The Cold War – Page 2 – Great History

The Cuban Revolution

By 1953, Cuba was politically unstable. When Spain first established control over the island in the early 16th century, it created a society structured around hierarchy and exploitation. At the top were Spanish-born elites, known as Peninsulares, while those of Spanish descent born on the island, Creoles, occupied a secondary position. Beneath them were enslaved Africans and their descendants, whose forced labour became central to Cuba’s plantation economy. Although the island’s indigenous population declined drastically following European arrival, Cuban society became increasingly diverse, shaped by a mixture of African, European, and mixed-race communities.

A photo of Christopher Columbus landing in Central America in 1492

By the 19th century, tensions within this system had begun to grow. Wealth and power remained concentrated in the hands of a small elite, while many Cubans, particularly in rural areas, lived in poverty. At the same time, a distinct Cuban identity was beginning to emerge, especially among Creole elites who resented both Spanish control and their exclusion from the highest levels of authority. These tensions would eventually give rise to a series of independence movements, the most significant of which was led by José Martí. Martí, a writer, political thinker, and revolutionary, envisioned an independent Cuba free not only from Spanish rule but also from foreign domination. In 1895, he helped launch a new war of independence against Spain. Although Martí was killed early in the conflict, the war continued, gradually weakening Spanish control over the island.

By the late 1890s, Spain was struggling to maintain its hold on Cuba, both militarily and economically. In 1898, the conflict took a decisive turn when the United States intervened following the explosion of the USS Maine in Havana harbour. The cause of the explosion remains disputed, but it was widely blamed on Spain in the American press, creating public pressure for war. Under President William McKinley, the United States declared war on Spain, quickly defeating Spanish forces in what became known as the Spanish-American War. Although Cuban rebels had fought for independence for years and done most of the effort, it was the American intervention that ultimately brought the war to a close.

A painting of Theodore Roosevelt, then assistant Secretary of the Navy, charging into battle in Cuba

In its aftermath, Spain relinquished control of Cuba, but full independence did not immediately follow. Instead, the United States established a military government on the island and retained significant influence over its future. This influence was formalised in 1901 through the Platt Amendment, which granted the United States the right to intervene in Cuban affairs and limited Cuba’s sovereignty in foreign policy. It also allowed the establishment of a permanent American naval base at Guantánamo Bay. While Cuba was formally independent by 1902, in practice it remained heavily dependent on and influenced by the United States.

Economic ties deepened this relationship. American businesses invested heavily in Cuba, particularly in the sugar industry, which became the backbone of the island’s economy. By the early 20th century, a significant portion of Cuba’s land, infrastructure and key industries were controlled by U.S. companies. While this brought periods of economic growth, it also created a system that was highly dependent on American markets and vulnerable to external shocks. These weaknesses became painfully clear during the Great Depression. As demand for Cuban sugar collapsed, unemployment soared and living standards declined sharply, especially in rural areas. Economic hardship quickly translated into political unrest.

A family of rural cane cutters during this period

By the early 1930s, opposition to the government of pro-American Gerardo Machado had reached a breaking point. Machado’s increasingly authoritarian rule, combined with the economic crisis, sparked widespread protests, strikes and violence across the island. In 1933, his government collapsed under mounting pressure from America, who were losing confidence in his leadership. What followed was not a stable transition, but a period of political turmoil, marked by rapidly changing governments and competing factions struggling for control. Out of this instability emerged a new and influential figure, Fulgencio Batista.

Initially rising through the ranks as a military officer during the so-called “Sergeants’ Revolt,” Batista became the dominant figure behind the scenes, exerting control over the Cuban government throughout the 1930s and 1940s. Although Cuba experimented with constitutional government during this period, political corruption, economic inequality and social unrest remained persistent problems. In 1952, Batista seized power directly in a military coup, cancelling elections and establishing a dictatorship. His regime maintained close ties with the United States and oversaw continued economic growth in some sectors, particularly in urban areas such as Havana. However, this growth was unevenly distributed. Large sections of the population, especially in rural regions, continued to live in poverty, while political repression increased.

