He was only in office 895 days and didn't do that much while there. Ford's presidency saw the fall of Saigon, which was significant, but also something that had been building for a while and he didn't have much to do with it. Additionally, compared to the fall of the Berlin Wall and the end of the Soviet Union (Bush), the INF treaty/end of the Cold War (Reagan), Iranian revolution and hostage crisis (Carter), '73 Israeli War/disengagement in Vietnam/visiting China (Nixon), escalation in Vietnam/Gulf of Tomkin (Johnson), Cuban missile crisis (Kennedy), Eisenhower doctrine/Iranian coup/Suez crisis/space race (Eisenhower), or the Truman doctrine/NATO/Marshall plan/use of the a-bomb/start of the Cold War (Truman)... it just doesn't seem that important.
He's far from the only leader left off this list. I also omitted Hua Guofeng, 3-4 Soviet leaders depending on whether you count Yanayev or not, and a whopping 10 British prime ministers, among others. I left Churchill off the list and I daresay he was a much more significant leader of the Cold War than Gerald Ford. I just decided that he was much more associated with World War 2 and his first term in office so I left him off this quiz.
So, in short, no. This is not a comprehensive list. If it were there would be a few thousand answers.
Pol Pot could only really be described as dictator of Cambodia from 1975 to 1979 - before and after that he was just the leader of a Cambodian political party.
Great quiz. I could have done with an extra minute or so, but then I am trying to drag answers from the back of my mind or remember things from when I was only a kid.
Kalbahamut: Though I thoroughly disagree with you about Gerald Ford being omitted from this quiz, and I often regard you as a giant PITA... I must admit that you compose awesome quizes. Kudos!
Maybe. But I don't really think the quiz is any poorer for the omission of Harold Wilson or James Callaghan. I decided to leave off Winston Churchill because he's on my World Leaders of the World Wars quiz and is much better known for his leadership during that period. Aside from him, Thatcher, and maybe Atlee I don't think there are any British PMs that most people would know or that played a significant role in the events of the Cold War.
"I don't think there are any British PMs that most people would know" yeah you mean American people. Plenty of British people in the website would indeed know of them.
I agree with BlackJohn. If you're in Britain and lived through the Cold War period, then Wilson, MacMillan, Heath and others are every bit as well known as some of the US Presidents, and played their part on the world stage during that time, at least as much as many of those listed.
uh... no... I mean what I said. Most people. As in most (north of 50%) people in the world or even who come to this website. Commonly I've run in to the problem that those living in the UK seem to assume that their country constitutes the entire rest of the world outside of America. This is not the case. You're one small part of it. If I was tailoring this quiz specifically to a British audience then obviously I would have included more British prime ministers, though.
and while, sure, maybe those PMs you mentioned played a part in international politics during the Cold War, #1 how important were they, really, to how the major events of the Cold War (the conflict and many proxy conflicts between the US and USSR) played out? and #2 I'd be willing to bet money that if I put them on this quiz the percentage of people who guessed them would be in the Faisal - Nagy - Dubcek range or slightly higher.
If you (or anyone else who sees this) is inclined to take a quiz of mine, that would be incredibly helpful! I have a quiz called "Major 2020 Presidential Candidates" that is on the nomination page and would love feedback on it! Thank you in advance for anyone who checks it out!!
Because Israel was at the center of many events important to the Cold War. But likely also because I have a personal fascination with the region and so know more about it myself.
There is a lack of european leaders in this list, especially germans: Adenauer, Brandt, Kohl, Honecker... Berlin was central in the Cold War so I don't understand why you left them. I also have a problem with Lech Walesa here... to put him is a bit cliché, he was not really the leader during the cold war, but an opponent who became president after the end of the cold war in Poland (imo, the 89-91 period is not really the cold war anymore, the USSR was collapsing and the threat was vanishing). Jaruzelski would be more relevant. I see above that you removed Dubcek once, and I don't agree with that either, the Prague Spring is an important episode of the Cold War. So, in short, I know it was never meant to be a comprehensive list, but why not extend this to fifty?
