American foreign policy in mid and late 1960s was dominated by the war in Vietnam. Richard Nixon, the new Republican president and Henry Kissinger, his National Security Adviser (who in 1973 became his Secretary of State) resolved to end the war. The main reason for this was the decrease of economic and military superiority of the United States. Between 1964 and 1972 America switched from a 7 billion dollar trade surplus to a 7 billion dollar trade deficit (Ashton, 1989). War in Vietnam was one cause of this decline. As a result, there was an increased competition from America’s allies in Europe and Japan. The dollar depreciated quickly. There was a hope that détente would bring the balance back. Kissinger in his book (Years of Upheaval) wrote: “Détente was built on the twin pillars of resistance to Soviet expansionism and a willingness to negotiate on concrete issues, on the concept of deterrence and a readiness to explore the principles of coexistence.” (Bell, 1977)

Nixon began a policy of détente with the Soviet Union in May 1972, when he visited Moscow.
A series of arms control agreements were created to limit the development of strategic weapons and also to slow the arms race. The Strategic Arms Limitation Talks (SALT) and the Anti-Ballistic Missile treaty started in 1969.

A series of political visits began and it seemed that the two superpowers were enjoying both strategic and economic benefits of détente. However, in 1972, after a visit to China, President Nixon travelled to Moscow. According to Martel (Martel, 1994) the purpose of Nixon’s diplomatic visits was to create doubt in the minds of the leaders in each communist state about the other’s agreements with the US. He wanted to use improved relations with the Chinese to make the Soviets more manageable and better relations with the Soviets to make the Chinese more conciliatory. It was agreed in 1972 that détente should progress from arms control to cooperation in trade, science, technology, space ventures and other fields. And so it did- the trade between the US and USSR increased enormously, with Russians importing grain and other industrial goods necessary for sustaining their economy. Another positives of détente was the Helsinki agreement in 1975 which recognised borders in post Second World War Europe and also tried to monitor human rights in the Communist countries.

“Détente should not be mistaken for peace. Peace is an objective. Détente is a diplomatic mode or strategy by which that objective may be sought.” (Bell, The Diplomacy of Détente, 1977) This can be illustrated by the fact that nuclear weapons were never destroyed, there was only an attempt to control their growth. Also none of the countries were prepared to give up their diplomatic and military influence over other countries- for example USSR over Eastern Europe. The Soviets and the Americans never stopped competing for the resource-rich countries of the Third World. There was also a great deal of tension between the US and the Soviets in the Middle East where the two countries supported rival client states. Kissinger’s diplomacy was designed to eliminate Soviet influence in the Middle East under the cover of détente, as he himself later admitted in Years of Upheaval” (Bell, The Diplomacy of Détente, 1977).

It was the crisis of presidential authority in the US and involvement in Third World conflicts that ultimately led to the decline of détente. There was a growing anti-détente mood from 1976 when Carter became a president of the United States. SALT II talks started but at this point, the superpowers were not willing to carry on and eventually, the talks were suspended. Superpowers had conflicting policies in regional conflicts such as the conflict in Africa in 1978. Another issue that worsened the East – West relations was the invasion of Afghanistan by Soviet troops in 1979. In the Arab – Israeli conflict, Americans were fighting Soviet closest ally in the Middle East, Syria.

“Since 1976, The Committee for the Present Danger was portraying the USSR as abusing détente and becoming a growing threat to US interests.” (Lawler, 2004) China criticised the United States for not acting on potential Soviet threat to Western Europe. It seems that the whole world was based on mistrust. The USSR was disrespected for breaking mutual agreements and for invading other countries. SALT II talks were suspended. A number of points discussed above seem to suggest that détente could be seen as a temporary break from high tension between superpowers. And because the US and the Soviet Union never really trusted one other and had different ideological and strategic views, it can be said that the fall of détente was just a question of time