Why did dtente end?

Dtente is known as a period of cooperation and relaxation, after

the cold war had been underway for two decades. It started in 1969
and ended in the late 1970s-1980. The end of dtente was followed
by disillusionment for its failure and by the rise of the New Right in
the US and the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan.
In this essay we will examine the causes that drove dtente to an
end while focusing on different (International Relations) theories.
Focus on Realism.
The basic argument for realists is that dtente ended because of it
changed balance of power and national interests were more
important than cooperation.
Classical realism: Thucydide once stated growth of Athenian power
and the fear caused in Sparta, this can be compared to the fear of
the Soviet union (both international and domestic), which changed
balance of power. The US reaction was the second Cold War
(Rejection of SALT II, cut of trade) which reflects the egoist, selfseeking human nature.
Structural realism: It has a similar approach to Classical realism,
with the difference that they focus on the international system
(change of balance of power) only and when explaining US reaction
they dont give importance to the human nature.
We found two different schools of thought within structural realism:
1.Defensive realism: It clearly explains dtente itself but it doesnt
give an explanation to the Soviets invasion of Afghanistan, as they
state that expansion leads to conflict and that states like to remain
in their position.
2.Offensive realism: It explains both, the Soviet invasion of
Afghanistan, as they defend the maximizing of power, and the US
reaction as they defend military force. As Mearsheimer once stated
every state would like to be the most formidable military power, as
it is the only guarantee of survival in this world that can be very
dangerous.
Neo-classical realism: The US felt humiliated after giving so many
concessions to the USSR (Vietnam, Iran), and the rise of the New
Right plus the election of Reagan(who was quite harsh on the USSR)
who made some structural changes, meant a new foreign policy,
which drove dtente to an end
Focus on Liberalism.

Dtente was an opportunity of cooperation and both the US and the

USSR decided to take that opportunity as they had mutual interests.
But in the end the desire for power was stronger than those
interests and therefore USSR invades Afghanistan and the US votes
for the New Right and rejects the SALT II as they realize USSR had
won a lot from dtente.
Liberal commercial theory, which defends that material interests are
important, fails because USSR would have never risked the end of
dtente for material gains.
The Liberal idea about how mutual interests equal cooperation fails
too, as both USSR and US had mutual interests in the end of the
arms race but id did not end in cooperation.
There is an ongoing debate in International Relations, which is the
one of Agency against Structure.
Personalists are the individuals who made an impact in the politics
of the moment, in this context being Reagan because of his
charisma and authority, which led to a change in US foreign policy,
and Brezhnev, whose health and weakness made it easier for
hardliners to take over.
Structuralists are the ones who say dtente ended because of what
was going on in the international structure.
In conclusion, both structure and agency are important; Reagan and
the New Right , and the structure of the international system had an
impact and shaped the end of dtente.
After examining different theories it is clear that Neo-classical realist
theory is the one who best combines both (structure and agency),
as liberalism is weak to explain the end of dtente and fails to
explain the shift to the second Cold War.