I dunno. Feel like it's already long enough as it is; longer than the other similar quizzes on the site. I am more interested in Middle East history than European history during this period so you may have a point there. I had Dubcek on here before and took him off because he was one of the least-guessed answers I think. I think Walesa is a fair inclusion, sort of like putting on Gorbachev or Bush. It was at the end of the Cold War but still...
I sympathise entirely, the list can become very long. But rather than pointing out European figures who might have been added, I am struck by the total absence of figures from the Indian subcontinent.
He was president from 1990-1995 and Solidarity Chair before that. The quiz reflects this. The Cold War didn't end until the fall of the Soviet Union at the end of 1991. Walesa played a central role in the end of Communism in Poland, which was an important part of the Cold War.
You guys should read up on your Saudi history. It has in many ways impacted the history of the world since the end of World War 2. Faisal is probably the most popular king the country has ever had, though he ended up assassinated. Definitely a pivotal figure in the Cold War and the modern history of the Middle East. Interesting guy.
- The Emirate of Diriyah and the alliance between Muhammad bin Saud (son of the patriarch of the House of Saud) and Muhammad ibn AbdulWahab (the cleric credited with founding Wahhabism aka Saudi fundamentalist aka Salafism)
- ibn Saud's alliance with and eventual betrayal of the Ikhwan.
- T.E. Lawrence's campaign against the Ottomans
- The rivalry between the House of Saud and the Rashidi clan of Ha'il
- AbdulAziz's return from exile and conquest of Riyadh (he did so with 40 guys and some pointy sticks)
- The fall of the Kingdom of Hejaz
- AbdulAziz's summit with Franklin Roosevelt
- King Saud's lavish lifestyle and ouster by his brother Faisal
- Faisal's '73 oil embargo against the West over perceived support for Israel
- the attack on Saudi TV in Riyadh after they showed a woman on air
- the seizure of the Kabaa in 1979 which shocked the country backward toward conservatism
Could you please accept Faysal ? It's a common way of spelling that name.
Also, it's incorrect to reduce Salafism to the state-sponsored Saudi fundamentalism, which is only a trend of Salafism. Salafism isn't a monolithic movement but a group of reformist trends that emphasize on thinking religion like the first generations did. This definition is more accurate : http://www.oxfordislamicstudies.com/article/opr/t125/e2072.
Saudi authorities are very active in propaganda through TV, Internet and books, and because of that, many Salafis see them as righteous Muslims who rule in a very Islamic way. There are however many Salafi groups and individuals who hate them, sometimes to the extent of declaring them apostates (groups like Al-Qaida and Daesh are prime examples).
There also are many people influenced by Salafism but avoid calling themselves Salafis, as the term is often linked to notions like sectarianism, close-mindedness, misogyny, violence, terrorism, etc.
Great quiz, which I enjoyed taking a second time round a few years later. I still stand by my earlier comment regarding the years given for Pol Pot as Cambodia dictator as whilst he lead the Khmer Rouge for that period, he only led the country between '75 and '79 (I accept that parts of the country were under his control outside of those years, but if in 1974 or 1980 you asked someone who the leader of Cambodia is, the answer would not have been Pol Pot. My only other quibble is that maybe the Israelis getting about as much space as the US and the Soviets is a tad excessive, though it's obviously an eventful part of the world. That said maybe representing Africa and Latin America more would be good - perhaps Mengistu would make a good inclusion.
Pol Pot was Cambodia's Prime Minister only from 1975 to 1979, during the Khmer Rouge's rule when millions died. He did not run the country outside of those years.
The dates on the quiz are when Mr. Pot was General Secretary of the Communist Party of Cambodia, aka the Khmer Rouge. It's true they didn't really gain full control of the country until 1975, though they did control parts of it both before and after. I could change the dates to reflect this, or change the description of his position. I'll think on this and pick one or the other.
None, really. Sometimes I used official titles (president, general secretary, prime minister). Other times I used bland but factual descriptions (leader, dictator (a dictator being a leader with supreme authority, usually one who took power by force)). I admit this was arbitrary. I could have just used "leader" for everyone.
