Hello, and thank you for joining me.

I'm Mr. Marchant and I'll be your history teacher for today's lesson.

I'll be guiding you through all of our resources and my top aims are to ensure not only that you enjoy our learning, but also that you can successfully meet today's lesson objective.

Welcome to today's lesson, which is part of our unit on the transformation of the Cold War, where we've been asking ourselves, why did tensions ease by 1972? By the end of today's lesson, you'll be able to assess the significance of SALT 1.

There are five key words which will help us navigate our way through today's lesson.

Those are: arms, rapprochement, state visit, interim and moderated.

Arms is just another word for weapons.

Rapprochement refers to the development of friendlier relations between countries who have been enemies.

A state visit is when the leader of one country makes an official visit to another.

If something is interim, then it is only temporary, and moderated means to prevent something from reaching extremes.

Today's lesson will be split into two parts and we'll begin by thinking about state visits and arms limitations.

Most of the 1970s have often been considered a period of Detente between the USA and USSR.

During this period, there was a relaxation of tensions between the two superpowers.

State visits and new agreements on arms limitations were just some of the examples of rapprochement at this time.

So I want you to write the missing keyword from the following sentence.

During the period of Detente, there was blank between the USA and USSR.

So what's the missing word? Pause video here and press play when you're ready to see the right answer.

Now okay, well done to everybody who said that the missing word was rapprochement.

During the period of Detente, there was rapprochement between the USA and USSR, so their relations became more friendly.

State visits is one example of rapprochement between the two superpowers.

In 1972, US President Richard Nixon visited Moscow, the capital of the Soviet Union, and met the leader of the USSR, Leonid Brezhnev.

Nixon became the first US president to visit the Soviet capital.

This was also the first time since the end of World War II.

In other words, the first time since 1945 that a US president had visited the USSR.

Nixon spent a week in USSR during his state visit.

So let's reflect on what we've just heard.

Which of the following views about Nixon's state visit to the USSR is most valid? Is it Alex's view that symbolically, Nixon's state visit to the USSR suggested the superpowers were willing to work with one another again? Sam's view that symbolically, Nixon's state visit to the USSR suggested the superpowers were still highly suspicious of one another? Or Jacobs view that symbolically, Nixon's state visit to the USSR suggested that the USA had lost the Cold War to the Soviet Union? Pause the video here and press play when you're ready to see the right answer.

Okay, well done to everybody who said that Alex's view was the most valid, that symbolically, Nixon's state visit to the USSR suggested the superpowers were willing to work with one another again.

During his first evening in Moscow, Nixon gave a speech in which he shared some of the aims of his visit to the capital.

The President shared his hope that the USA and USSR "could begin to turn our countries away from a wasteful and dangerous arms race and towards more production for peace." So which of the following was a key aim of Nixon's visit to Moscow in 1972? Was it to create a US-Soviet Security Alliance, to moderate the US-Soviet arms race, or to remove Soviet control over Eastern Europe? Pause video here and press play when you're ready to check your answer.

Okay, well done to everybody who said that the correct answer was B, one of Nixon's key aims in visiting the USSR in 1972 was to moderate the US-Soviet arms race, which he described as wasteful.

So now we can think about arms limitations.

During Nixon's visit to Moscow, the USA and USSR reached new agreements on arms limitations.

The two countries signed the Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty, otherwise known SALT 1, after multiple years of talks and negotiations.

So thinking about what we've just heard, what was the name of the treaty signed by the USA and USSR in 1972? Pause the video here and press play when you're ready to see the right answer.

Okay, well done to everybody who said the name of the treaty signed by the superpowers in 1972 was the Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty, otherwise known SALT 1.

So we'll just think in a little bit more depth about SALT 1.

SALT 1 was made up of agreements in three key areas.

The Anti-Ballistic Missile or ABM Treaty restricted the development of ABMs, the Interim Treaty capped the number of long-range nuclear missiles each country could have, and the Basic Principles Agreement set out the aims of US-Soviet cooperation as well as rules for the conduct of nuclear war and steps which the two superpowers could follow to avoid conflict.

So thinking about what we just heard, which of the following was not an agreement in SALT 1 Treaty? Was it the removal of all nuclear weapons, restrictions on ABMs, restrictions on long-range missiles, or rules for the conduct of nuclear war? Pause video here and press play when you're ready to check your answer.

Okay, well done to everybody who said that the correct answer was A, the SALT 1 Treaty covered many different areas, but it did not have any agreements for the removal of all nuclear weapons.

So we're now in a good position to put all of our knowledge about state visits and arms limitations into practise.

I want you to study the following statements.

We have four, which say: Richard Nixon refused to travel to the USSR, the SALT 1 Treaty included agreements on arms limitations, the US and USSR continued their arms race in the development of ABMs and agreements on rules for the conduct of any nuclear war were a sign of Detente.

