The hawks are telling us that Ronald Reagan was responsible for the downfall of the Soviet Union. They may be right, but almost certainly for the wrong reasons.
Acccording to the hawks, Reagan spent so much money on the US military that the Soviet Union finally threw in the towel. This argument is not entirely convincing, since the US had been spending on the military for years with no apparent effect on the Soviet Union. Why was Reagan's spending any different from the spending before him? And why would the Soviet Union care about increased US military spending, especially on technological boondoogles such as "Star Wars"?
A better explanation is that Reagan was to the Soviet Union as Nixon was to China. Only a politician who had a reputation as a hard-liner could put aside the hard-line rhetoric and sit down and talk business. Nixon had his trip to China, and Reagan had his meetings with Gorbachev. At those meetings, Reagan and Gorbachev agreed to arms reductions. The Soviet Union already was on its final legs, and those meetings may (or may not) have helped lead to its final implosion. "Hey, maybe we are better off being friends with those Americans, rather than spending a fortune on our military."