Some decisions may have been influenced by common usage in English (Pahlavi is commonly referred to as the Shah in English, rarely as king or leader); other times I tried to use a title which would eliminate confusion over what was the correct answer (many countries might have a monarch or president who is a figurehead when real power lies with the prime minister or supreme cleric, etc. In countries like China and Russia, there are/were many different "leaders" with different titles, but usually one guy recognized as holding the real power - in China this guy is referred to commonly as the supreme leader. In Russia you end up with de-facto dictators like president/prime minister Putin, or General Secretary of the Communist party Stalin, at different times using different titles to wield the same level of authority).
There are a lot of answers to get in the time, and a good chunk of them are dammed tricky to spell. I didn’t even get finished as I struggled with spelling quite a few of them, the Ayatollah being one.
Also, any reason why you don’t accept “Valensa” as a type in? That’s how I have always seen his name spelt in the British media.
Yeah, although I typoed with the “n” it shouldn’t be there. And a quick Google shows most British media did actually spell it with a “W” rather than the “v” of my memory. So, I suspect you can ignore my comment.
It could do with more time though, I don’t know if you have added any since my post, I haven't had time to retake yet.
I've never read it as "Valensa" but it's a nice attempt at phonetic accuracy (Polish w = English v, and ę is a nasalized e). They should have gone one step further and write "Vawensa" (Polish ł is pronounced the same as the English w).
Agreed. It is hard to write Lech Wałęsa on a standard English keyboard. My version here was C&P'd. Maybe a phonetic version should be considered. He was pretty prominent during my school years during the 80s, and a few politically aware kids wore badges emblazoned with the Solidarność logo, so the spelling of both stuck with me.
Being Canadian I admit my bias, but I think it's worth inserting at least Brian Mulroney into the list as Canadian PM, as he was very close to Thatcher and Reagan, and head of a G7 nation. But, that's just me.
Too many israeli pms. why are there Indonesian presidents? How is Indonesia remotely relevant? Where is the leaders of West Germany, Spain, Italy, Turkey, Greece, more UK Pms, Brazil or Argentina? Come on, how is a westerner supposed to know the indonesian presidents?
Indonesia was a very important battleground in the Cold War. The overthrow of the socialist, communist leaning president Sukarno in 1965 by Suharto, one of his generals, led to a country wide purge of communists party members, their sympathizers, and Chinese immigrants in a spasm of massacres promoted by the rightwing Muslim clergy, land owners and Suharto himself - up to 3,000,000 people died, making it one of the world's most horrific genocides after World War II. Suharto then ruled as a dictator for 30 years. The West was happy to be rid of the communist encroachment in Indonesia, so the genocide was more or less never talked about. But there is a really good documentary on the subject, the Act of Killing, one of the best documentaries I've ever seen
Perhaps because the Berlin Wall was built during Ulbricht's tenure. However, both followed the Soviet Union devoutly and were not very important on their own. I would say that West German leaders Brandt (détente) and Schmidt, who co-founded the G7 with French president Giscard, had a greater impact. Schmidt and Giscard also emerged as driving forces in international politics during the rather weak presidencies of Ford and Carter. But as was exhaustively explained elsewhere, you can't have everyone in the quiz. And it's also about who is more recognizable to the general Jetpunk audience.
Yeah I second that, especially considering Nehru's role in the Non-Aligned Movement and Decolonization. In a similar vein, I feel like Kwame Nkrumah would also be a good fit.
I tried Erich Honecker, thought I spelled it wrong, tried again, then made sure I had the right spelling, spelled it again but slower and then finally gave up.
These leaders were all very relevant to the events of the Cold War - the series of proxy wars and political power plays around the world from 1945 to 1990 that were a result of the United States and Soviet Union trying to expand their own influence and contain that of the other. For instance, capitalist Batista was closely aligned with the US; then he was overthrown by Castro who was a communist aligned with the Soviets. The Shah of Iran was liberal, secular, and friendly toward the West. The ayatollahs that replaced him were the opposite. Egyptian president Nasser was quasi-socialist and favored to Soviets; when he was replaced by Sadat Egyptian foreign policy pivoted toward the West and Egypt became an important US ally in the Middle East as it remains to this day. And so on. Google [any of the above leaders] + "the Cold War" and you will find out why they are on the quiz.