The […] most disastrous of our failures, was the decision to give stature and support to one of the most bloody and repressive dictatorships in the long history of Latin American repression. Fulgencio Batista murdered 20,000 Cubans in seven years – a greater proportion of the Cuban population than the proportion of Americans who died in both World Wars, and he turned Democratic Cuba into a complete police state – destroying every individual liberty. Yet, [the United States] publicly praised Batista – hailed him as a staunch ally and a good friend – at a time when Batista was murdering thousands, destroying the last vestiges of freedom, and stealing hundreds of millions of dollars from the Cuban people, and we failed to press for free elections.
John F. Kennedy’s speech at a Democratic Party dinner, 1960

Batista’s regime radicalised many among the Cuban populace. Confidence in democratic institutions was severely undermined and they began to believe that American foreign policy regarding anti-Communism had been prioritised over the needs of the Cuban people. One of the radicalised individuals was a young lawyer by the name of Fidel Castro. Castro, who had previously ran for political office and legally challenged Batista, had largely given up on the rule of law and believed that only an armed revolution could stop him. Castro was not originally a communist or particularly anti-American by the beginnings of his political activity, having hired multiple anti-communists in his government when he rose to power. However, these people were eventually sidelined as his regime progressed.

Castro under arrest after the 1953 Moncada Attack

In July of 1953, Castro led over 160 people in an attack on the Moncada army barracks in Santiago de Cuba, in an attempt to enact a mass popular uprising. However, this was an abject failure, with many of the rebels being captured, tortured and executed. Both Castro and his brother were arrested, but he managed to use the trial as a platform for his ideology and the platform that would build the foundations for the later revolution. The pair were released in May 1955 and founded the July 26th Movement, named after the date of the Moncada attacks, before retreating to Mexico to regroup and reorganise. Here, they met Che Guevara.

A former medical student, Ernesto “Che” Guevara de la Serna believed that much of the poverty, hunger and disease that he had witnessed was a product of a capitalist system of exploitation by the United States against Latin America, an ideology that was solidified after the CIA assisted overthrow of Guatemalan President Jacobo Árbenz. The Castro brothers, Guevara and some 80 revolutionaries crowded onto a yacht and set sail to Cuba in 1956, where they were ambushed by Cuban forces. A handful of survivors retreated into the mountains. From here, the plan for the revolution was devised, where it would be split between guerilla fighting in the mountains and an insurgency in urban areas. Eventually, a combination of military defeats, loss of public support and the backing out of elites and the US led to Batista fleeing the country in early 1959. Castro and Guevara’s forces entered Havana largely unopposed due the collapse of the Cuban government.

Whilst there was a great demand for change within Cuba, the support for Castro’s movement in particular was not universal. It was undecided what was to come post-Batista amongst the Cuban populace, which Castro believed could become a breeding ground for a US-backed counter revolution, ideas which were reinforced by the CIA backed failed Bay of Pigs invasion in 1961. As a result of this belief even prior to the invasion, he suppressed the vast majority of political opposition whilst pursuing closer diplomatic and economic ties with the Soviet Union, which led to economic sanctions by the US. Using their economic backing from the USSR, Castro advanced social reforms in education and healthcare, but many of these programmes became strained following the dissolution of the USSR in 1991. Despite this, the US sanctions on Cuba have persisted, despite the near yearly declarations by the UN to lift the sanctions. Many have described the vast poverty in Cuba caused by the sanctions as a humanitarian crisis.

The Death of Stalin

By 1953, Joseph Stalin had dominated Soviet politics for almost three decades. Rising from a relatively obscure revolutionary in the years before the Russian Revolution, he gradually consolidated power after the death of Vladimir Lenin in 1924, outmanoeuvring rivals such as Leon Trotsky, Grigory Zinoviev and Lev Kamenev until he emerged as the undisputed leader of the Soviet Union.

Under Stalin, the Soviet Union underwent a dramatic transformation. Through a series of ambitious Five-Year Plans, the country was rapidly industrialised, turning what had largely been an agrarian society into one of the world’s leading industrial powers. Massive factories, railways and infrastructure projects were constructed across the country, while collectivisation fundamentally reshaped Soviet agriculture. These policies helped lay the foundations for the Soviet Union’s emergence as a global superpower, but they came at an immense human cost. Millions died during famines, political repression and forced labour programmes, while entire communities were uprooted in the pursuit of economic and political objectives.

The Soviet victory over Nazi Germany in the Second World War further elevated Stalin’s status. To many Soviet citizens, he was the leader who had guided the country through its darkest hour and emerged victorious. Across the Soviet bloc, portraits of Stalin hung in factories, schools and government buildings, while state propaganda cultivated an immense personality cult around him. Criticism of the leader was unthinkable.