So you need to do two things in response to these statements.

Firstly, I want you to identify whether each statement is true or false.

And then secondly, I want you to correct any false statements.

You should provide additional information to support any corrections that you do make.

So pause the video here and press play when you're ready to reflect on your responses.

Okay, well done for all of your hard work on that task.

So firstly, I asked you to identify whether each of our statements was true or false.

You should have said that our first statement was false, that the second statement was true.

The SALT 1 Treaty did include agreements on arms limitations.

The third statement was false and the fourth statement was true.

So for the second part of task A, we're gonna think about how we could have corrected both our first and third statements because I asked you to correct any full statements and provide additional information to support your corrections.

So your answers may have included Richard Nixon agreed to travel to the USSR.

Nixon visited Moscow in 1972, becoming the first US president to visit the USSR since World War II, and the US and USSR avoided an arms race in the development of ABMs by signing the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, which was part of SALT 1 and restricted the development of these weapons.

So really well done if your own responses were something similar to those models which we've just seen.

And now we're ready to move on to the second part of our lesson for today where we're going to think about the significance of SALT 1.

SALT 1 was celebrated by many people at the time it was signed and welcomed as a sign of US-Soviet Detente.

However, the treaty also had some limitations, which led others to criticise it.

The ability to agree to SALT 1 was a clear symbol of rapprochement between the superpowers.

As part of the Basic Principles, the two sides declared that differences in ideology and in the social systems of the USA and the USSR are not obstacles to the development of normal relations between them.

In other words, the agreement said that just because the USA was capitalist and the USSR was communist, this didn't mean that they couldn't establish normal relations.

Similarly, the Basic Principles also saw both the US and USSR agree to do their utmost to avoid military confrontations and to prevent the outbreak of nuclear war and will be prepared to negotiate and settle differences by peaceful means.

Other areas of SALT 1 helped to moderate the arms race.

Anti-ballistic missiles or ABMs were limited to just two sites and a maximum of 100 missiles for each country.

And caps were agreed on a number of intercontinental ballistic missiles or ICBMs and submarine-launched ballistic missiles or SLBMs possessed by each superpower.

So let's think about everything that we've just heard.

We have a statement on the screen that reads, Nixon and Brezhnev continued to doubt that communist and capitalist states could cooperate.

Is that statement true or false? Pause video here and press play when you're ready to see the right answer.

Okay, welcome to everybody who said that that statement was false, but we need to be able to justify our response.

So two justifications have appeared on the screen.

The first says that the Basic Principles stated that differences in ideology are not obstacles to the development of normal relations.

And the second says that the Basic Principles stated that differences in language are not obstacles to the development of normal relations.

So which one of those two justifications is correct? Pause the video here and press play when you're ready to see the right answer.

Okay, well done to everybody who said that the correct justification was A, the Basic Principles stated that differences in ideology are not obstacles to the development of normal relations.

In other words, the fact that the US was capitalist and the USSR was communist did not mean that they had to be hostile towards one another.

And let's try another question.

What was the maximum number of ABMs the USA and USSR were allowed to possess after SALT 1? Pause the video here and press play and you're ready to check your answer.

Okay, well then to everybody who said that the correct answer was 100.

The maximum number of ABMs the US and USSR were allowed to possess after SALT 1 was 100 missiles each at just two locations in each country.

This was part of the restrictions involved in the ABM Treaty.

Nevertheless, SALT 1 suffered from various weaknesses.

For one, the restrictions on numbers of ICBMs and SLBMs was only agreed for an interim five-year period rather than indefinitely.

These restrictions also still left both the USA and USSR with substantial nuclear arsenals.

Both superpowers possessed over 1,000 ICBMs even after they agreed to the limits of SALT 1.

Furthermore, not all arms were covered by the treaty.

Strategic bombers, which were planes designed to bomb distant enemy targets like factories were not restricted.

Similarly, some of the latest nuclear weapons technologies were not covered by SALT 1.

Multiple independently targeted reentry vehicles or MIRVs had first been developed by the USA at the beginning of the 1970s and were then quickly produced in the USSR as well.

MIRVs allowed multiple nuclear warheads to be fired from a single missile, creating a potential for far greater devastation than previous nuclear weapons technologies had been capable of.

These MIRVs were not included as part of the restrictions in SALT 1.

So let's think about what we've just heard.

Which two of the following weapons were not restricted by SALT 1? ABMs, MIRVs, SLBMs, or strategic bombers? Remember, you're looking for two answers to this question.

So pause the video here and press play when you're ready to see the right answers.

Okay, well done to everybody who said that the correct answers were B and D, SALT 1 did not provide any restrictions on MIRVs or strategic bombers.

And let's try another question.