I think the soviet leaders were more important to the cold war than the Israeli PMs. Simply because the main two protagonists of the cold war were USSR and USA. Hence I would include more Soviet leaders, and cut back on the Israeli ones apart from the ones involved in major wars. (I'm perhaps just peeved I can't remember all the Israeli ones).
On the other hand I feel like all of the Israeli leaders here were significant. Ben-Gurion was the first PM of Israel. He courted American support for Israel but didn't get it; Czechoslovakia and then France became their most important early supporters. Americans feared he had too much of a socialist leaning and might ally with the Communists. He was also born in Russian Poland. Then he presided over the Suez Crisis, which was a pretty important event in the Cold War.
Meir was PM of Israel during the Yom Kippur War. Soviet allies Syria and Egypt invaded Israel who by then was being reluctantly backed by the United States - in part as a response to spreading Soviet influence in the region. The war threatened to involve both super powers and could have turned the Cold War into a hot one pretty quickly. When the Israelis chased out the invaders and were within striking distance of both Damascus and Cairo, largely to avoid Soviet intervention, the US pressured Israel into withdrawing.
Rabin and Peres were both signatories of the Oslo Accords which was an important step toward peace between Israel and the Palestinians as represented by Arafat and the PLO. Both were awarded the Nobel Peace Prize along with Arafat. For his part in this, Rabin was assassinated by a right-wing Israeli extremist. Peres also signed the peace treaty with Jordan.
Begin was significant mostly for signing the peace treaty with Anwar Sadat of Egypt. A treaty that has lasted until this day. Sadat and his predecessor Nasser were Soviet-friendly, but after making peace with Israel he pivoted to the West and brought Egypt into the American sphere. One of the most significant developments in the Middle East during the Cold War.
So... all of them are on here for a reason and worth knowing about if you want to understand the history of the Cold War. The Soviet leaders I left off... not so much.
Kalb, I love you buddy, I love Israel, been there several times, proud Jew... but you gotta cut back on the Israeli PMs. Peres definitely doesn't belong there. I'd hold it to Ben Gurion and either Begin or Meir.
I saw Nagy and Dubcek were removed; I think they both would be great on this quiz. A couple of West Germans and Africans would be good, too. Maybe Nkruma or Mobuto Sese Seko or Idi Amin.
Peres was *way* more important to the Cold War than Nkruma or Amin. I mean.. as foreign minister under Rabin, Peres pushed forward the peace deal between Israel and Jordan which was a huge development, and he shared the Nobel Peace Prize with Rabin and Arafat. From '77-'14 he served as Israeli P.M. four separate times and became the country's 9th president, as well. And on top of all that, before I removed Nagy and Dubek from the quiz, he was guessed more than both of them, too.
Maybe you could argue that he did more while not a head of state than he did while he was... but still... ::shrug:: he's not on here because of any love I have for Israel or Jews.
I'm gonna leave this one as is for the foreseeable future. Thanks for the input regardless.
Also I could possibly be ignorant or biased, but from my understanding of history the most important theaters of the Cold War (the decades long conflict between the United States and Soviet Union fought through proxy and struggles to expand each state's sphere of influence without direct engagement) were Eastern Europe (mostly centered around East Germany and the other Soviet Bloc countries), the Middle East (mostly Israel, Turkey, Egypt, Syria, Afghanistan and Iran), the far East (Korea, China, Vietnam, Indonesia, and those countries adjacent), and the Americas south of the USA (Panama, Chile, Nicaragua, Cuba, etc). East Asia and Eastern Europe were in play because they were in Stalin's and Mao's back yard. The Americas because they were in Truman's. And then the Middle East mostly because that's where most of the world's oil came from (and they were also very close to the USSR). Africa was almost irrelevant. That's why it was called the 3rd world.
