What factors led to the end of the Cold War?

sinister670

henretta_2009_ch30_pg_886.pdf

Home >History homework help >What factors led to the end of the Cold War?

1980

1990

2000

A Divided Nation in a Disordered World 1 9 8 0 – 2 0 0 8

882

P A R T S E V E N

DIPLOMACY GOVERNMENT ECONOMY

Beyond the Cold War

� Ronald Reagan begins arms buildup

� INF Treaty (1988) � Berlin Wall falls (1989)

� First Persian Gulf War (1990)

� Soviet Union collapses; end of the Cold War

� U.S. peacekeeping forces in Bosnia

� Al Qaeda attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon (2001)

� United States and allies fight Taliban in Afghanistan

� United States invades Iraq (2003); costly insurgency begins

� North Korea tests nuclear weapons; stalemate with Iran over nuclear program

Conservative ascendancy

� New Right and Evangelical Christians help to elect Ronald Reagan

� Reagan cuts taxes and federal regulatory system

� Republican “Contract with America” (1994)

� Bill Clinton advances moderate Democratic policies; wins welfare reform and NAFTA

� Clinton impeached and acquitted (1998–1999)

� George W. Bush chosen as president in contested election (2000)

� Bush pushes faith-based initiatives and No Child Left Behind

� USA PATRIOT Act passed (2002)

� Hamdan v. Rumsfeld (2006) overturns detainee policies

Uneven affluence and globalization

� Reaganomics; budget and trade deficits soar

� Labor union membership declines

� New technology prompts productivity rise

� Global competition cuts U.S. manufacturing; jobs outsourced

� Bush tax cuts cause budget deficits to soar

� Income inequality increases

� Huge trade deficits with China

� Collapse of housing boom causes major financial crisis

Henretta_ch30_882-915.indd Page 882 10/4/08 11:03:31 AM user-s131Henretta_ch30_882-915.indd Page 882 10/4/08 11:03:31 AM user-s131 /Users/user-s131/Desktop/Users/user-s131/Desktop

883

SOCIETY

Demographic change and culture wars

� Advent of “Yuppies” � Rise in Hispanic and

Asian immigration � Crime and drug crises in

the cities � AIDS epidemic

� Los Angeles race riots (1992)

� “Culture Wars” over affirmative action, feminism, abortion, and gay rights

� Many states ban gay marriages

� “Minutemen” patrol Mexican border; immigration changes proposed; stalemate results

� Baby boomers begin to retire; new federal drug benefits for elderly

Media and the information revolution

� Cable News Network (CNN) founded (1980)

� Television industry deregulation

� Compact discs and cell phones invented

� Dramatic growth of the Internet and World Wide Web

� America Online rises and declines

� Biotech revolution enhances medical treatment

� Broadband access grows � “Blogging” and

“YouTubing” increase � “Creation Science”

controversy � Bush limits federal stem-

cell research � Environmental issues

intensify as evidence of global warming becomes definitive

In 1992, former president Richard M. Nixon remarked, “History is never worth reading until it’s fi fty years old. It takes fi fty years before you’re able to come back and evaluate a man or a period of time.” Nixon’s comments remind us that writing recent his- tory poses a particular challenge; not knowing the future, we cannot say which present-day trends will prove to be of lasting importance. Part Seven is therefore a work in progress; its perspective will change as events unfold. It has fi ve broad themes: the ascendancy of the Republican Party and the New Right, the impact of economic globalization, social confl icts stem- ming from cultural diversity, the revolution in information technol- ogy, and the end of the Cold War and the rise of Muslim terrorism.

TECHNOLOGY AND SCIENCE

Henretta_ch30_882-915.indd Page 883 10/4/08 11:03:38 AM user-s131Henretta_ch30_882-915.indd Page 883 10/4/08 11:03:38 AM user-s131 /Users/user-s131/Desktop/Users/user-s131/Desktop

G O V E R N M E N T With Ronald Reagan’s election in 1980, “New Right” conservatism be- gan its ascendancy. The conservatives sought to roll back the social wel- fare state created by the New Deal and the Great Society. Presidents Reagan and George H. W. Bush cut taxes, limited federal regulation, and appointed conservative-minded federal judges. Democrat Bill Clinton won passage of some welfare measures but pursued a centrist policy. Evangelical Christians and conservative lawmakers brought abortion, gay rights, and other cultural issues into the political arena, setting off controversies that revealed sharp divisions among the American people. George W. Bush capitalized on these divisions to win the presidency, but his record as an economic conservative was more ambiguous than Reagan’s or his father’s because, while he was a tax cutter and free-marketeer, he was also an undisciplined spender who plunged the federal budget into severe defi cit. By the end of his presidency, it was no longer clear that New Right conservatism was in the ascendancy.

D I P LO M AC Y Suddenly, in the late 1980s, the Soviet Union and its satellite Communist regimes in Eastern Europe collapsed, leaving the United States as the only military superpower. Expecting to lead in the creation of a “new world order,” the United States actively countered civil wars, terrorist activities, and military aggression in many parts of the world. In 1991, it fought the Persian Gulf War in response to Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait; in the late 1990s, it led military action in Serbia and Bosnia. In 2001, responding to terrorist assaults on New York and Washington by the radical Islamic group Al Qaeda, President George W. Bush attacked Al Qaeda’s bases in Afghanistan. He then ordered an invasion of Iraq in 2003 that quickly toppled the dictator Saddam Hussein but triggered civil chaos and a violent insurgency that, as of 2008, had cost the United States $500 billion and 30,000 casualties.

E CO N O M Y The American economy grew substantially between 1980 and 2007, thanks to the increased productivity of workers and robust spending by American consumers. Republican tax cuts spurred investment but also contributed to budget defi cits and a widening gap between rich and poor citizens. The Federal Reserve kept interest rates low and made credit so cheap that a speculative housing boom developed. The end of the Cold War allowed the worldwide expansion of capitalism. American-run

884

�� !�"��#��$%� ��

multinational corporations shifted manufacturing facilities to China and other low-wage countries at the expense of American workers. The resulting fl ood of cheap foreign-made goods benefi ted consumers but created a massive American trade defi cit. Because of the trade imbal- ance, budget defi cits, and the housing bubble, American prosperity rested on shaky foundations. In 2008, as the housing bubble burst and a fi nancial crisis set in, the economy slid into recession.

S O C I E T Y During these decades, American society grew ever more diverse in demo- graphic composition and cultural values. Increased immigration from Latin America and Asia added to cultural tensions and produced a new nativist movement. Continuing battles over affi rmative action, abor- tion, sexual standards, homosexuality, feminism, and religion in public life took on an increasingly passionate character, which hindered the achievement of politically negotiated compromises. Political paralysis was most striking in the cases of illegal immigration and Social Security, in which bitterly contested solutions ended in stalemate.

T E C H N O LO G Y A N D S C I E N C E Scientifi c knowledge and technological advances likewise triggered cul- tural confl icts. Religious conservatives invoked a faith-based ideology that challenged the legitimacy of scientifi c evidence and led to battles over the teaching of evolution and funding for stem-cell research. The new electronic world likewise raised troubling issues. Would cable TV, with its multitude of choices, further erode a common American culture? Would the World Wide Web facilitate the outsourcing of American middle-class jobs? Would computer technology allow gov- ernments and private data-collecting businesses to track the lives and limit the freedom of American citizens?

A “new world order,” a New Right ascendancy, a new global econ- omy, massive immigration, and a technological revolution: We live in a time of rapid change and continuing challenges that will test the resil- ience of American society and the creativity of American leaders.

885

Henretta_ch30_882-915.indd Page 885 10/20/08 11:06:24 AM user-s131 /Volumes/MHSF/MH-SANFRAN/MHSF027/MHS...Henretta_ch30_882-915.indd Page 885 10/20/08 11:06:24 AM user-s131 /Volumes/MHSF/MH-SANFRAN/MHSF027/MHS...

The Reagan Revolution and the End of the Cold War 1 9 8 0 – 2 0 0 1

30 C H A P T E R

Whether or not he was a

great president, Ronald

Reagan was a great man,

in the sense that he

changed the way people

thought. ––Richard Reeves, 2004

Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!” demanded President Ron-ald Reagan in a Berlin speech in June 1987, addressing his remarks to Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev in Moscow. Two years later, in November 1989, millions of television viewers worldwide watched jubi- lant Germans themselves knock down the Berlin Wall. The cement and barbed wire

barrier, which had divided the city since 1961, was a vivid symbol of Communist repres- sion and the Cold War division of Europe. More than 400 East Germans had lost their lives trying to escape to West Berlin. Now East and West Berliners, young and old, danced on the remains of the forbidding wall. Then, in 1991, the Soviet Union itself dissolved, ending the Cold War. A new world order was in the making.

The end of the Cold War was partly the result of a dramatic change in American political life. The election of President Ronald Reagan began a conservative political ascendancy that has continued into the twenty-fi rst century. Supported by the Republican Party’s New Right, Reagan took an aggressive stance toward the Soviet Union and the liberal ideology that had informed American public policy since the New Deal of Franklin D. Roosevelt (1933–1945). However, the Republicans’ domestic agenda was complicated by a split between religious conservatives, who demanded strong government action to implement their faith-based policies, and economic conserva- tives, who favored limited government and free markets. Moreover, the Democratic Party remained a potent — and fl exible — political force. Acknowledging the right- ward shift in the country’s mood, Democrat Bill Clinton trod a centrist path that led him to the White House in 1992 and again in 1996. “The era of big government is over,” Clinton declared. At home as well as abroad, a new order emerged during the last decades of the century.

886

“

�� ! �� "� #�$%

C H A P T E R 30 The Reagan Revolution and the End of the Cold War, 1980–2001 � 887

The Rise of Conservatism The Great Depression of the 1930s and World War II had discredited the traditional conservative program of limited government at home and political isolationism abroad. Although the conservatives’ crusade against Communism revived their politi- cal fortunes during the Cold War, they failed to devise a set of domestic policies that

The Wall Comes Down As the Communist government of East Germany collapsed, West Berliners showed their contempt for the wall dividing the city by defacing it with graffi ti. Then, in November 1989, East and West Berliners destroyed huge sections of the wall with sledgehammers, an act of psychic liberation that symbolized the end of the Cold War. Alexandra Avakian/Woodfi n Camp & Associates.

�� !"�#��$%� ��

888 � PA R T S E V E N A Divided Nation in a Disordered World, 1980–2008

won the allegiance of American voters. Then, in the late 1970s, conservative Republicans took advantage of serious blunders by liberal Democrats and built a formidable political coalition.