A portrait of Stalin in the centre of Berlin

Yet beneath this image of strength lay a system increasingly shaped by fear. Stalin’s distrust of both real and imagined enemies had fuelled the Great Purges of the 1930s, during which hundreds of thousands were executed and millions more were imprisoned in the Gulag system. Senior party officials, military commanders, intellectuals and ordinary citizens all lived under the constant threat of denunciation and arrest. Even members of Stalin’s inner circle understood that a single mistake could end their careers, their freedom or their lives.

On the evening of 28 February 1953, Stalin invited several members of his inner circle to his dacha at Kuntsevo, west of Moscow. Among the guests were Lavrentiy Beria, Georgy Malenkov, Nikita Khrushchev and Nikolai Bulganin. Such gatherings were a regular feature of Stalin’s final years. The Soviet leader often kept his subordinates awake into the early hours of the morning, eating, drinking and discussing politics while they carefully navigated the dangers of displeasing one of the most feared men in the world. The meeting stretched late into the night. The guests eventually departed shortly after four o’clock in the morning on 1 March, leaving Stalin alone. Before retiring, he instructed his guards not to disturb him. This was not unusual. Stalin frequently worked irregular hours and expected complete obedience from those around him.

As the day progressed, however, something seemed wrong. Normally, Stalin would emerge from his rooms or summon staff at some point during the morning. This time there was only silence. The guards grew increasingly anxious but were reluctant to investigate. Years of Stalin’s rule had taught them that interrupting him without permission could have severe consequences. The hours passed. Afternoon became evening. Still there was no sign of movement from inside Stalin’s quarters. Shortly after 10 p.m., a member of staff noticed a light had come on in Stalin’s room. The guards took this as a sign that he was awake and hesitated to enter. When no further activity followed, concern finally overcame fear. One of the guards cautiously opened the door. The scene inside was alarming. Stalin was lying on the floor beside a table, partially paralysed and unable to speak.

The guards immediately informed senior Soviet officials. Beria, Malenkov, Khrushchev and others soon arrived at the dacha. Yet even then, precious time was lost. Some accounts suggest that Beria initially dismissed the situation, insisting that Stalin was merely asleep. Whether this was genuine misjudgement or political calculation remains one of the most debated questions surrounding Stalin’s final days. Doctors were eventually summoned, but they arrived many hours after Stalin had first collapsed. Their diagnosis was grim. The seventy-three-year-old Soviet leader had suffered a severe cerebral haemorrhage that had left much of his body paralysed. Over the following days, members of the leadership gathered around his bedside as millions of Soviet citizens remained unaware that the man who had ruled their country for a generation was dying. Ultimately, Stalin died on March 5th of 1953, leaving the Politburo without Stalin’s guidance, while Malenkov assumed the role of acting General Secretary. Whilst many were distraught by this, some saw an opportunity. Out of those, 3 members of the Politburo emerged from the power struggle, all vying for the top job.

Georgy Malenkov – Deputy Premier of the Soviet Union

A loyal Stalin lieutenant who had spent years climbing through the Communist Party bureaucracy, Malenkov had become one of the most influential men in the Soviet Union during the final years of Stalin’s rule. Calm, methodical and politically experienced, he initially appeared to have the strongest claim to leadership. In the days after Stalin’s death, he assumed several of Stalin’s government responsibilities and seemed destined to emerge as the new dominant figure.

Lavrentiy Beria – Former Head of the NKVD

If Malenkov possessed legitimacy, Beria possessed power. As the longtime chief of Stalin’s security apparatus, Beria had overseen some of the darkest chapters of Stalin’s rule. Millions had passed through institutions under his control, from prisons and labour camps to the secret police itself. Feared throughout the Soviet Union, Beria understood the inner workings of the Soviet state better than almost anyone alive. With Stalin gone, many of his colleagues feared that Beria could use his influence over the security services to seize power for himself.

Nikita Khrushchev – Moscow Party Head

Unlike Malenkov and Beria, Khrushchev was not initially seen as the frontrunner. A former miner who had risen through the Communist Party ranks, he had survived Stalin’s political purges through a mixture of loyalty, political skill and an ability to avoid attracting unwanted attention. Though often underestimated by his rivals, Khrushchev had spent years building relationships throughout the party. While others focused on titles and institutions, he quietly cultivated support among the officials whose votes would ultimately decide the future of the Soviet Union.

