Talk:Détente

Comment
I just added a bunch bull shit to this document just to see if it gets fixed of stuff from my HIST 100 notes, so I do not claim that any of it is encylopedia worthy, but I felt as if it would be better than if all of it was left unsaid for longer. This is more of a plea for someone else to bulk up this page a bit, and encourage more link-up of all the pages involved with the "cooling off" era. I enfact enncourage someone to disagree with everything I typed, if it will encourage a nice edit.

A better definition

 * Detente (Can we get a pronounciation here?) was the Nixon-era policy of attempting a negotiated accommodation with the Soviet Union.

I think detente was a policy rather than a result. Some advocates may have predicted it would (or claimed that it did) "lessen tensions" - but that is only advocacy, i.e., reasons given for pursuing the policy.

The article should say that some people thought the US should NOT try to "win" the Cold War but negotiate some sort of accommodation, and explain why they advocated this -- to "lessen tensions", for example. --Uncle Ed (El Dunce) 19:04, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)


 * Many historians believe Détente was just as much, if not more, an action by the Soviet leaders than Nixon. So calling it a "Nixon-era policy" isn't quite correct. - SimonP 20:36, Oct 19, 2004 (UTC)

Sounds like Nixon and the Soviets each had their own agenda. Perhaps the article could delve into these agendas. --Uncle Ed (El Dunce) 14:59, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I don't know how to edit wikipedia pages, but the soviet "definition" of detente should have a link to the Soviet language! - Can anyone tell me how to do this? --Brilong87 (talk) 15:45, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
 * There was no Soviet language. - 91.122.0.73 (talk) 22:14, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

Hostages
I added that the hostages were taken by Lebanon, because it sounded as if they were taken by Iran. Iran had no control over Hezbollah, only influence.
 * What do you mean? The sentence is referring to the Iranian hostage crisis, which had nothing to do with Lebanon. - SimonP 13:38, Nov 15, 2004 (UTC)

POV?

 * I am concerned about the last statement of the article that effectively writes off the peace between the two super powers as being all but impossible to sustain due to inherent differences in their governments. That's not really why Détente ended, and without some serious research detailing those differences, this statement is little more than a broad stroke.  Unless we can agree to support that final statement, and steer the article toward outlining the differences between the two sides, I think we are better off omitting it.Chamb 20:48, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

I like the last sentence. The superpowers were in fact ideologically opposed. Moreover, as the article mentioned, the Cold War continued in spite of detente; without a more fundamental shift in relations, detente could objectively be called almost inevitably temporary. With the U.S. and U.S.S.R. actively promoting their own and thwarting each others' influences abroad, there was no real peace and nothing to sustain.

Afghanistan
"American President Jimmy Carter boosted the U.S. defense budget and began to heavily subsidize the anti-Soviet fighters in Afghanistan, a decision that would come back to haunt the U.S. on 11 September 2001."

This sentence should be erased or cleaned up. Moral imperatives have no place in encyclopedic writing.

It is unwise to claim the events of September 11, 2001 are inherently linked with the Carter administration's decisions in the cold war. There is room for speculation, but claiming the support of anti-soviet fighters in Afghanistan as the cause of September 11 attack is under researched and poorly articulated. It, in my opinion, would be more appeasing to talk about how this event and the United States relationship with the Shaw government of Iran have generated tension, an addition to the already existing disenchantment with the Detente policy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.62.231.57 (talk) 22:03, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Thawing the cold war
I know it's a commonly used phrase, but I think thawing the cold war is a bit of a mixed metaphor. Jarvik 18:59, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Criticism?
I see that deterrence has a heavy criticism section where detente does not even have one. I'm not complaining, i'm just noting the lack of it. Well that's wikipedia for you.--64.75.187.195 06:05, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Kissinger
Was Kissinger the person who invented the term? I mean, he was the person who extended the said policy. He should also get a notable mention in the article since this was his policy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.183.33.59 (talk) 22:34, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Clever
The "Thawing" of the cold war. Clever, I like it :D 67.86.108.27 (talk) 00:16, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

WRC ?
From the article: "Soviet thinkers also felt that a less aggressive policy could potentially detach the Western Europeans from their American WRC."

Can anyone expand (and/or link) the abbreviation WRC? I don't know what it means (and WRC doesn't seem to give an answer). Oliphaunt (talk) 23:40, 31 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Agree, I can't figure out what it's supposed to mean. //Blaxthos ( t / c ) 21:28, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Consistency
I note that the article uses several different permutations of the word "Détente", varying in capitalization, italics, and use of the accented vowel é. I don't know what is preferred (linguistically, or per WP:MOS); can someone with more knowledge either suggest what method is proper, or standardize the words in the article? Thanks! //Blaxthos ( t / c ) 21:28, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Triangular Diplomacy?
The page makes no mention of Nixon's Triangular Diplomacy between the Soviet Union and China. While this was not the only cause to detente it effected it and should probably be mentioned somewhere. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.9.226.199 (talk) 04:32, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Detente during the late 50's
What about Khrushchev's detente policy during the late 50's? Should that section not be expanded? Starting with the pacification of Austria in 1955 and leading to plans, however interupted by the Cuban crisis, for a Partial Nuclear Test-Ban Teaty in 1963. Although the Soviet-Union was making an economical and military come back in these years, Khrushchev's believed the Soviet-Union needed time to catch up with the USA. His strive for detente was also an important factor in the Sino-Soviet Rift.
 * See Khruschev Thaw. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 19:32, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

The use of Détente soley for a Cold War scenario is factually incorrect
This article, like the many I see when I come here, is written in the style of an American high school history project. Its scope is so myopic it is almost laughable.