Reagan and the Emergence of the New Right The personal odyssey of Ronald Reagan embodies the story of New Right Republican conservatism. Before World War II, Reagan was a well-known movie actor and a New Deal Democrat and admirer of Franklin Roosevelt. However, he turned away from the New Deal, partly from self-interest (he disliked paying high taxes) and partly on prin- ciple. As head of the Screen Actors Guild from 1947 to 1952, Reagan had to deal with its Communist members, who formed the extreme left wing of the liberal New Deal. Dismayed by their hard-line tactics and goals, he became a militant anti-Communist conservative and a well-known spokesperson for the General Electric Corporation. In the early 1960s, Reagan joined the Republican Party and threw himself into California politics, speaking for conservative causes and candidates.

Ronald Reagan came to national attention in 1964 with a televised speech at the Republican convention supporting archconservative Barry Goldwater for the presidency (see Chapter 28). Just as the “Cross of Gold” speech elevated William Jennings Bryan to fame in 1896, so Reagan’s address, titled “A Time for Choosing,” secured his political future. Backed fi nancially by wealthy southern Californians, he won the state’s governorship in 1968 and again in 1972. Reagan’s impassioned rhet- oric supporting limited government, low taxation, and law and order won broad support among citizens of the most populous state and made him a force in national politics. After narrowly losing a bid to become the Republican presidential nomi- nee in 1976, Reagan counted on his growing popularity to make him the party’s candidate in 1980.

In 1964, the conservative message preached by Ronald Reagan and Barry Goldwater had appealed to few American voters. Then came the series of events that undermined the liberal agenda of the Democratic Party: a stagnating economy, the failed war in Vietnam, African American riots, a judiciary that legalized abortion and enforced school busing, and an expanded federal regulatory state. By the mid-1970s, conservatism com- manded greater popular support. In the South, long a Democratic stronghold, whites hostile to federal civil rights legislation voted Republican in increasing numbers. Simul- taneously, middle-class suburbanites and migrants to the Sun Belt states endorsed the conservative agenda of combating crime, limiting social welfare spending, and increas- ing expenditures on military defense.

Strong New Right grassroots organizations spread the message. In 1964, nearly four million volunteers had campaigned for Barry Goldwater; now they swung their support to Ronald Reagan. Skilled conservative political operatives such as Richard Viguerie, a Louisiana-born Catholic and antiabortion activist, applied new computer technology to political campaigning. They used computerized mailing lists to solicit campaign funds, drum up support for conservative causes, and get out the vote on election day.

Other support for the New Right came from think tanks funded by wealthy conservatives. The Heritage Foundation, the American Enterprise Institute, and the

�� !�"��#��$%� ��

C H A P T E R 30 The Reagan Revolution and the End of the Cold War, 1980–2001 � 889

Cato Institute issued policy proposals and persistently attacked liberal legislation and the permissive culture that they claimed it had spawned. These organizations blended the traditional conservative themes of individualism and free markets with the hot-button “social issues” of affi rmative action, the welfare state, and changing gender roles and sexual values. They also fostered the growth of a cadre of conser- vative intellectuals. For decades, William F. Buckley, the founder and editor of the National Review, and Milton Friedman, the Nobel Prize–winning laissez-faire economist at the University of Chicago, were virtually the only nationally promi- nent conservative intellectuals. Now they were joined on the public stage by the so-called neoconservatives — well-known intellectuals such as Jeane Kirkpatrick, Nathan Glazer, and Norman Podhoretz, editor of Commentary magazine. Many neoconservatives had once advocated radical and liberal causes. Vehemently recanting their former views, they now bolstered the intellectual respectability of the Republican Right. As liberal New York senator Daniel Moynihan remarked, suddenly “the GOP has become a party of ideas.”

The most striking addition to the conservative coalition was the Religious Right, which had previously had a limited political presence. Drawing its member- ship from conservative Catholics and Protestant evangelicals, the Religious Right condemned divorce, abortion, premarital sex, and feminism. Charismatic television

Jerry Falwell The resurgence of evangelical religion in the 1970s was accompanied by a conservative movement in politics known as the New Right or the Christian Right. Founded in 1979 by televangelist Jerry Falwell, the Moral Majority was one of the earliest New Right groups, committed to promoting “family values” and (as the title to the record album suggests) patriotism in American society and politics. Dennis Brack/Black Star.

For more help analyzing this image, see the Online Study Guide at bedfordstmartins.com/henrettaconcise.

�� !�"��#��$%� ��

890 � PA R T S E V E N A Divided Nation in a Disordered World, 1980–2008

evangelists such as Pat Robertson, the son of a U.S. senator, and Jerry Falwell, the founder of the Moral Majority, emerged as the champions of a faith-based political agenda. As these cultural conservatives attacked Democratic liberals for support- ing lenient treatment of criminals, permissive sexuality, and welfare payments to unmarried mothers with multiple children, economic conservatives called for cuts in taxes and government regulations. Ronald Reagan endorsed both conservative programs and, with the support of both groups, captured the Republican presi- dential nomination in 1980 (see American Voices, p. 891). To win the votes of moderate Republicans, Reagan chose former CIA director George H. W. Bush as his running mate.

The Election of 1980 President Jimmy Carter’s sinking popularity virtually doomed his bid for reelection. When the Democrats renominated him over his liberal challenger, Edward (Ted) Kennedy of Massachusetts, Carter’s approval rating was stunningly low: A mere 21 percent of Americans believed that he was an effective president. The reasons were clear: Economically, millions of citizens were feeling the pinch from stagnant wages, high inflation, crippling mortgage rates, and an unemployment rate of nearly 8 percent (see Chapter 29). In international affairs, the nation blamed Carter for his weak response to Soviet expansion and the Iranians’ seizure of American diplomats.

The incumbent president found himself constantly on the defensive, while Rea- gan remained upbeat and decisive. “This is the greatest country in the world,” Reagan reassured the nation in his warm baritone voice. “We have the talent, we have the drive. . . . All we need is the leadership.” To emphasize his intention to be a formi- dable international leader, Reagan hinted that he would take strong action to win the hostages’ return. To signal his rejection of liberal policies, the California gov- ernor declared his opposition to affi rmative action and forced busing and promised to get “the government off our backs.” Most important, Reagan effectively appealed to the many Americans who felt fi nancially insecure. In a televised debate with Carter, Rea- gan emphasized the hardships facing working- and middle-class Americans in an era of “stagfl ation” — stagnant wages amidst rapidly rising prices — and asked them: “Are you better off today than you were four years ago?”

In November, the voters gave a clear answer. They repudiated Carter, giving him only 41 percent of the vote. Independent candidate John Anderson garnered 8 per- cent, and Reagan won easily, with 51 percent of the popular vote. Moreover, the Republicans elected thirty-three new members of the House of Representatives and twelve new senators, which gave them control of the U.S. Senate for the fi rst time since 1954.

Superior fi nancial resources contributed to the Republicans’ success: Two-thirds of all corporate donations to political action committees went to conservative Republican candidates. While the Democratic Party saw its key constituency — organized labor — dwindle in size and infl uence, the GOP used its ample funds to reach voters through a sophisticated television campaign and direct-mail advertisements. “Madison Avenue” advertising techniques — long used to sell commercial products — now dominated

�� !��"�#$

A M E R I C A N V O I C E S

S O U R C E S : Donald E. Wildmon, The Home Invaders (Elgin, IL: Victor Books, 1985), 3–7; Yale University Archives.

The Moral Majority and Its Critics D O N A L D E . W I L D M O N A N D A . B A R T L E T T G I A M AT T I Modern liberals favor the separation of church and state and are ethical pluralists — that is,

they are skeptical of absolute moral principles. Conservative Christians challenge the

legitimacy of pluralism and seek through political action and legislation to make their religion

an integral part of public life. Donald Wildmon is a Christian minister and a grassroots

religious activist. A. Bartlett Giamatti was the president of Yale University (1978–1986) and

subsequently president of the National (Baseball) League.

�� !�"��#��$%� ��

This selection has been omitted intentionally from your CourseSmart eBook due to electronic permissions issues. Regrettably, we cannot make this piece available to you in a digital format.

arthurjohnson

Rectangle

892 � PA R T S E V E N A Divided Nation in a Disordered World, 1980–2008

political campaigning. Slickly produced ads trumpeted the virtues of a political candi- date and smeared the record — and, increasingly, the reputation — of his or her op- ponent.

The Republicans’ aggressive campaigning furthered the realignment of the American electorate that had begun during the 1970s. The core of the Republican Party remained the relatively affl uent, white, Protestant voters who supported balanced budgets, opposed government activism, feared crime and communism, and believed in a strong national defense. Now two large groups of former Democrats had joined the Republican cause: southern whites who opposed civil rights legislation and so-called Reagan Democrats, Catholic blue-collar workers who took alarm at antiwar protestors, feminist demands, and welfare expenditures. Reagan Republicanism also attracted young voters and residents of rapidly growing suburban communities in Texas, Arizona, and California.

The Religious Right also contributed to the Republican victory. The Moral Majority claimed that it had registered two million new voters for the 1980 election, and the Republican Party’s platform refl ected its infl uence. The platform called for a constitu- tional ban on abortion, voluntary prayer in public schools, and a mandatory death penalty for certain crimes. The Republicans also demanded an end to court-mandated busing and, for the fi rst time in forty years, opposed the Equal Rights Amendment. Within the Republican Party, conservatism had triumphed.

Reagan’s victory led some observers to predict a long-lasting alteration in American voting patters. U.S. News & World Report proclaimed “A Massive Shift [to the] . . . Right.” Other commentators noted that Reagan had won a bare majority of the popular vote and that many working-class voters — disillusioned Democrats — stayed home. Rather than an endorsement of conservatism, one analyst called the

election a “landslide vote of no confidence in an incompetent administration.” Nonetheless, Ronald Reagan’s victory raised the possibility of a dramatic shift in government policies. The new president claimed that the American pub- lic had given him a mandate for sweeping change. His success or failure would determine the significance of the election and the New Right.

The Reagan Presidency, 1981–1989 At age sixty-nine, Ronald Reagan was the oldest man to assume the presidency. His appearance and demeanor belied his age. Concerned since his acting days with his physical fi tness, Reagan conveyed a sense of vigor and purpose. His folksy humor endeared him to millions, who overlooked his indifference to details of public policy and embraced his optimistic message of national pride. Even when major scandals shook his administration, Reagan maintained his popularity. Critics dubbed him “the Tefl on president,” since nothing damaging seemed to stick. But sympathetic observers called

� Which were the key groups of the new Republican coalition? Were their goals complementary? Contradictory?

� What factors led to Ronald Reagan’s election in 1980?

�� !�"��#��$%� ��

C H A P T E R 30 The Reagan Revolution and the End of the Cold War, 1980–2001 � 893

Reagan “the Great Communicator” and marveled at his success in advancing the con- servatives’ economic and cultural agenda.