Rather than appoint a new supreme leader, the leading figures agreed to govern collectively. On paper, Georgy Malenkov emerged as the most powerful man in the Soviet Union. He became Chairman of the Council of Ministers, effectively the Soviet premier, while also briefly retaining a senior position within the Communist Party itself. Yet it was Lavrentiy Beria who appeared to hold the strongest hand. Within weeks of Stalin’s death, he had regained control over the Soviet security apparatus by merging the Ministries of Internal Affairs and State Security under his authority, in an organisation that eventually became the KGB. This gave him influence over the police, intelligence services and prison system. Many of his colleagues viewed this development with alarm. They had spent years watching Stalin use the security services to destroy rivals and now feared that Beria might do the same.

(Left to right) Stalin, Malenkov, Beria and Anastas Mikoyan at the Dynamo Stadium in Moscow

At first, Beria appeared surprisingly reform-minded. He oversaw a large amnesty that released over a million prisoners from Soviet camps and prisons, scaled back several ongoing political investigations and signalled support for a less confrontational foreign policy. He even suggested that East Germany might need a different political approach after growing unrest there. Whether these proposals reflected genuine reformist beliefs or an attempt to build political support remains a matter of debate among historians. Whatever his intentions, Beria’s actions frightened many members of the Soviet leadership. To some, he appeared to be positioning himself as a new Stalin: a man with control over the security services and the ability to remove opponents at will. Nikita Khrushchev in particular became convinced that Beria had to be stopped before he could consolidate power.

One man whose support Khrushchev desperately needed was Georgy Zhukov. Zhukov was one of the most celebrated military commanders in Soviet history, having played a central role in the defence of Moscow, the victory at Stalingrad and the capture of Berlin. Although Stalin had sidelined him after the war, his prestige within the armed forces remained immense. Khrushchev and his allies feared that Beria’s control of the security services made him too dangerous to confront without military backing. Zhukov agreed to support the conspiracy and organised loyal army officers to intervene when the moment came.

A photo of Khrushchev (left) and Zhukov (centre)

Unlike Beria, Khrushchev possessed neither a personal army nor direct control over the state bureaucracy. What he did have was influence within the Communist Party. Over the spring and summer of 1953, he quietly built support among senior party officials while working to convince Malenkov and others that Beria represented a threat to all of them. Even those who disliked Khrushchev often feared Beria more. The turning point came after the East German uprising of June 1953. As Soviet tanks restored order in East Berlin, concerns about Beria’s growing influence reached a breaking point. Khrushchev, Malenkov and several other senior leaders secretly agreed that he had to be removed. To ensure success, they enlisted the support of Marshal Georgy Zhukov and the Soviet military.

On 26 June 1953, Beria attended a Presidium meeting in the Kremlin believing it would be routine. Instead, Khrushchev and his allies launched a coordinated attack on him, accusing him of abusing his power and betraying the interests of the Soviet state. As the confrontation escalated, Zhukov’s military officers entered the room and placed Beria under arrest. The man who had spent years orchestrating arrests for others now found himself a prisoner. Beria was held in secret confinement while the new leadership consolidated its position. In December 1953, he was tried by a special tribunal on charges including treason, terrorism and counter-revolutionary activity. Found guilty, he was sentenced to death and executed shortly afterwards. His remains were cremated and buried in the woods.

Beria’s downfall fundamentally altered the balance of power. Although Malenkov remained premier, it was Khrushchev who emerged from the crisis in the strongest position. Over the next three years he steadily outmanoeuvred his remaining rivals, strengthened his influence within the Communist Party and ultimately established himself as the dominant figure in Soviet politics. By 1956, the struggle that began with Stalin’s death had effectively been decided.

With Beria gone, the struggle for power was far from over. Georgy Malenkov remained Chairman of the Council of Ministers and, on paper, appeared to be the most powerful man in the Soviet Union. Yet Khrushchev possessed something equally valuable: control over the Communist Party itself. As First Secretary, he spent the next two years carefully building support among regional party officials, promoting loyal allies and presenting himself as a practical reformer rather than an ambitious revolutionary. While Malenkov argued for greater investment in consumer goods and a reduction in military spending, Khrushchev gradually convinced many within the party that his rival lacked the strength and authority needed to lead the country.

Khrushchev and Malenkov at a meeting of the Radmin

By early 1955, Khrushchev had gathered enough support to force Malenkov from the premiership. Although Malenkov remained in government for a time, his political influence had been shattered. For the first time since Stalin’s death, it was becoming clear who was emerging victorious from the succession struggle. Unlike Beria, who had attempted to seize power through control of the security services, Khrushchev had won through party politics, alliances and patient manoeuvring behind the scenes. Having secured his position, Khrushchev turned his attention to Stalin’s legacy. Many Soviet citizens still viewed Stalin as the great leader who had industrialised the country and led it to victory in the Second World War.

