During the Korean war, North Korea, which was communism, fought against its capitalist brother in the south. During the war, the north was backed by the Soviets and the Chinese while the South was backed with the biggest capitalist country at the time, the United States of America. At first, in 1945, the 38th parallel was used to divide the north and the south. In June, 1950, the north attacked the south. This was mostly because of conflicting views, communism and capitalism. Also, Slain, the USSR leader at the time, misunderstood the Secretary of State Dean Acheson's claim that the United States will fight to defend all territory within its "defensive perimeter", because he didn't mention Korea. This led Stalin into thinking that the US will not defend Korea, so he gave the go-ahead to attack. Both sides pushed back and forth until there was a stalemate. Eventually, an armistice was made on July 27th, 1953. Currently, both sides are technically still at war with each other, but on standby mode. Therefore, this question is often asked: IIn examining the Korean War in the context of the broader Cold War, which pattern does it represent more, continuity or change? Throughout the war, we can see many changes, however, the pattern of continuity still dominates the context of the Cold War. This article will first talk about the patterns of continuity and change, answer the question and give a conclusion regarding the answer.
First, in order to explain the pattern of continuity and change of the Korean war, we must look at both of them. For continuity, there were a few things. One was smaller countries asking for the help and aid of other countries that were economically or militarily superior. In the Korean War, it was obvious: the north sought the help of the Soviets while the south were backed by the United States. An example of this outside the Korean war was the Truman doctrine, in which the US gave huge sums of money to countries that wanted to be liberated. Also, there were the opposing views of Communists and Capitalists. The ideologies of the two sides conflict each other already, so it is not surprising that the two sides fought against each other. This also happened in East and West Berlin, in which East Berlin was under the control of the Soviets and the West was under the influence of Western Powers.
Now that we've taken a look at the patterns of continuity, we must look at the patterns of change in order to answer the question effectively. During the Korean War, the United Nations passed a resolution in the Security Council that actually had a big impact on a war. At the time, the UN was a newly mad organization and this was its first resolution passed that had a huge impact on an issue that concerned two opposing superpowers. This was actually because of the fact that the USSR left the conference midway. This allowed the UN to pass resolutions that would otherwise be impossible with the USSR's veto in the Security Council.
As you can see, the patterns of continuity have far more characteristics than the patterns of continuity. The continuation of smaller countries asking for help and the opposing views of communism continued into and after the Korean War. The UN resolution passed was indeed a change, but the United Nations had only been recently made at the time. Despite the pattern of continuity being overwhelming, both the changes and the continuation of certain these things are very important to the world in modern history.
First, in order to explain the pattern of continuity and change of the Korean war, we must look at both of them. For continuity, there were a few things. One was smaller countries asking for the help and aid of other countries that were economically or militarily superior. In the Korean War, it was obvious: the north sought the help of the Soviets while the south were backed by the United States. An example of this outside the Korean war was the Truman doctrine, in which the US gave huge sums of money to countries that wanted to be liberated. Also, there were the opposing views of Communists and Capitalists. The ideologies of the two sides conflict each other already, so it is not surprising that the two sides fought against each other. This also happened in East and West Berlin, in which East Berlin was under the control of the Soviets and the West was under the influence of Western Powers.
Now that we've taken a look at the patterns of continuity, we must look at the patterns of change in order to answer the question effectively. During the Korean War, the United Nations passed a resolution in the Security Council that actually had a big impact on a war. At the time, the UN was a newly mad organization and this was its first resolution passed that had a huge impact on an issue that concerned two opposing superpowers. This was actually because of the fact that the USSR left the conference midway. This allowed the UN to pass resolutions that would otherwise be impossible with the USSR's veto in the Security Council.
As you can see, the patterns of continuity have far more characteristics than the patterns of continuity. The continuation of smaller countries asking for help and the opposing views of communism continued into and after the Korean War. The UN resolution passed was indeed a change, but the United Nations had only been recently made at the time. Despite the pattern of continuity being overwhelming, both the changes and the continuation of certain these things are very important to the world in modern history.