Reaganomics The Republican president kept his political message clear and simple. “Government is not the solution,” he declared. “Government is the problem.” In his fi rst year in offi ce, Reagan and his chief advisor, James A. Baker III, quickly set new government priorities. To roll back the expanded liberal state, they launched a three-pronged assault on federal taxes, social welfare spending, and the regulatory bureaucracy. To win the Cold War, they advocated a vast increase in defense spending. And to match the resurgent economies of Germany and Japan, whom the United States had defeated in World War II and then helped to rebuild, they set out to restore American leadership of the world’s capitalist societies.

To achieve this economic goal, the new administration advanced a set of policies, quickly dubbed “Reaganomics,” to increase the supply of goods. The theory underly- ing supply-side economics, as this approach was called, emphasized the importance of investment in productive enterprises. According to George Gilder, a major supply-side theorist, the best way to bolster investment was to reduce the taxes paid by business corporations and wealthy Americans, who could then use these funds to expand pro- duction. Supply-siders maintained that the resulting economic expansion would increase government revenues and offset the loss of tax dollars stemming from the original tax cuts.

Taking advantage of Republican control of the Senate and his personal popularity following a failed assassination attempt, Reagan won congressional approval of the Economic Recovery Tax Act (ERTA). The act reduced income tax rates paid by most Americans by 23 percent over three years. For the wealthiest Americans — those with millions to invest — the highest marginal tax rate dropped from 70 to 50 percent. The act also slashed estate taxes, the levies on inheritances instituted during the Progressive era to prevent the transmission of huge fortunes from one generation to the next. Finally, the new legislation trimmed the taxes paid by business corporations by $150 billion over a period of fi ve years. As a result of ERTA, by 1986, the annual reve- nue of the federal government had been cut by $200 billion.

David Stockman, Reagan’s budget director, hoped to match this reduction in tax revenue with a comparable cutback in federal expenditures. To meet this ambitious goal, he proposed substantial cuts in Social Security and Medicare. But Congress — and the president — rejected his proposals. They were not willing to antagonize middle- class and elderly voters who viewed these government entitlements as sacred. As neo- conservative columnist George Will noted ironically, “Americans are conservative. What they want to conserve is the New Deal.” This contradiction between Republican ideology and political reality would frustrate the GOP into the twenty-fi rst century.

In a futile attempt to balance the budget, Stockman advocated spending cuts for programs for food stamps, unemployment compensation, and Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC). In the administration’s view, these programs represented the worst features of Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society, being handouts to economic drones at the expense of hardworking taxpayers. Congress approved some cutbacks but

�� !�"��#��$%� ��

894 � PA R T S E V E N A Divided Nation in a Disordered World, 1980–2008

preserved most of these welfare programs because of their importance; in 1980, some twenty-one million people received food stamps. Congress likewise continued to lavish huge subsidies and tariff protection on wealthy farmers and business corporations — “welfare for the rich,” as critics labeled it. As the administration’s spending cuts fell far short of its goal, the federal budget defi cit increased dramatically.

Military spending accounted for most of the growing federal defi cit, and Presi- dent Reagan was its strongest supporter. “Defense is not a budget item,” he declared, “you spend what you need.” To “make America number one again,” Reagan and Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger pushed through Congress a fi ve-year, $1.2 tril- lion military spending program. The administration revived the B-1 bomber, which President Carter had canceled because of its great expense and limited usefulness, and continued development of the MX, a new missile system that Carter had approved. Reagan’s most ambitious weapons plan, proposed in 1983, was the controversial Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI). Popularly known as “Star Wars” because of its science-fi ction-like character, SDI proposed a system of laser-equipped satellites that would detect and destroy incoming ballistic missiles carrying atomic weapons. Would it work? Most scientists were dubious. Secretary of State George Shultz thought it was “lunacy,” and even Weinberger, who liked every weapons system he saw, dismissed the idea. Nonetheless, Congress approved initial funding for the enormously expensive project. During Reagan’s presidency, military spending accounted for nearly one- fourth of all federal expenditures and produced a skyrocketing national debt. By the time Reagan left offi ce, the federal defi cit had tripled, rising from $930 billion in 1981 to $2.8 trillion in 1989. Every American citizen — from infant to senior citizen — now owed a hidden debt of $11,000.

Advocates of Reaganomics asserted that excessive regulation by federal agencies impeded economic growth. Some of these bureaucracies, such as the U.S. Department of Labor, had risen to prominence during the New Deal; others, such as the Environ- mental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Occupational Safety and Health Administra- tion, had been created by Democratic Congresses during Johnson’s Great Society and the Nixon administration (see Chapters 24, 28, and 29). Although these agencies provided many services to business corporations, they also increased their costs — by protecting the rights of workers, ordering safety improvements in factories, and requir- ing expensive equipment to limit the release of toxic chemicals into the environment. To reduce the reach of federal regulatory agencies, the Reagan administration cut their budgets — by an average of 12 percent. Invoking the “New Federalism” advocated by President Nixon, it transferred some regulatory responsibilities to state governments.

The Reagan administration also crippled the regulatory agencies by staffi ng them with leaders who were hostile to the agencies’ missions. James Watt, an outspoken conservative who headed the Department of the Interior, attacked environmentalists as “a left-wing cult.” Acting on his free-enterprise principles, Watt opened public lands for use by private businesses — oil and coal corporations, large-scale ranchers, and timber companies. Already under heavy criticism for these economic giveaways, Watt had to resign in 1983 when he dismissively characterized members of a public com- mission as “a black, a woman, two Jews, and a cripple.” Anne Gorsuch Burford, whom Reagan appointed to head the EPA, likewise resigned when she was implicated in a money scandal and refused to provide Congress with documents on the Superfund

�� !�"��#��$%� ��

C H A P T E R 30 The Reagan Revolution and the End of the Cold War, 1980–2001 � 895

program, which cleans up toxic waste sites. The Sierra Club and other environmental groups aroused enough public outrage about these appointees that the administration changed its position. During President Reagan’s second term, he signifi cantly increased the EPA’s budget and added acreage to the National Wilderness Preservation System and animals and plants to the endangered species lists.

Ultimately, politics in a democracy is “the art of the possible,” and savvy politi- cians know when to advance and when to retreat. Having attained two of his prime goals — a major tax cut and a dramatic increase in defense spending — Reagan did not seriously attempt to scale back big government and the welfare state. When Reagan left offi ce in 1989, federal spending stood at 22.1 percent of the gross domestic product (GDP) and federal taxes at 19 percent of GDP, both virtually the same as in 1981. In the meantime, the federal defi cit had tripled in size, and the number of civilian gov- ernment workers had actually increased from 2.9 to 3.1 million. This outcome — so different from the president’s lofty rhetoric about balancing budgets and downsizing government — elicited harsh criticism from conservative commentators. There was no “Reagan Revolution,” as one noted bitterly.

Reagan’s Second Term On entering offi ce in 1981, President Reagan had supported the tight money policy of the Federal Reserve Board headed by Paul Volcker. By raising interest rates to the ex- traordinarily high level of 18 percent, Volcker had quickly cut the high infl ation of the Carter years. But this defl ationary policy caused an economic recession that put some ten million Americans out of work. The president’s approval rating plummeted, and in the elections of 1982, Democrats picked up twenty-six seats in the House of Repre- sentatives and seven state governorships.

The economy — and the president’s popularity — quickly revived. During the 1984 election campaign, Reagan hailed his tax cuts as the reason for the economic resur- gence. His campaign theme, “It’s Morning in America,” suggested that a new day of prosperity had dawned. The Democrats nominated former vice president Walter Mondale of Minnesota. With strong ties to labor unions, ethnic groups, and party leaders, Mondale epitomized the New Deal coalition. To appeal to women voters, Mondale selected Representative Geraldine Ferraro of New York as his running mate — the fi rst woman to run on the presidential ticket of a major political party. Neither Ferraro’s presence nor Mondale’s credentials made a difference. The incumbent president won a landslide victory, losing only Minnesota and the District of Columbia. Still, Democrats retained their majority in the House and, in 1986, regained control of the Senate.

A major scandal marred Reagan’s second term. Early in 1986, news leaked out that the administration had negotiated an arms-for-hostages deal with the revolutionary Islamic government of Iran. For years, the president had denounced Iran as an “outlaw state” and a supporter of terrorism. But in 1985, he wanted its help. To win Iran’s assistance in freeing some American hostages held by Hezbollah, a pro-Iranian Shiite group in Lebanon, the administration covertly sold arms to the “outlaw state.”

While this secret Iranian arms deal was diplomatically and politically controversial, the use of resulting profi ts in Nicaragua was patently illegal. In 1981, the Reagan admin- istration had suspended aid to Nicaragua. Its goal was the ouster of the left-wing

�� !�"��#��$%� ��

896 � PA R T S E V E N A Divided Nation in a Disordered World, 1980–2008

Sandinista government. It claimed that the Sandinistas were pursuing socialist policies detrimental to American business interests, forming a military alliance with Fidel Castro in Cuba, and supporting a leftist rebellion in neighboring El Salvador (Map 30.1). To overthrow the elected Sandinista government, President Reagan ordered the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) to aid an armed Nicaraguan opposition group called the Contras. Although Reagan praised the Contras as “freedom fi ghters,” Congress worried that the president and other executive branch agencies were assuming war-making powers that the Constitution reserved to the legislature. In 1984, Congress banned the CIA and any other government agency from providing any military support to the Contras. Oliver North, a lieutenant colonel in the U.S. Marines and an aide to the National Security Council, consciously defi ed that ban. With the tacit or explicit consent of high-ranking administration offi cials, including the president, North used the profi ts from the Iranian arms deal to assist the Contras. When asked whether he knew of North’s illegal actions, Reagan replied, “I don’t remember.” Still swayed by Reagan’s charm, the public accepted this convenient loss of memory. Nonetheless, the Iran-Contra affair resulted in

1959 – Castro ousts dictator Batista. 1961 – CIA-backed Cuban exiles launch unsuccessful invasion at Bay of Pigs. 1962 – Cuban Missile Crisis: U.S. blockades Cuba.

1954 – U.S.-backed coup overthrows Arbenz’s socialist government.

1980s – U.S. sends money and military advisors to aid right-wing regime against leftist uprising.

1964 – U.S. troops quell anti-American rioting in Canal Zone. 1978 – Treaty provides for joint U.S.-Panama control of Canal Zone in preparation for full turnover of canal. 1989 – U.S. troops invade, capturing dictator Noriega. 1999 – Control of canal returned to Panama.

1979 – Somoza regime overthrown; Sandinistas come to power. 1979- U.S.-backed Contra rebels and ’89 Sandinistas fight civil war. 1990 – Sandinistas defeated in elections; coalition government comes to power.

1983 – U.S. troops invade to oust a communist regime.