Why was the Interim Treaty criticised? Was it because of restrictions on ICBMs and SLBMs only lasting for five years, because restrictions on ICBMs and SLBMs being removed or because restrictions on ICBMs and SLBMs were designed to favour the USA? Pause video here and press play when you're ready to see the right answer.

Okay, well done to everybody who said that the correct answer was A, the Interim Treaty, which included restrictions on ICBMs and SLBMs was criticised because it was only to last for five years.

Meaning that after that short period of time, both superpowers could continue increasing their stock of intercontinental ballistic missiles and submarine-launched ballistic missiles.

Like the rest of SALT 1, some people criticised the Basic Principles.

For one, it was noted that the Principles did not stipulate that the superpowers should refuse to use their nuclear weapons in the event of any war between them.

Many people were also sceptical if a nuclear war did occur that both sides would stick to the steps and rules agreed to as part of the Basic Principles.

Subsequently, there were some critics who suggested that the superpowers were only really seeking to gain good publicity from the Basic Principles and the rest of SALT 1 rather than trying to make any meaningful changes.

So thinking about what we've just heard, I want you to change one word to correct the following sentence, which reads, some critics worried that the Basic Principles would be respected if war actually did break out between the USA and the Soviet Union.

So consider which word seems to be incorrect and how should it be changed? Pause video here and press play when you're ready to reflect on your response.

Okay, well done to everybody who said that the word respected should actually have said ignored.

Some critics worried that the Basic Principles would be ignored if war actually did break out between the USA and the Soviet Union.

So we're now ready to put all of our knowledge about the significance of SALT 1 into practise.

We're gonna split task B into two parts.

Firstly, I want you to complete the table.

You need to identify at least two strengths and two weaknesses of SALT 1.

So pause the video here and press play when you're ready to check your answers.

Okay, well done for your effort on that first part of task B.

So I asked you to complete the table by identifying at least two strengths and two weaknesses of SALT 1 and your answers may have included for the strengths of SALT 1 that SALT 1 was a symbol of superpower rapprochement, that it included a promise to try to overcome differences peacefully and that it introduced limits on ABMs, ICBMs and SLBMs, which moderated the arms race.

However, for weaknesses, you may have identified that MIRVs and strategic bombers were not covered by SALT 1, that limits on ICBMs and SLMs were only temporary, they were only to last for five years, and that both the US and USSR still possessed large nuclear arsenals.

It's really well done if you managed to select two weaknesses and two strengths to look something like those provided in our model.

And now we can progress onto the second part of task B.

Which of our statements about the significance SALT 1 is most accurate? That SALT 1 intensified the Cold War, that SALT 1 moderated the Cold War or that SALT 1 ended the Cold War? You should consider both the strengths and weaknesses of SALT 1 as part of your answer.

So pause the video here and press play when you're ready to reflect on your response.

Okay, well done for all of your effort on that part of task B.

So I asked you which statement about the significance of SALT 1 was most accurate and your answer may have included: it is most accurate to say that SALT 1 moderated the Cold War as it introduced restrictions on the arms race and committed the superpowers to cooperate.

For example, the Basic Principles Agreement promised that the USA and USSR would do their utmost to settle differences by peaceful means.

Meanwhile, the ABM Treaty and Interim Treaty led to new arms limitations.

SLBMs and ICBMs were capped and each side agreed to develop no more than 100 ABMs. This represented a significant moderation of the expenses and competition previously seen as part of the arms race.

Although there were many strengths to SALT 1, it also had weaknesses, which meant that it did not end the Cold War.

For instance, only parts the arms race were moderated because strategic bombers and the latest nuclear technologies, such as MIRVs, were not covered.

Similarly, both superpowers retained substantial nuclear arsenals after SALT 1 was signed and there was scepticism that the new rules agreed to as part of the Basic Principles would be honoured in wartime.

Therefore, SALT 1 did moderate but did not end the Cold War.

So really well done if your own response looks something like that model, which we've just seen.

And so now we've reached the end of today's lesson, which puts us in a good position to summarise our learning about Detente and SALT 1.

We've seen that in 1972, Richard Nixon became the first US president to visit the USSR since the end of World War II.

SALT 1 was signed by the superpowers during Nixon's visit to the USSR.

SALT 1 moderated the arms race for the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty and Interim Treaty.

The Basic Principles Agreement committed the USA and USSR to cooperate with one another.

Some new technologies, such as MIRVs, were not covered by SALT 1.

And despite the signing of SALT 1, the Cold War still continued between the USA and USSR.

So thank you for all of the hard work which you've invested into today's lesson.

It's been a pleasure to help guide you for our resources and to think together about the transformation of the Cold War and to really evaluate how much of a difference did SALT 1 make to those tensions between the USA and the USSR.