Yet within the party leadership there was growing unease over the scale of the terror that had accompanied his rule. Khrushchev believed that if the Soviet Union was to survive and prosper, it could no longer be governed through constant fear, purges and mass repression. In February 1956, at the Twentieth Congress of the Communist Party, Khrushchev delivered what became known as the Secret Speech. Speaking behind closed doors to party delegates, he launched a devastating attack on Stalin’s cult of personality, accusing the former dictator of abusing his power, ordering unlawful arrests and executions, and betraying the principles of Lenin. For many delegates, who had spent decades praising Stalin as an infallible leader, the speech came as a profound shock

A photo of Khrushchev at the Secret Speech

The consequences were enormous. Across the Soviet Union, statues of Stalin were removed, cities and institutions bearing his name were renamed, and countless political prisoners were released from labour camps. The secret police lost much of the unchecked power they had enjoyed under Stalin, while censorship and political repression were eased, though never abolished entirely. The process became known as De-Stalinisation, and it marked the most significant change in Soviet politics since Stalin himself had come to power. Yet Khrushchev’s reforms were not without limits. He never questioned the Communist Party’s monopoly on power and remained willing to use force when he believed Soviet control was threatened, as demonstrated by the crushing of the Hungarian Uprising in 1956. His vision was not to dismantle the Soviet system, but to reform it. He wanted a Soviet Union that remained communist, but one that was less dependent on terror and less dominated by the memory of a single man.

Stalin’s death marked the end of one of the most brutal chapters in Russian history. For nearly three decades he had dominated the Soviet Union through fear, transforming it into a global superpower while simultaneously overseeing purges, famines, labour camps and political repression on an immense scale. Yet his passing revealed a truth that dictators often try to conceal: no individual is indispensable. Within months, the men who had spent years obeying Stalin were fighting amongst themselves for control of the system he had built. Of all the contenders, Khrushchev emerged victorious. Through a combination of political skill, strategic alliances and careful timing, he defeated both Beria and Malenkov and established himself as the Soviet Union’s new leader. More importantly, he began the difficult process of dismantling the culture of fear that Stalin had created. The Soviet Union that emerged after 1953 was still an authoritarian one-party state, but it was no longer Stalin’s Soviet Union. The struggle that followed his death reshaped the Communist world, altered the course of the Cold War and demonstrated that even the most powerful dictatorship could change once the man at its centre was gone.

The Truman Doctrine

In the aftermath of World War 2, many of the war torn countries, such as France and Poland, began to turn to Communism in order to rebuild. Wanting to expand their influence, the Communist USSR, lead by Joseph Stalin, wanted to expand Communism all across Europe. Meanwhile, the United States opposed this, wanting more countries to embrace free market economies, capitalism and democracy. This lead to tensions rising between the two factions who were once allies against the Nazis. This divide between Western Capitalism and Eastern Communism was no clearer than in Greece.

From 1946-1949, Greece was in a civil war, between the Nationalists, backed by the United States, and the Communists. Whilst Harry Truman, President of the United States, feared that the Soviets may back the Greek Communists, Stalin’s focus was more on Turkey, and seeing if they would become a Communist nation, due to their oil production in Iran needing to pass through Turkish waters, requesting a military base in the country and transit rights through the Dardanelles Strait and the Sea of Marmara. Due to the economic impacts of having the water being Soviet Occupied, the United States sought a democracy in Turkey.

Many people feared that the Soviet Union would have a monopoly over the Mediterranean if Greece and Turkey fell to Communism. Truman chose to take action and addressed Congress with his plan on March 12th, 1947

One way of life is based upon the will of the majority, and is distinguished by free institutions, representative government, free elections, guarantees of individual liberty, freedom of speech and religion, and freedom from political oppression.

The second way of life is based upon the will of a minority forcibly imposed upon the majority. It relies upon terror and oppression, a controlled press and radio; fixed elections, and the suppression of personal freedoms.

I believe that it must be the policy of the United States to support free peoples who are resisting attempted subjugation by armed minorities or by outside pressures. I believe that we must assist free peoples to work out their own destinies in their own way.
An excerpt from Truman’s speech to Congress

Truman was very careful to not explicitly name Communism or the USSR, but everyone knew what he was talking about. In order to truly combat communism, Truman, with the advise from Senator Arthur Vandenburg, over exaggerated the crisis, to such a degree where it would scare the American people and get them to side against Communism. Many modern historians cite the Truman Doctrine as the declaration of the Cold War.