1965 – U.S. troops invade to prevent leftist takeover.

1991 – Military coup ousts President Aristide. 1994 – U.S. troops oversee peaceful return of Aristide to power.

0 250 500 kilometers

0 250 500 miles

E W

A T L A N T I C O C E A N

P A C I F I C O C E A N

Gulf of Mexico

C a r i b b e a n S e a

M E X I C O

U N I T E D S T A T E S

GUATEMALA

EL SALVADOR

NICARAGUA COSTA RICA

PANAMA COLOMBIA

CUBA

JAMAICA

DOMINICAN REPUBLIC

HAITI

Puerto Rico U.S.

VIRGIN ISLANDS

B A

H A

M A

HONDURAS

BELIZE

VENEZUELA

YUCATAN PENINSULA

Grenada

Mexico City

Veracruz

Caracas

Havana

New Orleans

Miami Nassau

Kingston Port-au- Prince

Santo Domingo

San Juan

Belmopan

Guatemala

San Salvador Tegucigalpa

Managua

San Jose

Panama

�

� �

�

� �

�

MAP 30.1 U.S. Involvement in Latin America and the Caribbean, 1954–2000 Ever since the Monroe Doctrine (1823), the United States has claimed a special interest in Latin America. During the Cold War, U.S. foreign policy focused on containing instability and the appeal of Communism in a region plagued by poverty and military dictatorships. The American government provided economic aid to address social needs and it intervened with military forces (or by supporting military coups) to remove unfriendly or socialist governments. The Reagan administration’s support of the Contra rebels in Nicaragua, aspects of which were contrary to U.S. law, was one of those interventions.

�� !"�#��$��%&� ��

C H A P T E R 30 The Reagan Revolution and the End of the Cold War, 1980–2001 � 897

the prosecution of Colonel North and several other offi cials and jeopardized the presi- dent’s historical reputation. Most Americans were shocked by Reagan’s dealings with Iran and its allies. Weakened by the Iran-Contra scandal, Reagan proposed no bold domestic policy initiatives in his last two years.

However, the president continued to shape the judiciary. During his two terms, Reagan appointed 368 federal court judges, most of them with conservative creden- tials, and three Supreme Court justices: Sandra Day O’Connor, Antonin Scalia, and Anthony Kennedy. O’Connor, the fi rst woman to serve on the court, coauthored an important decision supporting a woman’s right to an abortion and, as a “swing” vote between liberals and conservatives, shaped the court’s decision making. Kennedy was also a judicial moderate, leaving Scalia as Reagan’s only genuinely conservative ap- pointee. But Reagan also elevated Justice William Rehnquist, a conservative Nixon appointee, to the position of chief justice. Under Rehnquist’s leadership (1986–2005), the court’s conservatives took an extremely activist stance, limiting the reach of federal laws, ending court-ordered busing, and extending constitutional protection to certain kinds of property. However, on controversial issues such as individual liberties, abor- tion rights, affi rmative action, and the rights of criminal defendants, O’Connor led the court toward a moderate position. Consequently, the justices watered down, but did not usually over- turn, the liberal rulings of the Warren Court (1954–1967). Still, a more conservative federal judiciary stood as a signifi cant institutional legacy of the Reagan presidency.

Defeating Communism and Creating a New World Order Ronald Reagan entered offi ce determined to confront the Soviet Union diplomatically and militarily. Backed by Republican hard-liners, Reagan unleashed some of the harshest Cold War rhetoric since the 1950s, labeling the Soviet Union an “evil empire” and vowing that it would end up “on the ash heap of history.” By his second term, Reagan had decided that this goal would be best achieved by actively cooperating with Mikhail Gorbachev, the reform-minded Russian Communist leader. The downfall of the Soviet Union in 1991 ended the nearly fi fty-year-long Cold War, but a new set of foreign challenges quickly appeared.

The End of the Cold War The collapse of the Soviet Union was the result of external pressure from the United States and the internal weaknesses of the Communist economy. To defeat the Soviets, the administration pursued a two-pronged strategy. First, it abandoned the policy of détente and set about rearming America. This buildup in American military strength, reasoned hard-line Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger, would force the Soviets into an arms race that would strain their economy and cause domestic unrest. Second, the president supported the initiatives of CIA director William Casey. Casey sought to

� What were the key elements of Reagan’s domestic policy?

� What limits did Reagan face in promoting his policies? What were his successes and failures?

�� !"�#��$%� ��

898 � PA R T S E V E N A Divided Nation in a Disordered World, 1980–2008

roll back Soviet infl uence in the Third World by funding guerrillas who were trying to overthrow pro-Communist governments in Angola, Mozambique, Afghanistan, and Central America.

These strategies placed new pressures on the Communist regime. The Soviet sys- tem of state socialism and central economic planning had transformed Russia from an agricultural to an industrial society. But it had done so very ineffi ciently. Lacking the discipline of a market economy, most enterprises hoarded raw materials, employed too many workers, and did not develop new products. Except in military weaponry and space technology, the Russian economy fell farther and farther behind those of capitalist societies, and most people in the Soviet bloc endured a low standard of liv- ing. Moreover, the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, like the American war in Vietnam, turned out to be major blunder — an unwinnable war that cost vast amounts of money, destroyed military morale, and undermined popular support of the Communist government.

Mikhail Gorbachev, a younger Russian leader who became general secretary of the Communist Party in 1985, recognized the need for internal economic reform, technological progress, and an end to the war in Afghanistan. His policies of glasnost (openness) and perestroika (economic restructuring) spurred widespread criticism of the rigid institutions and authoritarian controls of the Communist regime. To lessen tensions with the United States, Gorbachev met with Reagan in 1985, and the two leaders established a warm personal rapport. By 1987, they had agreed to eliminate all intermediate-range nuclear missiles based in Europe. A year later, Gorbachev ordered Soviet troops out of Afghanistan, and Reagan replaced many of his hard-line advisors with policymakers who favored a renewal of détente.

As Gorbachev’s reforms revealed the fl aws of the Soviet system, the peoples of eastern and central Europe demanded the ouster of their Communist governments. In Poland, the Roman Catholic Church and its pope — Polish-born John Paul II — joined with Solidarity, the trade union movement led by Lech Walesa, to overthrow the pro-Soviet regime. In 1956 and 1964, Russian troops had quashed similar popular uprisings in Hungary and East Germany. Now they did not intervene, and a series of peaceful uprisings — “Velvet Revolutions” — created a new political order throughout the region. The destruction of the Berlin Wall in November 1989 symbolized the end of Communist rule in central Europe.

Two years later, the Soviet Union collapsed. Alarmed by Gorbachev’s reforms, Soviet military leaders seized him in August 1991. But widespread popular opposition led by Boris Yeltsin, the president of the Russian Republic, thwarted their efforts to oust Gorbachev from offi ce. This failure broke the dominance of the Communist Party. On December 25, 1991, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics formally dis- solved to make way for an eleven-member Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS). The Russian Republic assumed leadership of the CIS, but the Soviet Union was no more (Map 30.2).

In 1956, Nikita Khrushchev had told the United States, “We will bury you,” but now the tombstone read, “The Soviet Union, 1917–1991.” For more than forty years, the United States had fought a bitter economic and ideological battle against its Communist foe, a struggle that had exerted an enormous impact on American society. By linking the campaign for African American rights to the diplomatic competition

�� !�"��#��$%� ��

C H A P T E R 30 The Reagan Revolution and the End of the Cold War, 1980–2001 � 899

with the Soviet Union for the allegiance of the peoples in the Third World, liberal politicians had advanced the cause of racial equality in the United States. However, by labeling social welfare legislation as “communistic,” conservative politicians had limited its extent — as had the staggering cost of the Cold War. American taxpayers had spent some $4 trillion on nuclear weapons and trillions more on conventional arms. The physical and psychological costs were equally high: radiation from atomic weapons tests, anti-Communist witch hunts, and — most pervasive of all — a constant fear of nuclear annihilation. “Nobody — no country, no party, no person — ‘won’ the cold war,” concluded George Kennan, the architect in 1947 of the American policy of containment, because its cost was so high and both sides benefi ted greatly from its end.

Of course, most Americans had no qualms about proclaiming victory, and advo- cates of free-market capitalism, particularly conservative Republicans, celebrated the outcome. The collapse of Communism in Eastern Europe and the disintegration of the Soviet Union itself, they argued, demonstrated that they had been right all along.

Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) linked to Russia

Territory of former USSR that did not join CIS

Warsaw Pact nations allied with USSR

0 250 500 kilometers

0 500 miles250

Black Sea

Baltic Sea

Caspian Sea

Aral Sea

Lake Balkhash

DENMARK

GERMANY

EAST GERMANY

1990

LUX.

SWITZ.

SLOVENIA CROATIA

BOSNIA- HERZEGOVINA

AUSTRIA

CZECH REP. 1991

SLO VAK

199 1

HUNG AR

1991

RUSSIA

POLAND 1991

Y U

G O

SLAV IA

ALBANIA 1968

GREECE

MACEDONIA

BULGARIA 1991

ROMANIA 1991

MOLDOVA Aug. 1991

UKRAINE Aug. 1991

BELARUS Aug. 1991

LITHUANIA Mar. 1990

LATVIA May 1990

ESTONIA Mar. 1990

N O

RW AY

SW ED

FIN LA

N D

R U S S I A

KAZAKHSTAN Dec. 1991 KYRGYZSTAN

Aug. 1991

TAJIKISTAN Sept. 1991UZBEKISTAN

Aug. 1991

TURKMENISTAN Oct. 1991

IRAN

AFGHANISTAN

AZERBAIJAN Oct. 1991

ARMENIA Aug. 1991

GEORGIA Apr. 1991

TURKEY

ITALY

Moscow

Tallinn

Riga

Vilnius

Minsk

Kiev

Chisinau

Tbilisi

Yerevan

Ashgabat

Baku

Tashkent

Dushanbe

Bishkek Alma-Ata

MAP 30.2 The Collapse of the Soviet Union and the Creation of Independent States, 1989–1991 The collapse of Soviet Communism dramatically altered the political landscape of central Europe and central Asia. The Warsaw Pact, the Soviet Union’s answer to NATO, vanished. West Germany and East Germany reunited, and the nations that had been created by the Versailles Treaty of 1919 — Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, and Yugoslavia — reasserted their independence or split into smaller ethnically defi ned nations. The Soviet republics bordering Russia, from Belarus in the west to Kyrgyzstan in the east, also became independent states while remaining loosely bound with Russia in the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS). For more help analyzing this map, see the Online Study Guide at bedfordstmartins.com/henrettaconcise.

