, he simply wanted to strengthen
it through reform however once reform had begun he could not contain it
189
Appendix I.
Ahmed Youssry works as a production planner for a multinational corporation. He

was among the first protesters to enter Tahrir Square.
It's a different world. It will never be the same again. It feels like I'm in
a movie, but I don't know how it will end. Every day I have two jobs --
I go to Tahrir during the day and, at night, I protect the buildings in my
neighborhood.
Right now, I am waiting for my best friend and then we will go to
Tahrir. We decided to help injured people and to bring some medical
supplies, like bandages and antibiotics and stuff. And then we'll go to
the emergency aid points so we can help them out. If there are no
injured people, then we'll join the demonstrations.
I think people are not scared anymore. But the first priority for the
protesters is to cancel Emergency Law, which allows the police to
arrest you any time, any place, and take you to National Security.
That's why some people don't want to leave Tahrir, until they cancel
that law. [According to news reports, approximately 1,600 people have
been detained since Jan 15th.]
"We Were Only 500" to Start
I never imagined it would get this big. I was disappointed at first,
because we were the first ones entering Tahrir on the 25th and we were
only 500 or so. Five hundred people protesting Mubarak, and we didn't
know what was going to happen. It was scary and we were like: OK,
should we leave or should we stay? Should we do what we believe we
should do?' Then, after a few hours, people filled in, and by the end of
the day, I think we were 25,000. That's when I realized we were at the
point of no return.
I would have regretted it all my life if I wasn't there from the start.
Tuesday, Mubarak's Speech; Wednesday, A Different Story
On Tuesday after Mubarak's speech, I felt like we got what we wanted;
we don't want people to suffer -- if they need to go to work, to get food,
then we don't want to stop them. We figured if Mubarak doesn't do
what he promised we can go back on the streets.
But after what happened last Wednesday, we felt betrayed. Wednesday
was like hell. Why would he [Mubarak] do that? People died. Over
1,000 were injured. We felt completely betrayed. That is when we
realized we cannot trust him. We cannot stop until he is gone.
190
The Muslim Brotherhood Can't Own This
When we started, we had unity. Now there is division. Some people
think that if we stop now we will lose what we have.
The Muslim Brotherhood is coming out now; they are doing a lot of the
fighting [against Mubarak supporters] but they can't take over the
movement. This is a youth movement. There are a lot of them [Muslim
Brotherhood] but they can't own this.
I'm also afraid of external interference from the U.S., the U.N., Europe
or Israel. We want to face this on our own. We have our own political
rights now.
Ahmed Youssry joins with other protesters at Tahrir Square.