3rd world = not aligned or not strategically relevant.
Over time people noticed that the term "3rd world country" was often used to reference very resource-poor impoverished countries without close trade or political relationships with more developed countries like Russia or the USA... and they started to incorrectly assume that this is what the term meant. And that's how the meaning shifted from the original "not aligned with the USA or USSR" to what's commonly understood today "poor and pre-industrialization." But still most of these countries are in Africa.
Sort of a non-sequitur, but I wonder why more Third World countries didn't aggressively align themselves with the U.S. during the Cold War.
The Soviet Union had a bunch of lackey states (for lack of a better word) such as Cuba who would vote their way in the UN or even judge Olympic events corruptly if the need was there.
But, ideology aside, the USSR was such an obviously inferior partner because they had far fewer resources. If I was the corrupt leader of a Third World nation in the 1980s, I would have been throwing myself at the feet of the U.S., promising to root out Communists, and basking in favorable trade deals and foreign aid. It was just such an obviously better deal.
When I play Tropico the game presents the option of allying your paradisical island dictatorship with either the Americans or the Soviets but it doesn't seem to make much of a difference.
Excellent and interesting quiz. I only got 31/40, but I think I will take it again and again in the coming months and try to remember them all. I struggled in particular with the Asian leaders, but I also didn't know the East German leader, which is disappointing as I am very much a Germanophile. I also couldn't think of the US president immediately post-war - couldn't get FDR out of my head in the time allowed. By the time I went back to try again, the time had run out.
I prefer the quiz as is. I know many Westerners don't know of the Mid-East, Asian, and Latin American leaders, but those on the quiz all had pivotal roles in events central to the Cold War.
The one where he illegally came to then usurped power with xenophobic racist populist rhetoric and vows to steal billions in international investments and infrastructure, and was soon deposed?
I'd argue that Adenauer is a relatively influential/important Cold War figure. Not saying you need to change your whole quiz, just wondering if he was considered as an option at any point.
Although Stalin abolished the position of General Sec of the USSR in 1952, Malenkov did not become Chairman of the Council of Ministers until 1953, so I think it is fair to say Stalin was the leader of the USSR until his death in 1953
33/40, fun quiz. I can understand why not every U.S. president was included, since most of the other countries don't have every single leader, but still expected to see Ford
I disagree with leaving Ford off the list. I think all the leaders of the U.S. and USSR should be included since they are the two superpowers of the Cold War.
So, in short, no. This is not a comprehensive list. If it were there would be a few thousand answers.
And of course Churchill absolutely belongs on this list but I understand the reason for exclusion.
and while, sure, maybe those PMs you mentioned played a part in international politics during the Cold War, #1 how important were they, really, to how the major events of the Cold War (the conflict and many proxy conflicts between the US and USSR) played out? and #2 I'd be willing to bet money that if I put them on this quiz the percentage of people who guessed them would be in the Faisal - Nagy - Dubcek range or slightly higher.
- The Emirate of Diriyah and the alliance between Muhammad bin Saud (son of the patriarch of the House of Saud) and Muhammad ibn AbdulWahab (the cleric credited with founding Wahhabism aka Saudi fundamentalist aka Salafism)
- ibn Saud's alliance with and eventual betrayal of the Ikhwan.
- T.E. Lawrence's campaign against the Ottomans
- The rivalry between the House of Saud and the Rashidi clan of Ha'il
- AbdulAziz's return from exile and conquest of Riyadh (he did so with 40 guys and some pointy sticks)
- The fall of the Kingdom of Hejaz
- AbdulAziz's summit with Franklin Roosevelt
- King Saud's lavish lifestyle and ouster by his brother Faisal
- Faisal's '73 oil embargo against the West over perceived support for Israel
- the attack on Saudi TV in Riyadh after they showed a woman on air
- the seizure of the Kabaa in 1979 which shocked the country backward toward conservatism
Also, it's incorrect to reduce Salafism to the state-sponsored Saudi fundamentalism, which is only a trend of Salafism. Salafism isn't a monolithic movement but a group of reformist trends that emphasize on thinking religion like the first generations did. This definition is more accurate : http://www.oxfordislamicstudies.com/article/opr/t125/e2072.