�� !��"�#$

900 � PA R T S E V E N A Divided Nation in a Disordered World, 1980–2008

Ronald Reagan’s role in facilitating the end of the Cold War was probably his most important achievement. Otherwise, his presidency left a mixed legacy. Despite his pledge to get the federal government “off our backs,” he failed to reduce its size or scope. Social Security and other entitlement programs remained untouched, and enormous military spending outweighed cuts in other programs. Determined not to divide the country, Reagan did not actively push controversial policies espoused by the Religious Right. He called for tax credits for private religious schools, restrictions on abortions, and a constitutional amendment to permit prayer in public schools but did not expend his political capital to secure these measures.

While Reagan failed to roll back the social welfare and regulatory state of the New Deal–Great Society era, he changed the dynamic of American politics. The Reagan pres- idency restored popular belief that America — and individual Americans — could enjoy increasing prosperity. And his antigovernment rhetoric won many adherents, as did his bold and fi scally dangerous tax cuts. As one historian has summed up Reagan’s domestic legacy: “For the next twenty years at least, American policies would focus on retrench- ment and cost-savings, budget cuts and tax cuts, deregulation and policy redefi nitions.” Social welfare liberalism, ascendant since 1933, was now on the defensive.

The Presidency of George H. W. Bush George H. W. Bush, Reagan’s vice president and successor, was a man of intelligence, courage, and ambition. Born to wealth and high status, he served with distinction as a naval aviator hero during World War II and then graduated Phi Beta Kappa from Yale University. Bush prospered as a Texas oil developer and member of Congress and served as ambassador to the United Nations during the presidency of Richard Nixon and as head of the CIA in the Ford Administration. Although Bush lacked Reagan’s extraordinary charisma and commanding presence, he had personal strengths that his predecessor lacked.

George Bush won the Republican nomination in 1988 and chose as the vice presidential candidate a young conservative Indiana senator, Dan Quayle. In the Democratic primaries, Governor Michael Dukakis of Massachusetts easily outpolled the charismatic civil rights leader Jesse Jackson, whose populist Rainbow Coalition brought together minority and liberal groups within the party. Dukakis chose Senator Lloyd Bentsen of Texas as his running mate.

The election campaign took on a harsh tone as brief television “attack ads” took precedence over a thoughtful discussion of policy issues. The Republicans’ mantra was “Read My Lips: No New Taxes,” a sound bite drawn from a Bush speech. The Bush campaign charged that Dukakis was “a card-carrying member” of the American Civil Liberties Union, a liberal free-speech organization, and that he was “soft on crime.” Bush supporters repeatedly ran TV ads focused on Willie Horton, a convicted African American murderer who had raped a woman while on furlough from a prison in Governor Dukakis’s state of Massachusetts. Placed on the defensive by these attacks, Dukakis failed to mount an effective campaign or to unify the liberal and moderate factions within Democratic Party. Bush carried thirty-eight states, winning the popular vote by 53.4 percent to 45.6 percent, but Democrats retained control of the House of Representatives and the Senate.

�� !�"��#��$%� ��

C H A P T E R 30 The Reagan Revolution and the End of the Cold War, 1980–2001 � 901

Faced with a Democratic Congress and personally interested in foreign affairs, George H. W. Bush proposed few distinctive domestic initiatives. Rather, congressional Democrats took the lead. They enacted legislation allowing workers to take leave for family and medical emergencies, a measure that Bush vetoed. Then, over the presi- dent’s opposition, the Democrats secured legislation enlarging the rights of workers who claimed discrimination because of their race or gender. With the president’s sup- port, congressional liberals also won approval of the Americans with Disabilities Act, a major piece of legislation that signifi cantly enhanced the legal rights of physically disabled people in employment, public transportation, and housing.

As Democratic politicians seized the initiative in Congress, conservative Republican judges made their presence known in the courts. In Webster v. Reproductive Health Services (1989), the Supreme Court upheld the authority of state governments to limit the use of public funds and facilities for abortions. The justices also allowed a regulation that prevented federally funded health clinics from discussing abortion with their clients. Then, in the important case of Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey (1992), the court upheld a Pennsylvania law requiring a twenty-four-hour waiting period prior to an abortion. Surveying these and other decisions, a reporter suggested that 1989 was “The Year the Court Turned Right,” with a conservative majority ready and willing to limit or invalidate liberal legislation and legal precedents.

This observation was only partly correct. The Court was not yet fi rmly conserva- tive in character. Although the Casey decision, coauthored by Reagan appointees Sandra Day O’Connor and Anthony Kennedy, upheld certain restrictions on abortions, it affi rmed the “essential holding” in Roe v. Wade that women had a constitutional right to control their bodies. Justice David Souter, appointed to the Court by Bush in 1990, voted with O’Connor and Kennedy to uphold Roe and, like O’Connor, emerged as an ideologically moderate justice on a range of issues.

Bush’s other appointment to the Court was Clarence Thomas, an African American conservative with little judicial experience or legal expertise. Thomas’s nomination proved controversial; he was opposed by the NAACP, the Urban League, and other black groups and was accused of sexual harassment by Anita Hill, an African American law professor. Hill told the all-male Senate Judiciary Committee that Thomas had sexually harassed her when they were colleagues at a federal agency. Despite these charges, Republicans in the Senate won Thomas’s confi rmation by a narrow margin. Once on the bench, Thomas took his cues from his conservative colleagues, Chief Justice William Rehnquist and Justice Antonin Scalia.

The controversy over Clarence Thomas hurt Bush at the polls. Democrats accused Republicans of ignoring sexual harassment, an issue of concern to many women, and vowed to mobilize female voters. In the election of 1992, the number of women, mostly Democrats, elected to the Senate increased from three to seven, and in the House it rose from thirty to forty-eight.

Bush’s main political problems stemmed from the huge budget defi cit bequeathed by Ronald Reagan. In 1985, Congress had enacted the Gramm-Rudman Act, which mandated automatic cuts in government programs in 1991 if the budget remained wildly out of balance. That moment had now come. Unless Congress and the president acted, there would be a shutdown of all nonessential government departments and the layoff of thousands of employees. To resolve the crisis, Congress enacted legislation

�� !"�#��$��%&� ��

902 � PA R T S E V E N A Divided Nation in a Disordered World, 1980–2008

that cut spending and signifi cantly increased taxes. Abandoning his pledge of “No New Taxes,” Bush signed the legislation, earning the enmity of conservative Republicans and diminishing his chances for reelection in 1992.

Bush also struggled with an economic recession that began in 1990 and stretched into the middle of 1991. As unemployment mounted, the president could do little be- cause the funding for many federal programs — including housing, public works, and social services — had been shifted to state and local governments during the Reagan years. The states faced similar problems because the economic slowdown sharply eroded their tax revenues. Indeed, to balance their budgets, as required by their constitutions, states laid off workers and cut social spending. The combination of the tax increase, which alienated Republican conservatives, and a tepid federal response to the recession, which turned independent voters against the administration, became crucial factors in preventing George H. W. Bush’s reelection in 1992.

Reagan, Bush, and the Middle East, 1980–1991 The end of the Cold War left the United States as the only military superpower and raised the prospect of a “new world order” dominated by the United States and its European and Asian allies. But American diplomats now confronted an array of regional, religious, and ethnic confl icts that defi ed easy solutions. Those in the Middle East — the oil-rich lands stretching from Iran to Algeria — remained the most press- ing and the most threatening to American interests.

Like previous presidents, Ronald Reagan had little success in resolving the con- fl icts between the Jewish state of Israel and its Muslim Arab neighbors. In 1982, the Reagan administration initially supported Israel’s invasion of Lebanon, a military operation intended to destroy the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), which had taken over part of that country. As the invasion turned into a violence-ridden occupation, the administration urged an Israeli withdrawal and in 1984 dispatched American Marines as “peacekeepers,” a decision that it quickly regretted. Lebanese Muslim militants, angered by American support for Israel, targeted the Marines with a truck bomb, killing 241 soldiers; rather than confronting the bombers, Reagan withdrew the American forces. Three years later, Palestinians living in the Gaza Strip and along the West Bank of the Jordan River — territories occupied by Israel since 1967 — mounted an intifada, a civilian uprising against Israeli authority. In response, American diplomats stepped up their efforts to persuade the PLO and Arab nations to accept the legitimacy of Israel and to convince the Israelis to allow the creation of a Palestinian state. Neither initiative met with much success.

American policymakers faced a second set of problems in the oil-rich nations of Iran and Iraq. In September 1980, the revolutionary Shiite Islamic nation of Iran, headed by Ayatollah Khomeini, came under attack from Iraq, a secular state headed by the ruth- less dictator Saddam Hussein and his Sunni Muslim followers. The war stemmed from boundary disputes over deep water ports in the Persian Gulf, which were essential to shipping oil. The fi ghting was intense and long lasting — a war of attrition that claimed a million casualties. The Reagan administration ignored Hussein’s brutal repression of his political opponents in Iraq and the murder (using poison gas) of thousands of Iraqi Kurds and provided Hussein with military intelligence and other aid. Its goals were to

�� !"�#��$��%&� ��

C H A P T E R 30 The Reagan Revolution and the End of the Cold War, 1980–2001 � 903

maintain supplies of Iraqi oil, undermine the Iranian “outlaw state,” and preserve a bal- ance of power in the Middle East. Finally, in 1988, an armistice ended the inconclusive war, both sides still claiming the territory that sparked the confl ict.

Two years later, in August 1990, Saddam Hussein again went to war to expand Iraq’s boundaries and oil supply (see Voices from Abroad, p. 904). His troops quickly conquered Kuwait, Iraq’s small oil-rich neighbor, and threatened Saudi Arabia, the site of one-fi fth of the world’s known oil reserves and an informal ally of the United States. To preserve Western access to oil, President George H. W. Bush sponsored a series of resolutions in the United Nations Security Council condemning Iraq, calling for its withdrawal from Kuwait, and imposing an embargo and trade sanctions. When Hussein refused to withdraw, Bush successfully prodded the UN to authorize the use of force. Demonstrating great diplomatic fi nesse, the president organized a military coalition of thirty-four nations. Dividing mostly along party lines, the House of Representatives authorized American participation by a vote of 252 to 182, and the Senate agreed by the close margin of 52 to 47.

The coalition forces led by the United States quickly won the war for the “libera- tion of Kuwait.” A month of American air strikes crushed the communication network of the Iraqi army, destroyed its air forces, and weakened the morale of its soldiers. A land offensive then swiftly forced the withdrawal of Iraqi forces from Kuwait. To avoid a protracted struggle and retain French and Russian support for the UN coalition, President G. H. W. Bush wisely decided against occupying Iraq and removing Saddam Hussein from power. Instead, he won passage of UN Resolution 687, which imposed economic sanctions against Iraq unless it allowed unfettered inspection of its weapons systems, destroyed all biological and chemical arms, and unconditionally pledged not to develop nuclear weapons.