Some people think Mubarak can change, and I want to smack them,
because he had 30 years to prove himself. I want him out. But I'm
thinking about what is the best solution, so we don't hurt our economy
more and hurt our political situation more. I don't want things to be
more ruined than they already are. So I'm confused about when to stop.
I'm trying to figure a way out.
On Facebook, I do have friends who want the demonstrations to stop. I
think they have some valid points. But I don't want them to judge me.
Reactions from Work and Parents
My whole company took the last week off. The whole country took the
week off. The economy has already crashed, which is scary. I was one
of only two people in my office that went to the demonstrations on the
25th. I was worried about their reaction, but they were just curious to
hear what it was like in Tahrir.
My parents support the demonstrations but they don't want me going.
But they cannot stop me. My mother wants stability; she is afraid of
chaos. But she hates Mubarak.
When my father talks to me and says, "That's enough," I tell him we
just did something that you didn't manage to do over the last 30 years,
so you just need to be silent now. [laughs] And he, somehow, agrees.
It's our time.
We are no longer the waiting generation; we are the revolution
generation.
My mother and others think we youth created the situation. But in my
opinion, the corrupt system created the situation, and they have to
191
figure out how to solve it.
We believe there is only one chance for each generation to start a
revolution. No generation can do two revolutions. If it's not now, it will
be never.
Started on Facebook; Empowered by Google
We hit a tipping point because of people like Wael Ghonim. And his
ideas stuck. Most of the youth know that Wael Ghonim [Google
marketing executive who was detained for 12 days and released
Monday] started everything. He started a page for Khaled Saeed, a guy
who was killed by the police a few months ago.
And Wael Ghonim started a fan page for him and called for
demonstrations. That was in June. Then after Tunisia, Wael called for
revolution on Jan. 25 from the fan page [English version].
He's an amazing person, but we never expected this from him. It's not
about who is the leader ... in history, every revolution has a leader. But
in this case, it's the revolution of the people.
I watched Wael Ghonim give an interview on TV. It touched
everybody. He was so honest. He said every word we wanted to say.
I think Facebook is the number one actor in this revolution. I saw a sign
today that an old man was holding, and it said in Arabic, "Thank you
Facebook; we'll take it from here."
Abdel Hameed Ezzat
Abdel Hameed Ezzat is a business trainer. His father, who passed away seven
months ago, worked in the military.
I didn't hear about the demonstration until after it started. It didn't start
that big. I was busy with work, so I wasn't on Facebook, but it was
Facebook that drove these issues.
On behalf of most people here I can say that most people don't like
what is happening. We have supported that everything must change and
that Egypt must have a better future, but we don't support that
everything has to stop and people lose their jobs.
We were pro the 25th [the political movement that mobilized on Jan.
25] until it changed.
When President Mubarak announced the amendments to the
constitution and that he wouldn't run for president again, I claim that 95
percent of people were satisfied with that. I have relatives all over
192
Egypt, and everyone was very happy; they thought it was a solution,
and at the same time, that's all he can offer. What else can they [the
protesters] want?
What is happening in Tahrir [Liberation Square] is all that the world is
seeing. But what you see on TV is not everything that is happening in
Egypt. People here want to get back to work. We want to get back to
our lives and correcting the wrongs of the past era.
Wednesday's Violence; Protecting Our Streets

The violence was not caused by the NPD [Mubarak's party]. I have a
lot of friends who are police officers, and they went there with no guns
and no weapons. The Muslim Brotherhood fought with them, but the
police officers had no guns. The violence was created to attract the
mass media and to give the impression that everything was going
wrong in Egypt.
Everybody in Egypt is trying to help each other. If anybody needs food,
we give them food; if anyone needs security, we organize so that our
streets are guarded. We sleep in shifts. I am responsible for our
neighborhood. We don't want chaos - people in Egypt hate chaos.
Something happened the other day in Tahrir: Muslims were praying
and the Christians formed a ring around them. This is one of the best
scenes I have ever seen.
A ubiquitous slogan of the uprising, calling for President Mubarak to go now.
193
Mubarak Is A Very Brave Man
Based on what I've known my whole life, I'm not sure that Mubarak
will leave. He's a very brave man. He's going to respond in a very
strong way. And he's not going to accept leaving in a bad way.
What is really irritating Egyptians now is how other countries are