Saudi authorities are very active in propaganda through TV, Internet and books, and because of that, many Salafis see them as righteous Muslims who rule in a very Islamic way. There are however many Salafi groups and individuals who hate them, sometimes to the extent of declaring them apostates (groups like Al-Qaida and Daesh are prime examples).
There also are many people influenced by Salafism but avoid calling themselves Salafis, as the term is often linked to notions like sectarianism, close-mindedness, misogyny, violence, terrorism, etc.
#1 concern was clarity.
#2 was just my personal whims.
I wasn't trying to be political or controversial.
There are a lot of answers to get in the time, and a good chunk of them are dammed tricky to spell. I didn’t even get finished as I struggled with spelling quite a few of them, the Ayatollah being one.
Also, any reason why you don’t accept “Valensa” as a type in? That’s how I have always seen his name spelt in the British media.
Great idea fir a quiz though.
It could do with more time though, I don’t know if you have added any since my post, I haven't had time to retake yet.
https://www.google.com/search?q=Solidarno%C5%9B%C4%87+logo&client=safari&rls=en&tbm=isch&source=iu&ictx=1&fir=lxRDdA4bKmvxEM%252C-M_NlST4amd6xM%252C_&vet=1&usg=AI4_-kR_-TufpZqeD65gCydjFpXA6PeVvg&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiUspWckKjvAhXkmFwKHYeLA-UQ9QF6BAgGEAE&biw=1258&bih=741#imgrc=lxRDdA4bKmvxEM
Nehru was the key figure in Non-aligned movement enough in Cold War to appear on this list
Honecker would have made sense to include. Sorry.
Meir was PM of Israel during the Yom Kippur War. Soviet allies Syria and Egypt invaded Israel who by then was being reluctantly backed by the United States - in part as a response to spreading Soviet influence in the region. The war threatened to involve both super powers and could have turned the Cold War into a hot one pretty quickly. When the Israelis chased out the invaders and were within striking distance of both Damascus and Cairo, largely to avoid Soviet intervention, the US pressured Israel into withdrawing.
Begin was significant mostly for signing the peace treaty with Anwar Sadat of Egypt. A treaty that has lasted until this day. Sadat and his predecessor Nasser were Soviet-friendly, but after making peace with Israel he pivoted to the West and brought Egypt into the American sphere. One of the most significant developments in the Middle East during the Cold War.
So... all of them are on here for a reason and worth knowing about if you want to understand the history of the Cold War. The Soviet leaders I left off... not so much.
I saw Nagy and Dubcek were removed; I think they both would be great on this quiz. A couple of West Germans and Africans would be good, too. Maybe Nkruma or Mobuto Sese Seko or Idi Amin.
Maybe you could argue that he did more while not a head of state than he did while he was... but still... ::shrug:: he's not on here because of any love I have for Israel or Jews.
I'm gonna leave this one as is for the foreseeable future. Thanks for the input regardless.
2nd world = USSR or Soviet-aligned
3rd world = not aligned or not strategically relevant.
Over time people noticed that the term "3rd world country" was often used to reference very resource-poor impoverished countries without close trade or political relationships with more developed countries like Russia or the USA... and they started to incorrectly assume that this is what the term meant. And that's how the meaning shifted from the original "not aligned with the USA or USSR" to what's commonly understood today "poor and pre-industrialization." But still most of these countries are in Africa.
The Soviet Union had a bunch of lackey states (for lack of a better word) such as Cuba who would vote their way in the UN or even judge Olympic events corruptly if the need was there.
But, ideology aside, the USSR was such an obviously inferior partner because they had far fewer resources. If I was the corrupt leader of a Third World nation in the 1980s, I would have been throwing myself at the feet of the U.S., promising to root out Communists, and basking in favorable trade deals and foreign aid. It was just such an obviously better deal.
Also, I feel like we should have some more European leaders. Maybe swap one of the Israeli PMs for someone like Eden?
Also forgot Il-Sung :/