Men — and Women — at War Women played visible roles in the Persian Gulf War and made up about 10 percent of the American troops. In the last decades of the twentieth century, ever larger numbers of women chose military careers and, although prohibited from most fi ghting roles, were increasingly assigned to combat zones. Luc Delahaye/SIPA Press.

�� !"�#��$%� ��

This great crisis started on the 2nd of August, between the faithful rulers and presidents of these nations — the unjust rulers who have abused everything that is noble and holy until they are now standing in a position which enables the devil to manipulate them. This is the great crisis of this age in this great part of the world where the material side of life has surpassed the spiritual one and the moral one. . . . This is the war of right against wrong and is a crisis between Allah’s teachings and the devil.

Allah the Almighty has made his choice — the choice for the fi ghters and the strugglers who are in favor of principles, God has chosen the arena for this crisis to be the Arab World, and has put the Arabs in a progressive position in which the Iraqis are among the foremost. And to confi rm once more the meaning that God taught us ever since the fi rst light of faith and belief, which is that the arena of the Arab World is the arena of the fi rst belief and Arabs have always been an example and a model for belief and faith in God Almighty and are the ones who are worthy of true happiness.

It is now your turn, Arabs, to save all humanity and not just save yourselves, and to show the principles and meanings of the message of Islam, of which you are

all believers and of which you are all leaders.

It is now your turn to save humanity from the unjust powers who are corrupt and exploit us and are so proud of their positions, and these are led by the United States of America. . . .

For, as we know out of a story from the Holy Koran, the rulers, the corrupt rulers, have always been ousted by their people for it is a right on all of us to carry out the holy jihad, the holy war of Islam, to liberate the holy shrines of Islam. . . .

We call upon all Arabs, each according to his potentials and capabilities within the teachings of Allah and according to the Muslim holy war of jihad, to fi ght this U.S. presence of nonbelievers. . . . And we hail the people of Saudi Arabia who are being fooled by their rulers, as well as the people of dear Egypt, as well as all the people of the Arab nations who are not of the same position as their leaders, and they believe in their pride and their sovereignty over their land. We call on them to revolt against their traitors, their rulers, and to fi ght foreign presence in the holy lands. And we support them, and more important, that God is with them.

S O U R C E : New York Times, September 6, 1990, A19.

A Holy War Against the United States S A D D A M H U S S E I N After Iraq invaded Kuwait in August 1990, President Saddam Hussein of Iraq justifi ed the

action in the language of jihad, or Muslim holy war. Although Hussein was a secular ruler

who kept religion and Muslim mullahs out of public life, he knew that many Iraqis were

devout Muslims. He also recognized that Islamic fundamentalism had become part of the

political discourse of the Arab world, particularly in relations with Western nations.

V O I C E S F R O M A B R O A D

�� !"�#��$%� ��

C H A P T E R 30 The Reagan Revolution and the End of the Cold War, 1980–2001 � 905

The military victory, low incidence of American casualties, and quick withdrawal produced a euphoric reaction at home. “By God, we’ve kicked the Vietnam syndrome once and for all,” Bush gloated, as his approval rating shot up precipitously. The presi- dent spoke too soon. Saddam Hussein remained a problem for American policymakers, who worried that he wanted to dominate the region. Hussein’s ambitions were one fac- tor that, in March 2003, would cause Bush’s son, President George W. Bush, to initiate another war in Iraq, one that would be much more protracted, expensive, and bloody for Americans and Iraqis alike — indeed, a new Vietnam-like quagmire (see Chapter 32).

Thus, the end of the Cold War brought not peace but two very hot wars in the Middle East. For half a century, the United States and the Soviet Union had tried to divide the world into two rival economic and ideological blocs: communist and capitalist. The next half century promised a new set of struggles, one of them between a Western-led agenda of economic and cultural globalization and an anti-Western ideology of Muslim and Arab regionalism.

The Clinton Presidency, 1993–2001 The election of 1992 brought a Democrat, Arkansas governor Bill Clinton, to the White House. A profound admirer of John F. Kennedy, Clinton hoped to rekindle the idealistic vision of the slain president. Like Kennedy, Clinton was a political pragmatist. Distancing himself from liberals and special-interest groups, he styled himself a “New Democrat” who would bring “Reagan Democrats” and middle-class voters back to the party.

Clinton’s Early Record Raised fi rst in Hope, Arkansas, by his grandparents and then in Hot Springs after his mother married an abusive alcoholic, Clinton left home to study at Georgetown University. He won a Rhodes scholarship to Oxford and earned a law degree at Yale, where he mar- ried a classmate, Hillary Rodham. Returning to Arkansas, he entered politics and won election to six two-year terms as governor. In 1991, at age forty-fi ve, he was energetic, ambitious, and a policy “wonk,” extraordinarily well informed about political issues.

Clinton became the Democratic candidate but only after surviving charges that he dodged the draft to avoid service in Vietnam, smoked marijuana, and cheated repeat- edly on his wife. Although all those stories had an element of truth, Clinton adroitly talked his way into the presidential nomination: he had charisma and a way with words. For his running mate, he chose Al Gore, a second-term senator from Tennessee. Gore was about the same age as Clinton, making them the fi rst baby boom national ticket as well as the fi rst all-southern ticket.

President Bush easily won renomination over his lone opponent, the conservative columnist Pat Buchanan. But Bush allowed the Religious Right to dominate the Republican convention and write a conservative platform that alienated many political

� What factors led to the end of the Cold War?

� Why did the United States inter- vene in the confl icts between Iraq and Iran and between Iraq and Kuwait? What were Ameri can goals in each case?

�� !�"��#��$%� ��

906 � PA R T S E V E N A Divided Nation in a Disordered World, 1980–2008

moderates. The Bush campaign suffered especially from the independent candidacy of Texas billionaire H. Ross Perot, whose condemnation of the rising federal defi cit and the infl uence of corporate lobbyists on Congress attracted many middle-class voters.

The Democrats mounted an aggressive campaign that focused on Clinton’s do- mestic agenda: He promised a tax cut for the middle classes, universal health insur- ance, and a reduction of the huge Republican budget defi cit. Freed from the demands of the Cold War, Democrats hoped that an emphasis on domestic issues would sweep them to victory. They were right. On election day, Bush could not overcome voters’ discontent over the weak economy and conservatives’ disgust at his tax hikes. He re- ceived only 37 percent of the popular vote as millions of Republicans cast their ballots for Ross Perot, who won more votes (19 percent) than any independent candidate since Theodore Roosevelt in 1912. With 43 percent of the vote, Clinton easily won the election. Moreover, the Democratic Party retained control of both houses of Congress, ending twelve years of divided government. Still, there were dark clouds on the hori- zon. Bill Clinton entered the White House supported by only a minority of voters and opposed by political enemies who considered him “a pot-smoking, philandering, draft-dodger.” He would need great skill and luck to fulfi ll his dream of going down in history as a great president.

Clinton’s ambition exceeded his abilities. The fi rst year of his administration was riddled by mistakes: failed nominations of two attorney generals, embarrassing patronage revelations, and an unsuccessful attempt to end a ban on homosexuals in the military. The president looked like a political amateur, out of his depth. Then came a major failure on the enormously diffi cult issue of health-care legislation.

Clinton’s goal was to provide a system of health care that would cover all Americans. Although the United States spends a higher percentage of its gross national product (GNP) on medical care than any other nation, it is the only major industrialized country that does not provide government-guaranteed health insurance to all citizens.

A Forceful and Controversial First Lady and Senator Drawing inspiration from Eleanor Roosevelt, Hillary Rodham Clinton hoped that the country was ready for a First Lady who actively shaped policy. It wasn’t, or at least it wasn’t ready for her health-care plan. Subsequently, Hillary Rodham Clinton assumed a less visible role in administration policymaking. In 2001, she won election to the U.S. Senate from New York and in 2008 nearly became the Democratic nominee for president. Robert Trippet/SIPA Press.

�� !"�#��$��%&� ��

C H A P T E R 30 The Reagan Revolution and the End of the Cold War, 1980–2001 � 907

With medical costs and insurance premiums spiraling out of control, the president designated his wife, attorney Hillary Rodham Clinton, to head a task force to draft new legislation. This appointment was controversial because no First Lady had ever played a formal role in policymaking. But it suited the times: In many American families, both husbands and wives held decision-making positions in the workforce.

The recommendations of the task force were even more controversial. Recogniz- ing the potency of Reagan’s attack on “big government,” the task force proposed a system of “managed competition,” in which private insurance companies and market forces would reign in health-care expenditures. The cost of this system would fall heavily on employers, who had to pay 80 percent of their workers’ health benefi ts; consequently, many smaller businesses campaigned strongly against it. By mid-1994, Democratic leaders in Congress declared that the Clintons’ universal health-care proposal was dead. Forty million Americans, 15 percent of the population, remained without health coverage.

Addressing other concerns of social welfare Democrats, Clinton appointed two prochoice liberal jurists, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer, to the Supreme Court. He also placed women and members of racial minorities in cabinet positions. Janet Reno became attorney general, the fi rst woman to head the Department of Justice; Donna E. Shalala headed the Department of Health and Human Services; and in Clinton’s second term, Madeleine Albright served as the fi rst female secretary of state. Clinton chose an African American, Ron Brown, as secretary of commerce and two Latinos, Henry Cisneros and Frederico Peña, to head the Department of Housing and Urban Development and the Department of Transportation, respectively.

The Clinton administration’s policies toward families, abortion, and crime likewise appealed to liberal Democrats. In 1993, Clinton signed the Family and Medical Leave Act, which had twice been vetoed by President Bush, and the Clinic Entrance Act, which made it a federal crime to obstruct people entering hospitals or abortion clinics. Clinton’s administration also won approval of two gun-control measures, on handguns and assault weapons, though neither law lowered gun sales or the murder rate. But Clinton “got tough on crime” (and muted criticism from conservatives) by securing funding for 100,000 new police offi cers in local communities across the nation.

The president had equal success with the centrist New Democrat elements of his political agenda. Shortly before leaving offi ce, George H. W. Bush had signed the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), an arrangement among the United States, Canada, and Mexico to create a free-trade zone covering all of North America. The Clinton administration pushed the measure through Congress, where it was bitterly contested. American manufacturers looking for new markets or hoping to move their plants to Mexico, where workers’ wages were much lower, strongly supported NAFTA. Labor unions — a traditional Democratic constituency — opposed the agreement be- cause it would cut American jobs. Environmentalists likewise condemned the pact because antipollution laws were weak (and even more weakly enforced) south of the border. However, the Clinton administration was fi lled with free-trade advocates, including Treasury Secretary Lloyd Bentsen, Labor Secretary Robert Reich, and Robert Rubin, a Wall Street investment banker who headed the National Economic Council. With Clinton’s support, they pushed NAFTA through Congress by assembling a coali- tion of free-trade Democrats and Republicans.

