The Unsung Leadership of Khrushchev Persuasive Essay by Top Papers

The paper relates that for most North Americans, the Cuban Missile Crisis is significant not only because it brought humanity closer to nuclear annihilation that at any other time in its history, but because it was, in some respects, one of the most impressive moments of John F. Kennedy's presidency. The paper points out that this should not be taken too far: bringing a nation to the brink of nuclear Armageddon is, after all, hardly something that should inspire apotheosis. The paper notes that be that as it may, many historians have seen Kennedy's success in getting the Soviets to remove their missiles from Cuba in exchange only for a promise that the US would not invade Castro's stronghold as an instance of the President making the other guy "blink" first; in short, Kennedy got what he and those around him wanted while forcing the Soviets to back away from their conspicuous and obstreperous support of Cuba. The paper also notes that given the realpolitik of the early 1960s and the seemingly implacable hostility of the Cold War, that is often enough for people to credit the US president with a qualified triumph. However, the paper argues that what is often overlooked is that the Soviet leader of the time, Nikita Khrushchev, may ultimately have been at least as responsible as Kennedy for resolving the crisis before it grew into something apocalyptic. Specifically, he urged restraint on the part of his subordinates - subordinates who were probably much more dangerous and unpredictable than the ones Kennedy had to deal with - and he also acceded to deal that, certainly on the surface, was not as good for his public image as it was for Kennedy's. Lastly, the paper posits that contrary to the views of some, the United States was generally the aggressor during this period when it came to nuclear build-up (and when it came to trying to eliminate "unfriendly" foreign leaders) and Khrushchev's decision to arm Cuba, even if ill-considered, was certainly understandable. The paper concludes that Nikita Khrushchev deserves more credit from history than he has been given.