Détente did not start in the Cold War, it began in the late 1890s, when the diplomatic relations between the United Kingdom and France became warmer ending almost a millennium of perpetual suspicion and hostilities. That is where the term was originated. The word was reused later in the Cold War because it signalled a similar change in attitudes between the West (in general) and not just the USA to the USSR.

There is no mention of any of the above in this article at all. This article would suggest that the Cold War created détente. Needs a whole rewrite to make any sense. Otherwise keep well away!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.158.255.231 (talk) 16:33, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
 * The improved relations of the UK and France circa 1900 are covered by Triple Entente and Entente cordiale. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 19:34, 28 April 2012 (UTC)


 * While the anon was inaccurate in his or her specific description of the original usage ("Entente" was always the term for that), he or she is certainly right that it is not something which has only been used to describe the subject of this article. The other major usage of détente is to refer to efforts to reduce tensions between Germany and the western powers during the 1920s. john k (talk) 17:04, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

English
The first paragraph of the main body is particularly poorly written. I'm happy to give this a bit of a brush, but wouldn't mind some other people as well, so we can avoid POV bias entering the topic. Micmacimus (talk) 05:31, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Which specific problems in this paragraph should be corrected? Jarble (talk) 22:13, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

Improve the information
Hey anybody thats good with this topic, PLS add more info on it, i need it for something — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.30.135.60 (talk) 00:49, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Meaning of разрядка
Разрядка means "discharging" (of electrical batteries). The verb разрядить means "to discharge" (an electrical battery, either via its use or intentionally, a gun, a cannon, and so on), and this root along with this prefix can be used figuratively in relation to people and especially nations: the relations are freed of the charge of negative emotions. I think it refers to the Cold War only, not to any other tensions; that's because the Cold War, unlike any other war or any other group of tensions, was a psychological war firstly (at least, for Russians), so such "psychological" terms are suitable for its description. - 89.110.8.96 (talk) 08:19, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

Began in 1966 - 1967
As I recall detente began with the Glassboro Conference in 1967, where Johnson and Kosygin met in an amicable atmosphere. Nixon's (or at least Agnew's) red-baiting in the 1968 campaign made further progress impossible at the time, but when Nixon got into office he was following up on Glassboro. Remember also that Kissinger did work for the Johnson Administration. 69.122.42.32 (talk) 16:13, 31 August 2017 (UTC)captcrisis

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Détente. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141023220026/http://slantchev.ucsd.edu/courses/nss/lectures/detente-malaise.pdf to http://slantchev.ucsd.edu/courses/nss/lectures/detente-malaise.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 09:58, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

Franco-German Détente in 1912
Add a section on diplomatic efforts between France and Germany before World War I. Credit is given to Jules Cambon, French ambassador in Berlin for helping to move this forward. See - DutchTreat (talk) 13:07, 4 July 2021 (UTC)
 * More details in - DutchTreat (talk) 13:25, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

International
The détente didn't only happen between the US and East Bloc countries. At the time, it was a global phenomenon between the two blocs. In fact, the German version of this article doesn't deal with the US at all. Its name is Entspannungspolitik ("policy of easing/relaxation"), as was the contemporary German name for the global détente at the time, and it deals mainly with what in the English Wikipedia is covered over at Ostpolitik.

Not only does this demonstrate huge shortcomings of this English article on détente in only mentioning US intiatives at the time, but also in that this English article basically only lists a few intitiatives, or rather just a few treaties, called détente, without giving any actual context or background as to what developments throughout the 1960s had led to this new policy, before Nixon assumed office. Unlike over at Ostpolitik, there's no context, no background, no bigger picture here as to why it was all happening, and this article here makes it sound a bit like it was a personal Nixon folly of "being soft on the Reds".

Actually, it all went back to the Cuban missile crisis, the Berlin Crisis of 1961, and the stalemate in the Vietnam war, which all demonstrated a significant crisis, even outright practical collapse of the Truman Doctrine of anti-Communist rollback, highlighting that aggressive approaches from either side failed to bring about any significant advances. This was coupled with a growing fear of nuclear holocaust in the general populace in many countries on both sides throughout the 1960s that had already lingered since a decade earlier. Thus, détente emerged as a pragmatic approach of "agreeing to disagree" on both sides and largely respecting each other's spheres of influence, in order to maintain world peace, prevent world war III, and seek bi-lateral diplomatic accords for the sake of embettering human rights situations, as basically an overall more effective form of containment. This entire approach, not only in relation to the two German states but to the entire global confrontation between the two Blocs, was outlined in two 1962 and 1963 speeches by Willy Brandt and Egon Bahr already, immediately after the Cuban missile crisis and the construction of the Berlin Wall. --2003:EF:170A:9205:7469:5095:FCD8:ABF5 (talk) 04:39, 21 December 2022 (UTC)