�� !"�#��$%� ��

908 � PA R T S E V E N A Divided Nation in a Disordered World, 1980–2008

Signifi cantly, Clinton took effective action to reduce the budget defi cits of the Reagan-Bush presidencies. In 1993, Clinton secured a fi ve-year budget package that would reduce the federal defi cit by $500 billion. Republicans unanimously opposed the proposal because it raised taxes on corporations and wealthy individuals, and liberal Democrats complained because it limited social spending. Clinton also paid a price; he had to abandon his campaign promise to lower taxes for the middle class. But shared sacrifice led to shared rewards. By 1998, Clinton’s fiscal policies had balanced the federal budget and had begun to pay down the federal debt — at a rate of $156 billion a year between 1999 and 2001. As fi scal sanity returned to Washington,

A Bipartisan Balanced Budget Throughout his time in the White House, Bill Clinton worked to reduce federal defi cits by increasing taxes and restraining spending. On August 5, 1997, a smiling President Clinton signed a balanced budget bill, surrounded by congressional leaders including Republican John Kasich of Ohio (front row, far right), Chair of the House Budget Committee, and Republican Newt Gingrich of Georgia (front row, second from right), the Speaker of the House. Also looking on with satisfaction was Vice President Al Gore, who already had hopes for the presidency in 2000. Ron Edmonds/Wide World Photos, Inc.

�� !�"��#��$%� ��

C H A P T E R 30 The Reagan Revolution and the End of the Cold War, 1980–2001 � 909

the economy boomed, thanks in part to the low interest rates stemming from defi cit reduction. Ready access to cheap oil between 1986 and 2001 also fueled the growing econ- omy. During Clinton’s two terms in offi ce, unemployment fell from 6 percent to 4 per- cent, the GNP increased at an annual rate of 3 percent (twice that of Japan), the stock market more than doubled in value, and home ownership rose to an all-time high.

The Republican Resurgence The failure of health reform and the passage of NAFTA discouraged liberal Democrats even as Clinton’s policies on homosexuals, guns, and abortion energized conservative Republicans. “Clinton-haters” — those who denied his fi tness to be president — hammered away at his involvement in an allegedly fraudulent Arkansas real estate deal known as “Whitewater.” To address these allegations, the Clinton administration appointed an independent prosecutor to investigate the case.

In the meantime, the midterm election of 1994 became a referendum on the Clinton presidency, and its results transformed the political landscape. In a well- organized campaign strongly supported by the National Rifl e Association and the Religious Right, Republicans gained fi fty-two seats in the House of Representatives, giving them a majority for the fi rst time since 1954. They also retook control of the Senate and captured eleven governorships.

Leading the Republican charge was Representative Newt Gingrich of Georgia, who became the new Speaker of the House. An intellectually adept and aggressive conserva- tive, Gingrich masterminded the Republican campaign by advancing a “Contract with America.” If given a majority, he vowed that Republicans would secure votes on a series of proposals in the fi rst one hundred days of the new Congress. The contract included con- stitutional amendments to balance the budget and set term limits for members of Congress. It also promised signifi cant tax cuts, reductions in welfare programs, anticrime initiatives, and cutbacks in federal regulations. These initiatives signaled the advance of the conservative-backed Reagan Revolution of 1980 and again put the Democrats on the defensive. In his State of the Union message of 1996, Clinton suggested that “the era of big government is over.” For the rest of his presidency, he avoided expansive social welfare proposals and sought Republican support for a centrist, New Democrat program.

Although the Republicans controlled Congress, they, like Reagan before them, failed to make signifi cant cuts in the federal budget. Most big-budget items were politically or economically untouchable. The Treasury had to pay interest on the national debt; the military budget had to be met; the Social Security system had to be funded. When Republicans passed a government funding act in 1995 that included tax cuts for the wealthy and reduced funding for Medicare, Clinton vetoed the legislation, thereby shutting down many government offi ces for three weeks. Depicted by Democrats and many independent observers as heartless opponents of aid for senior citizens, the Republicans admitted defeat and gave the president a bill that he would sign.

Republicans had greater success in reforming the welfare system, a measure that saved relatively little money but carried a big ideological message. The AFDC (Aid to Families with Dependent Children) program provided average annual payments (including food stamps) of $7,740 to needy families, an amount well below the established poverty line. Still, many taxpaying Americans believed, with some

Henretta_ch30_882-915.indd Page 909 10/4/08 9:26:01 AM user-s131Henretta_ch30_882-915.indd Page 909 10/4/08 9:26:01 AM user-s131 /Users/user-s131/Desktop/Users/user-s131/Desktop

910 � PA R T S E V E N A Divided Nation in a Disordered World, 1980–2008

justifi cation, that the AFDC program perpetuated poverty by encouraging women recipients to bear children and to remain on welfare rather than seeking employment. Both Democrat- and Republican-run state legislatures had already imposed work re- quirements on people receiving welfare. In August 1996, the federal government did the same when President Clinton signed the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act. This historic overhaul of federal entitlements ended the guarantee of cash assistance by abolishing AFDC, required most adult recipients to fi nd work within two years, and gave states wide discretion in running their welfare programs.

The Republican takeover of Congress united the usually faction-ridden Democrats behind Clinton, who easily captured the party’s nomination in 1996. The Republicans settled on Senate majority leader Bob Dole of Kansas as their presidential candidate. A veteran of World War II, in which he lost the use of an arm, Dole was a safe but uninspiring candidate, lacking both personal charisma and innovative policies. He called for both a 15 percent tax cut and a balanced budget, a fi scal combination that few Americans believed possible. On election day, Clinton took 49 percent of the popular vote to 41 percent for Dole. Ross Perot, who failed to build his inspiring reform movement of 1992 into a viable political party, received 8 percent. By dint of great effort — dozens of risky vetoes, centrist initiatives, and determined fund-raising — Clinton had staged a heroic comeback from the electoral disaster of 1994. Still, Repub- licans retained control of Congress and, angered by Clinton’s reelection, conservatives returned to Washington eager to engage in partisan combat.

Clinton’s Impeachment Clinton’s hopes for a distinguished place in history unraveled halfway through his second term when a sex scandal led to his impeachment. The impeachment charges stemmed from Clinton’s sworn testimony in a lawsuit fi led by Paula Jones, a former Arkansas state employee. In that testimony and on national television, Clinton denied having sexually harassed Jones during his governorship. Those denials might (or might not) have been truthful. But Clinton also denied having had a sexual affair with Monica Lewinsky, a former White House intern — a charge that proved to be true. Indepen- dent prosecutor Kenneth Starr, a conservative Republican, concluded that Clinton had lied under oath regarding Lewinsky and obstructed justice and that these actions were grounds for impeachment.

Viewed historically, Americans have usually defi ned “high crimes and misdemeanors” — the constitutional standard for impeachment — as involving a serious abuse of public trust that endangered the republic. In 1998, conservative Republicans favored a much lower standard because they did not accept “Slick Willy” Clinton’s legitimacy as president. In reply to the question “Why do you hate Clinton so much?,” one conservative declared, “I hate him because he’s a woman- izing, Elvis-loving, non-inhaling, truth-shading, war-protesting, draft-dodging, abortion-protecting, gay-promoting, gun-hating baby boomer. That’s why.” Seeing Clinton as an embodiment of the permissive social values of the 1960s, conserva- tive Republicans vowed to oust him from offi ce. On December 19, the House of Representatives narrowly approved two articles of impeachment: one for perjury for lying to a grand jury about his liaison with Lewinsky and a second for obstruction

�� !�"��#��$%� ��

C H A P T E R 30 The Reagan Revolution and the End of the Cold War, 1980–2001 � 911

of justice by encouraging others to lie on his behalf. Only a minority of Americans supported the House’s action; according to a CBS News poll, 38 percent supported impeachment while 58 percent opposed it.

Lacking public support, Republicans in the Senate fell well short of the two- thirds majority they needed to remove the president. But like Andrew Johnson, the only other president to be tried by the Senate (see Chapter 15), Bill Clinton and the Democratic Party paid a high price for his acquittal. Preoccupied with defending himself, the president was unable to fashion a moderate Democratic alternative to the Republicans’ conservative domestic agenda. The American people also paid a high price because the Republicans’ vendetta against Clinton kept his administration from addressing important problems of foreign policy.

Foreign Policy at the End of the Twentieth Century Unlike George H. W. Bush, Clinton claimed no expertise in international affairs. “For- eign policy is not what I came here to do,” he lamented amidst a series of minor inter- national crises. Neither of his main advisors, Secretary of State Warren Christopher and Secretary of Defense Les Aspin, had a strategic vision of America’s role in the post–Cold War world. Consequently, Clinton pursued a cautious diplomatic policy. Unless important American interests were directly threatened, he avoided a commit- ment of U.S. infl uence and troops.

Clinton’s caution stemmed in part from a harrowing episode in the east African country of Somalia, where ethnic warfare had created political chaos and massive fam- ine. President Bush had approved American participation in a UN peacekeeping force, and Clinton had added additional troops. When bloody fi ghting in October 1993 killed eighteen American soldiers and wounded eighty-four, Clinton gradually with- drew the troops. No vital U.S. interests were at stake in Somalia, and it was unlikely that the peacekeepers could quell the factional violence. For similar reasons, Clinton refused in 1994 to dispatch American forces to the central African nation of Rwanda, where ethnic confl ict had escalated to genocide — the slaughter by ethnic Hutus of at least 800,000 people, mostly ethnic Tutsis.

Clinton gave closer attention to events in the Caribbean. In 1991, a military coup in Haiti had deposed Jean-Bertrand Aristide, the democratically elected president, and Clinton had criticized President Bush’s refusal to grant asylum to refugees fl eeing the new Haitian regime. Once in the White House, Clinton reversed his stance. He recog- nized that a massive infl ux of impoverished Haitian “boat people” would strain wel- fare services and increase racial tension. Consequently, the new president called for Aristide’s return to power and, by threatening a U.S. invasion, forced Haiti’s military rulers to step down. American troops maintained Aristide in power until March 1995, when the United Nations assumed peacemaking responsibilities.

Another set of internal confl icts — based on ethnicity, religion, and nationality — led in 1991 to the disintegration of the Communist nation of Yugoslavia. First, the Roman Catholic regions of Slovenia and Croatia declared independence from Yugoslavia, which was dominated by Russian Orthodox Serbians. Then, in 1992, the heavily Muslim province of Bosnia-Herzegovina declared its independence. However, the Serbian resi- dents of Bosnia refused to live in a Muslim-run multiethnic state. Supported fi nancially

�� !�"��#��$%� ��

912 � PA R T S E V E N A Divided Nation in a Disordered World, 1980–2008

and militarily by Slobodan Milosevic, the Serbian nationalistic leader of Yugoslavia, the Bosnian Serbs launched their own breakaway state and began a ruthless campaign of “ethnic cleansing.” To make Bosnia an all-Serbian society, they drove Muslims and Croats from their homes, executed tens of thousands of men, raped equally large num- bers of women, and forced the survivors into crowded refugee camps.

