Berlin Blockade
What Caused the Blockade?
The blockade was imposed by Russian leader, Josef Stalin on the 24th June 1948. The key aim of the Soviets was to “force the Western Allies either to change their [economic] policies or get out of Berlin altogether” (Downing, T et al. 1998. pg. 70) in order to gain total control of the capital. This belief corroborates with Walsh, a history teacher, and author of Modern World History who expresses that “Stalin believed that this would force the Allies out of Berlin and make Berlin entirely dependent on the USSR” (Walsh, B. 1996)
A prompt for the Soviet’s Berlin Blockade was the introduction of a new currency in the Western sectors to recuperate the economy weakened by the war. The economy saw almost immediate improvements (Walsh, b. 1996) after the Deutsch-Mark replaced the Reichs-Mark in 1948, which had lost its trading value. Vadney, a professor of history explains that the “Soviets blockaded the land routes to the city in protest against persistent US efforts to centralise the administration of economic policy” (Vadney, T. 1998). The Soviet’s response to Western monetary reform was largely caused by underlying tensions between the opposing powers, and a fear of Western, Capitalist presence in the divided city of Berlin.
The Blockade closed all roads and rail lines between West Germany and West Berlin, which Honseler et al argues “sought to cripple West Berlin by halting all transport of goods into West Berlin from non-Soviet countries.” (Honseler, E et al. 2009). This action threatened to cripple West Berlin, whose occupation rights were already vulnerable (Coleman, D. 1995) because it had the ability, according to Jones, to reduce the population to starvation (Jones, C. 2004).
A prompt for the Soviet’s Berlin Blockade was the introduction of a new currency in the Western sectors to recuperate the economy weakened by the war. The economy saw almost immediate improvements (Walsh, b. 1996) after the Deutsch-Mark replaced the Reichs-Mark in 1948, which had lost its trading value. Vadney, a professor of history explains that the “Soviets blockaded the land routes to the city in protest against persistent US efforts to centralise the administration of economic policy” (Vadney, T. 1998). The Soviet’s response to Western monetary reform was largely caused by underlying tensions between the opposing powers, and a fear of Western, Capitalist presence in the divided city of Berlin.
The Blockade closed all roads and rail lines between West Germany and West Berlin, which Honseler et al argues “sought to cripple West Berlin by halting all transport of goods into West Berlin from non-Soviet countries.” (Honseler, E et al. 2009). This action threatened to cripple West Berlin, whose occupation rights were already vulnerable (Coleman, D. 1995) because it had the ability, according to Jones, to reduce the population to starvation (Jones, C. 2004).
The Airlift
|
The Allies, led by the United States of America responded to this potentially detrimental blockade by launching a very successful military campaign, the Berlin Airlift. This campaign supplied West Berlin with food, medicine and fuel, through over 270 000 flights, delivering these goods to the city throughout the blockade. The video on the left shows primary American news footage about the blockade, which serves as a form of propaganda. The irony of the Berlin Airlift was illustrated in a New York Times Article in June, 1948, which presents the American perspective of the Blockade and Airlift- |
“United States airpower throughout Europe is being mobilized for a great shuttle service into besieged Berlin. United States aircraft, which four years ago brought death to the city, will bring life in the form of food and medicines to the people of the Western sectors, whose food supplies have been cut off by the Russians.” (New York Times, cited in Chicco, M, Schnabel, O.)
Clare, an Oxford Modern History Graduate argues the “Berlin Airlift provided a tangible demonstration of Western determination and competence”, (Clare, J. 2014) which corroborates with Downing et al who establishes the notion that the US airlift confirmed Western determination to occupy the emblematic city (Downing et al. 1998), and established Berlin’s inherent value to both East and West as a symbol as a “theatre of confrontation” (CVCE, 2015.) throughout the Cold War. The Berlin Blockade made it clear that events in this city would directly affect the wider conflict of the Cold War.
Engerman highlights the way in which the Western powers valued Berlin occupation as a symbol of Soviet containment - “The airlift of supplies to West Berlin indicated Western resolve to contain the Soviet Union; the United States was not in a position to roll back Soviet power, but would act assertively [to] limit its expansion.” (Engerman, D. 2012.) This popular contemporary understanding of the Blockade is supported by President Truman who stated at the end of the Blockade in 1949 that “We refused to be forced out of the city of Berlin. We demonstrated to the people of Europe that we would act resolutely, when their freedom was threatened…The Berlin blockade was a move to test our ability and our will to resist” (Truman, cited in Walsh, B. 1996. pg. 258) The United States’ continuing will to hold its position of power, demonstrated in this speech supports the theory that Berlin was central to the Cold War between the Soviet and American superpowers.
The Soviet’s key purpose to remove Western influence from the capital was very unsuccessful, considered by J. Briggs, a Professor of Political Science, as a “foreign policy disaster for the Soviets,” although from a Soviet perspective, no territory was lost, which could be interpreted as a positive outcome. Consequently, the Blockade was lifted after 318 days, on the 12th May 1949. Although this event did not change the Western Allies occupation in Berlin, it significantly contributed to rising tensions between the Communist East and Capitalist West, and most importantly laid the foundations of the importance of occupation in Berlin for both powers. The Berlin Blockade “established a tense balance between the superpowers which was to characterise much of the Cold War” (Walsh, B. 1996. pg. 260) and founded Berlin’s positioning at the centre of the conflict.
Engerman highlights the way in which the Western powers valued Berlin occupation as a symbol of Soviet containment - “The airlift of supplies to West Berlin indicated Western resolve to contain the Soviet Union; the United States was not in a position to roll back Soviet power, but would act assertively [to] limit its expansion.” (Engerman, D. 2012.) This popular contemporary understanding of the Blockade is supported by President Truman who stated at the end of the Blockade in 1949 that “We refused to be forced out of the city of Berlin. We demonstrated to the people of Europe that we would act resolutely, when their freedom was threatened…The Berlin blockade was a move to test our ability and our will to resist” (Truman, cited in Walsh, B. 1996. pg. 258) The United States’ continuing will to hold its position of power, demonstrated in this speech supports the theory that Berlin was central to the Cold War between the Soviet and American superpowers.
The Soviet’s key purpose to remove Western influence from the capital was very unsuccessful, considered by J. Briggs, a Professor of Political Science, as a “foreign policy disaster for the Soviets,” although from a Soviet perspective, no territory was lost, which could be interpreted as a positive outcome. Consequently, the Blockade was lifted after 318 days, on the 12th May 1949. Although this event did not change the Western Allies occupation in Berlin, it significantly contributed to rising tensions between the Communist East and Capitalist West, and most importantly laid the foundations of the importance of occupation in Berlin for both powers. The Berlin Blockade “established a tense balance between the superpowers which was to characterise much of the Cold War” (Walsh, B. 1996. pg. 260) and founded Berlin’s positioning at the centre of the conflict.