Cold War: A Prisoner's Dilemma

How Ideas and Not Actions Sustained the Cold War

Actions taken and foreign policy decisions made by the world super powers, during the period known as the Cold War, were vastly based upon fears and apprehensions. The super powers - the United States and the Soviet Union - were engaged in this conflict from the end of World War II until 1989 when the Berlin Wall toppled, however it was unlike any other war.

The prisoner’s dilemma is a decision making model that explains the pros and cons of cooperation and non-cooperation. By cooperating, a party only has a one-fourth, or twenty-five percent, chance of coming out on top. That small chance is contingent on the other party involved cooperating as well. Thus, even the slightest mistrust can lead to one or both parties acting through fear of the other party’s possible actions. 

The two opposing forces in the Cold War were communism and democracy. This clash made ideological and political enemies out of the USSR and the United States. During the Second World War, the United States and the Soviet Union had been allies and fought on the same side. However, that alliance was short-lived and ended not long after the conclusion of the war. Mistrust of the opposing government caused each to take actions while imagining what the other might be pondering. For instance, the United States maintained a policy of containment following World War II. Containment was the United State’s policy to restrain the expansion of the Soviet Union and, more importantly, communism. The development of this policy was based on the belief that the USSR would avoid taking risks at all costs and would easily back down when faced with opposition. This policy exemplifies how, in the prisoner’s dilemma, one tries to predict and control the other’s actions.