Fearing a Vietnam-like quagmire, President Clinton and Western European leaders hesitated to take military action against the Serbs. Finally, in November 1995, Clinton organized a NATO-led bombing campaign and peacekeeping effort that ended the Serbs’ vicious expansionist drive. Four years later, a similar Serb-led campaign of ethnic cleansing began in Kosovo, a province of Yugoslavia inhabited primarily by Albanian-speaking Muslims. Again led by the United States, NATO intervened with airstrikes and military forces to preserve Kosovo’s autonomy (Map 30.3). Against its inclinations, the Clinton administration had gradually adopted a policy of active engage- ment in nations beset with internal confl ict.

In the Middle East, Clinton was as unsuccessful as previous presidents in resolv- ing the long-standing confl ict between Jews and Arabs. In 1993, he arranged a meeting in Washington between Israeli prime minister Yitzhak Rabin and Yasser Arafat, chair- man of the Palestine Liberation Organization. Urged on by Clinton, they negotiated an agreement that allowed some autonomy to Palestinians living in the Israeli-occupied

0 100 200 kilometers

1000 200 miles Yugoslavia 1945–1991

Adriatic Sea

ROMANIA

HUNGARY AUSTRIA

SLOVENIA

ITALY

SERBIA

CROATIA

BOSNIA- HERZEGOVINA

MACEDONIA

ALBANIA

GREECE

MONTENEGRO

BULG.Kosovo Province

Vojvodina Province

MAP 30.3 Ethnic Confl ict in the Balkans: The Breakup of Yugoslavia, 1991–1992 The collapse of the Soviet Union spurred the disintegration of the independent Commu- nist nation of Yugoslavia, a multiethnic and multireligious state held together after 1945 by the near-dictatorial authority of Josip Broz Tito (1892–1980). Torn by ethnic and religious hatreds, Yugoslavia splintered into warring states. Slovenia and Macedonia won their independence in 1991, but Russian Orthodox Serbia, headed by president Slobodan Milosevic, tried to rule the rest of the Balkan peoples. Roman Catholic Croatia freed itself from Serb rule in 1995, and, after ruthless Serbian aggression against Muslims in Bosnia and later in Kosovo, the United States and NATO inter- vened militarily to create the separate states of Bosnia-Herzegovina (1995) and Montenegro (2006) and the autonomous Muslim province of Kosovo (1999). In 2008, Kosovo declared itself an independent republic, a claim not recog- nized by Serbia and Russia.

�� !�"��#��$%� ��

C H A P T E R 30 The Reagan Revolution and the End of the Cold War, 1980–2001 � 913

territories of the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. The hope that this agreement would lead to a general peace settlement was short lived. In 1995, a Jewish religious terrorist assassinated Rabin; the new prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu of the religious Likud Party, reverted to a hard-line policy against the Palestinians.

Hard-line religious and political groups sprang up in the Muslim world as well, dashing hopes for Middle Eastern peace and sparking new confl icts. During the 1990s, radical Islamic movements staged armed insurgencies in parts of Russia and China and threatened existing governments in the Muslim states of Algeria, Egypt, Pakistan, and Indonesia. These insurgent groups also mounted terrorist attacks against the United States, which they condemned as the main agent of economic globalization and cultural imperialism. In 1993, radical Muslim immigrants set off a bomb in the World Trade Center in New York City. Five years later, Muslim terrorists used truck bombs to blow up the American embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, and in 2000, they bombed an American warship, the USS Cole, in the port of Aden in Yemen. The Clinton administration knew that these attacks were the work of Al Qaeda, a network of terrorists organized by the wealthy Saudi exile Osama bin Laden, but no one — in the State Department, CIA, or Pentagon — knew how to counter these Islamic extremists (see Chapter 32).

“We have slain a large dragon,” CIA director James Woolsey observed as the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991. But, he quickly added, “We live now in a jungle fi lled with a bewildering variety of poisonous snakes. And in many ways, the dragon was easier to keep track of.” As the century ended, Woolsey’s words rang true. The Balkan and African crises, the Middle Eastern morass, and radical Islamic terrorist groups served as potent reminders of a world in confl ict and the limits of American power. If the world was not quite as dangerous as it had been during the Cold War era, it was no less problematic.

S U M M A RY The end of the twentieth century was a time of momentous change. Internationally, the collapse of the Soviet Union brought an end to the Cold War; concurrently, the growing importance of Middle Eastern oil and radical Islamic movements raised new diplomatic and military challenges.

Domestically, the rise of conservatism returned the Republican party to power. Rather than “getting the government off our backs,” President Ronald Reagan simply used its power in different ways. “Reaganomics” shifted wealth into the hands of mili- tary contractors and affl uent Americans, mostly at the expense of the poor. Middle-class

� How, if at all, did the “New Democrat” domestic policies of Bill Clinton diff er from the policies of Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush?

� Which scandal was the more serious: the Iran-Contra aff air or the Monica Lewinsky af- fair? How do you explain the diff erent outcomes for Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton?

� Compare and contrast the foreign policies of Bill Clinton, George H. W. Bush, and Ronald Reagan.

�� !�"��#��$%� ��

914 � PA R T S E V E N A Divided Nation in a Disordered World, 1980–2008

Americans — the majority of the population — generally prospered during the 1980s but divided sharply over cultural issues. Influenced by the Religious Right, the Republican Party vigorously attacked the welfare state and liberal cultural values.

These economic and cultural issues played out in the politics of the 1990s. Bill Clinton’s centrist, “New Democrat,” policies refl ected the conservative mood of the electorate and brought him two terms in the White House. However, the Republican congressional landslide of 1994 limited Clinton’s options, as did his sexual miscon- duct, which in 1998 led to his impeachment and loss of political effectiveness. As the century ended, American society was experiencing both cultural confl ict and a tech- nological revolution that promised to transform many aspects of life.

Connections: Government and Politics Future historians will debate Ronald Reagan’s impact on the two great events discussed in this chapter: the triumph of conservatism and the end of the Cold War. However, they will probably agree with our observation, in the essay opening Part Seven, that once the conservatives were in power, their agenda was “to roll back the social welfare state.”

In previous chapters, we watched the slow emergence of the powerful federal govern- ment that conservatives attacked. Prefi gured by the regulatory legislation of the Progres- sive era (Chapter 20), a strong national state emerged during the New Deal. As we saw in Chapter 24, the Roosevelt administration responded to the Great Depression by creating a federal bureaucracy and the Social Security system. But the rise of federal authority also stemmed from World War II and the Cold War. Those confl icts, as we saw in Chapters 25 and 26, brought massive increases in government spending, taxes, and employees — and a vast military-industrial complex of private corporations. In fact, after 1945, so many individuals, social groups, and business corporations became dependent on favorable legislation or government subsidies that, as we explained in this chapter, conservative politicians have not been able to reduce the size or scope of the federal government.

F O R F U R T H E R E X P LO R AT I O N James T. Patterson, Restless Giant: The United States from Watergate to Bush v. Gore (2005), provides a solid analysis. For evangelical politics, see Frances FitzGerald, Cities on a Hill (1986); William Martin, With God on Our Side (1996); and Lisa McGerr, Suburban Warriors (2001). On the Reagan and George H. W. Bush presidencies, read Lou Cannon, President Reagan: The Role of a Lifetime (2000); Haynes Johnson, Sleepwalking Through History (1992); and John Greene, The Presidency of George Bush (2000).

Richard A. Melanson, American Foreign Policy Since the Vietnam War (1991), and Raymond Garthoff, The Great Transition: Russian-American Politics and the End of the Cold War (1994) cover those topics. Two fi ne Web sites on the Cold War are www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv and www.wilsoncenter.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=topics .home&topic_id=1409. For the Gulf War, see Michael Gordon and Bernard Trainor, The Generals’ War (1995), and www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/gulf.

For the Clinton years, consult William Berman, From the Center to the Edge (2001), and Joe Klein, The Natural: The Misunderstood Presidency of Bill Clinton (2002). Richard A. Posner, An Affair of State (1999), probes the legal aspects of the Clinton impeachment; for online materials go to jurist.law.pitt.edu/impeach.htm#Public.

�� !�"��#��$%� ��

C H A P T E R 30 The Reagan Revolution and the End of the Cold War, 1980–2001 � 915

Other interesting political studies include Steven Gillon, “That’s Not What We Meant to Do” (2001); Fred Greenstein, The Presidential Difference: Leadership Style from FDR to George W. Bush (2000); and Ted Halstead and Michael Lind, The Radical Center: The Future of American Politics (2001).

T E S T YO U R K N O W L E D G E To assess your mastery of the material in this chapter and for Web sites, images, and documents related to this chapter, visit bedfordstmartins.com/henrettaconcise.

1970s � Rise of New Right 1981 � Ronald Reagan elected;

Republicans control Senate � Economic Recovery Tax Act

(ERTA) � Military expenditures

increase; regulatory agencies downsized

� Sandra Day O’Connor appointed to Supreme Court

1981–1989 � National debt triples � New Right think tanks gain

infl uence � U.S. assists Iraq in war

against Iran 1983 � Strategic Defense Initiative

(Star Wars) 1985 � Gramm-Rudman Budget

Act � Mikhail Gorbachev takes

power 1986 � Iran-Contra scandal

weakens Reagan � William Rehnquist named

chief justice 1987 � United States and Soviet

Union limit missiles in Europe

1988 � George H. W. Bush elected 1989 � Destruction of Berlin Wall;

“Velvet Revolutions” in Eastern Europe

1990–1991 � Persian Gulf War � Americans with Disabilities

Act 1991 � Dissolution of Soviet Union

ends Cold War � Clarence Thomas named to

Supreme Court 1992 � Democratic moderate Bill

Clinton elected � Planned Parenthood v.

Casey upholds Roe v. Wade 1993 � Congress passes Family

and Medical Leave Act � North American Free Trade

Agreement (NAFTA) 1994 � Clinton fails to win

universal health insurance but reduces budget defi cit and national debt

� Republicans gain control of Congress

1995 � U.S. troops enforce peace in Bosnia

1996 � Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act

1998–1999 � Clinton impeached and acquitted

� American military intervention in Bosnia and Serbia

� Rise of radical Islamic movements and Al Qaeda terrorists

T I M E L I N E

�� !�"��#��$%� ��