trying to push the government; people are very mad about this; you can
hear it in the streets.
When President Obama says Mubarak has to leave. No! Even the
people in Tahrir Square say he has to leave but only how we decide --
not America, not Russia.
Egypt's Future
We will have a better future. I'm in the streets now and I can see it. I
live in a very big building, and everyone is out talking about the same
goals. It is happening in every neighborhood in Egypt -- we are more
connected to each other, we have forgotten about our problems, and we
are optimistic about a better future.
New leaders will emerge from the movement of the 25th, especially
youth leaders -- people who know unemployment, people who are my
age. The focus will be on jobs and the economy.
My generation is the generation that changed everything.
194
Appendix J
195
Appendix K
196
Appendix L.
197
Appendix M. Rubric for Social Media Assignment
Knowledge and Demonstrates Demonstrates Demonstrates Demonstrates
Understanding limited some considerable a thorough
(demonstrates understanding understanding understanding understanding
understanding of historical of historical of historical of historical
of historical facts facts facts facts
facts)
Thinking and Use of relevant Use of some Use of relevant Use of relevant
Inquiry information is relevant information is information is
(Analyzes limited and information considerable thorough and
relevant provides and provides and provides provides
information conclusion conclusion conclusion conclusion
and creates a with little with some with sufficient with high
coherent effectiveness effectiveness effectiveness degree of
conclusion) effectiveness
Communication Limited use of Some Proper use of Thorough use
(articulates proper grammar and grammar and of proper
idea clearly and grammar and spelling errors. spelling with grammar and
uses proper spelling. Ideas Ideas are few spelling. Ideas
grammar) are presented presented with exceptions. are presented
with limited some clarity Ideas are with effective
clarity presented with clarity
considerable
clarity
Application Limited Some Considerable Sophisticated
(makes connection connection connection connection
connections between between between between
between historical facts historical facts historical facts historical facts
historical facts and and and and
and viewpoints arguments. arguments. arguments. arguments.
Limited Some Efficient Thorough
consistency consistency consistency consistency
with historical with historical with historical with historical
facts facts facts facts
198

Cold War Unit

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Cold War Unit

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Cold War

Jessica Grendzienski, Raven Allen, Aiza Khan

2. Divisions in the post-war era..p. 5-64

3. At the height of Cold war Politics.p. 65- 82

4. A time of technological innovation. p. 83- 96

6. Changes in Cold War Relationships: collapse of the dtente..p. 122-157

7. The Dissolution of the Soviet Union.p. 156-177

8. The end of the Cold War.p. 178-197

9. Culminating Assessment..p. 198- 199

World History: The West and the World

Prerequisite: Any university or university/college preparation course in Canadian and world

Communities: Local, National, and Global

By the end of this course, students will:

demonstrate an understanding of a variety of types of communities that have evolved

I. Types of Communities and Their Development

Change and Continuity

By the end of this course, students will:

demonstrate an understanding of how the historical concept of change is used to analyse

Citizenship and Heritage

By the end of this course, students will:

I. Western Beliefs, Philosophies, and Ideologies

Social, Economic, and Political Structures

By the end of this course, students will:

Methods of Historical Inquiry and Communication

By the end of this course, students will:

Video 2: A History of the Korean War

NATO and Warsaw Pact Reading:

Truman Firing Speech:

Assessment 1: Cold War Propaganda Posters

Review of different types of propaganda present in media:

Examples of different types of Cold War propaganda posters

Some things to consider are:

If now the Soviet Government tries, by separate action, to build up a pro-Communist

Youtube Video of Iron Curtain Speech:

Egypt Seizes Canal:

Bombing the Canal:

Canada Becomes Peacemaker:

Pearson Wins the Nobel Peace Prize

Suez Canal? How did both countries react?

3. How did Israel get involved in the conflict?

4. What was the United States position on the issue?

5. How did Canadas international role change because of Lester Pearson?

Formation of NATO and the Warsaw Pact Article:

WARSAW PACT: THE COMMUNIST ALLIANCE

Student Handouts, Inc. www.studenthandouts.com

Address by President Truman About Policy in the Far East, 1951

HOLD FOR RELEASE

EXTREME CARE MUST BE EXERCISED TO AVOID PREMATURE PUBLICATION OR

It is right for us to be in Korea. It was right last June. It is right today.

I want to remind you why this is true.

They want to control all Asia from the Kremlin.

That is what we have been doing. It is a difficult and bitter task.

But so far it has been successful.

So far, we have prevented World War III.

Our aim is to avoid the spread of the conflict.

One: the fighting must stop.

Three: there must be an end to the aggression.

That is our military objective -- to repel attack and to restore peace.

The struggle of the United Nations in Korea is a struggle for peace.

STATEMENT BY THE PRESIDENT

Creation of the Canal

Vital British interest

The crisis builds