Operation Paperclip

During a briefing at Blockhouse 34 of the Cape Canaveral Missile Test Annex in 1962, three of the most important men in the history of American space exploration were photographed sitting in the front row, President John F. Kennedy, who had promised that man would land on the moon by the end of the 1960s, Vice President Lyndon B. Johnson, who would later serve as President during some of the most important missions to outer space, and Kurt Debus, the first ever Director of the Kennedy Space Centre, who previously served as an Staffelrottenführer in the SS and a key architect in the Nazi V2 Rocket Project, which resulted in the deaths of thousands of people.

By May 1945, the Third Reich was in pieces. With the Führer dead, many high ranking Nazis and military officers, fearing Allied capture for their part in war crimes, including the Holocaust, either committed suicide or fled to South America. Most notably, Martin Bormann, Nazi Party Minister, Joseph Goebbels, Reichminister of Propaganda and Chancellor, and Reichsführer SS Heinrich Himmler all committed suicide in the final days of the war or in the weeks following, whilst Josef Mengele, a physician and anthropologist, specialising in human experimentation at Auschwitz, and Adolf Eichmann, a high ranking Party Member and Government Official, fled to Argentina, with the latter of the two being captured and executed in 1961 for his role in designing the Holocaust.

However, SS Sturmbannführer Wernher von Braun was less worried than most. In fact, he was bordering on confident, having approached the United States directly with his location, patiently and calmly waiting for their arrival. As a key architect behind the V2 Rocket, Braun was confident that his knowledge would be useful to the United States Government. As predicted, his captors gave him a warm welcome.

Braun (centre, civilian clothes) photographed with Wehrmacht Generals, such as Walter Dornberger, Friedrich Olbricht and Heinz Brandt in March 1941

What was more surprising, however, that this was occurring all across the collapsing Third Reich and during the years of occupation by the Allies. Whilst the Second World War had concluded, the Cold War was beginning to brew, and the Americans were determined on getting the upper hand against the Soviet Union. In all, over 1,500 Nazi Scientists were extracted from Germany between 1945 and 1962, in order to work on the American Space Programme, including Braun and the aforementioned Debus. Whilst Braun had handed himself over to the Americans, other scientists had to be found and extracted. These missing scientists were compiled in a list that, in an unsuccessful effort to dispose of evidence, was flushed down the toilet.

The operation, Operation Paperclip, was named after the paperclips that they would attach to the files, indicating they contained classified information such as Nazi affiliation or suspected war crimes and that all these should be overlooked in the name of advancing American science. For instance, Braun had overseen an SS Operation that involved forced labour at concentration camps.

The United States was not the only one involved in this practice. Whilst the British and French did not have the resources to exfiltrate German scientists without kidnapping or stealing patents, the Soviets used other more brutal methods in order to get the information they needed, such as bribery and forced relocation. The US method was the most controversial, however, offering a clean slate, the willing relocation of entire families and US citizenship.

Naturally, this massive influx of Germans into the United States raised a lot of eyebrows in the media. In response, the government did what every politician learns not to do on day 1 and told the truth. Immediately, there was mass public outcry, from influential figures such as Albert Einstein and Eleanor Roosevelt, as well as from the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP).

Many criticised that the victims of these mens atrocities in the Holocaust struggled greatly to get US Citizenship, ultimately to often get denied whilst the men who perpetrated the Holocaust got a fast track. In addition, there were also those who criticised the fact that former Nazis were now in Government positions, from an aspect of national security. However, as Cold War tensions grew, the argument that these scientists were necessary to combat the Soviet threat grew increasingly stronger.

Braun’s work at NASA involved getting the first American Satellite into orbit after the Soviet Sputnik, as well as the creation of the Saturn V rocket, which helped man land on the Moon. The work of other scientists involved in Paperclip ended up creating the jet engine and advanced pharmaceuticals research, but also developed chemical weapons such as Agent Orange, well known for its use in the Vietnam War.

Whilst these advances in science allowed the US Government to brand paperclip as success, hindsight casts doubt on this judgement. Whilst many minds taken to America in Paperclip were seen as geniuses, such as Braun, many were just your average Joe, who, upon contract completion, either returned to Germany or went to normal civilian life, assimilating amongst the populous. The ethical questions about bringing in scientists from such an evil regime to work on projects of national security still do not have full conclusive answers. However, it is undeniable that these men, no matter how abhorrent and evil their past was, changed our understanding of the universe at large.