History As It Happens

In the midst of a constitutional crisis, Chileans are also at odds over the legacy of one of the darkest days in their past. Fifty years ago, in September 1973, a military coup, welcomed but not directly instigated by the CIA, toppled the democratically-elected, socialist president Salvadore Allende. Army Gen. Augusto Pinochet took power and ruled Chile with an iron fist for nearly 17 years. Pinochet's regime was notorious for murdering, torturing, and imprisoning thousands of its opponents, canceling elections, and destroying labor unions. Yet, according to polls, significant numbers of Chileans today believe the military coup was justified because of the economic chaos and Marxist drift brought on by Allende's management of the country. Today's conflict over drafting a new constitution (to replace the Pinochet-era constitution) is a reflection of Chile's complicated history of political strife between left and right. In this episode, historians James Lockhart and Kristian Gustafson dissect the CIA's role in opposing Allende's rule after 1970. President Nixon hoped U.S. operatives could somehow block Allende's inauguration by covertly working with his domestic opponents in the Chilean military, Congress, and media. These efforts failed, but the country was embroiled in such chaos by 1973 that the military may have needed no such U.S. encouragement to ultimately dispatch Allende's government.

Every major poll on public trust in institutions finds that Americans have little confidence in the government, news media, banks, big business, and more. Across the board, Americans do not expect their institutions to effectively perform in the public interest. Some of this distrust is warranted. The fabric of society has been torn by massive institutional failure and deceit. Some of the distrust is the result of cynical mis- and disinformation spread by politicians and demagogues, eroding trust even further. When did the "crisis of confidence" begin, and how might it abate? In this episode, The Washington Times culture report Sean Salai and Vanderbilt University historian Niki Hemmer discuss the reasons why Americans have lost faith in their leaders.

This is the first episode in an occasional series examining major counterfactual scenarios in history. As the 60th anniversary of his assassination approaches, a question still hangs over John F. Kennedy's legacy: had he lived and been reelected, would he have withdrawn from Vietnam? It's a tantalizing counterfactual, not only because LBJ's escalation led to an epic tragedy, but because of the relevant lessons we can apply to our foreign policy dilemmas today. In this episode, eminent Vietnam scholar Fredrik Logevall separates fact from myth concerning Kennedy's ideas and intentions for withdrawing U.S. military advisors from the Cold War theater of Southeast Asia. Note: The source of the Kennedy audio tapes is millercenter.org at the University of Virginia.

Ukraine's leadership remains committed to liberating all territory now under Russian military occupation. This includes parts of the eastern Donbas region whose villages have been depopulated and its infrastructure destroyed in nearly a decade of war, if we date the origins of the current conflict to the outbreak of the separatist revolt in 2014. Historically, the Donbas was home to pro-Russian and pro-Soviet political forces who resisted integration with the West. This is why the political scientist Alexander Motyl once argued Ukraine "should let the Donbas go." Today, however, with a full-scale war underway for 18 months, Motyl argues Ukraine simply cannot cede territory to Russia. Moscow aims to subjugate Kyiv, not merely occupy the eastern fringes on the country. Much of the Donbas may be rubble, but ceding it to Putin would not bring Kyiv a lasting peace, Motyl contends.

After four felony indictments, the first ever presidential mug shot, two impeachments, and the trashing of the peaceful transfer of power, Donald J. Trump has worn out the word unprecedented. Next spring, as he stands trial on criminal charges alleging he tried to steal the 2020 election, Trump may also cement his party's nomination for the presidency. And what if he's convicted? Unprecedented, indeed. But rather than focus solely on how none of this has ever happened before, in this episode historians Jeremi Suri and Jeffrey Engel discuss the origins of the grievances and resentments that drive Trumpism. Trump has become a symbol for those who resent federal authority and cultural liberalism, namely the white working class left behind by deindustrialization and unsettled by demographic change.

In the aftermath of Russia's brutal invasion of Ukraine, there has been an overdue reckoning with the fact that many historians, foreign policy analysts, politicians, and others underestimated Vladimir Putin and overstated Russia's decline. This was despite the fact that Russia's forever-president habitually broadcast his grievances about "the West." It is, therefore, critical to understand what drives Putin today and how he's holding his regime together. In this episode, Catholic University historian Michael Kimmage describes what he calls Russia's "mafia state" following the death of mercenary leader Yevgeny Prigozhin. It is now apparent that Putin's ruling clique has survived Prigozhin's aborted challenge from June, and remains determined to fight a long war in Ukraine in the face of high casualties and economic sanctions. Also discussed in this episode is the unexpected popularity of the war inside Russia after 18 months of combat, how Russia is globalizing its war efforts to survive Western sanctions, and what it would take to get the Kremlin to the negotiating table.

Ukraine's counteroffensive, launched three months ago amid increasing pressure to turn the tide of the war, has made meager gains on its eastern and southern fronts against tough Russian defenses of minefields and trenches. Russia's war of aggression is now a war of attrition, and it's unclear which side may crack first. The high casualty figures -- an estimated 500,000 dead and wounded since the war began 18 months ago -- and lack of offensive progress are drawing comparisons to the First World War, whose aggressors also believed it would be over quickly. In this episode, Anatol Lieven of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft discusses what it will take to bring the war to an end, and why we should all be concerned with the darker parallels to the Great War a century ago.

Anniversaries have a way of concentrating our minds on important events, but most Americans paid little attention to a certain date in history when it crossed their calendars this month. On August 19, 1953, the CIA toppled Iran's democratic prime minister Mohammad Mossadegh and installed the Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, an event whose consequences haunt U.S.-Iran relations to this day. For Iran, the detested Shah's rule, backed by billions in U.S. military aid, led to an Islamic Revolution in 1979. For the U.S., the 1953 coup was the first such operation pulled off by the new CIA, which under eight years of the Eisenhower administration perpetrated dozens of covert operations in 48 countries. Meddling in the internal affairs of other nations would become standard U.S. procedure during the Cold War following the "success" of 1953. In this episode, Eurasia Group oil historian Gregory Brew discusses the remarkable series of events that led to Mossadegh's demise and the enduring relevance of the coup in today's geopolitics. Note: Excerpts of the documentary COUP 53 are courtesy Amirani Media.

The massive gathering of Americans on the National Mall sixty years ago, on August 28, 1963, is best remembered by the final few minutes of Martin Luther King, Jr.'s soaring call for racial harmony, "I Have A Dream." But there was much more to the March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom. In this episode, historians Thomas Jackson and William P. Jones recover aspects of Black intellectual history and a radical economic agenda that are invisible in sanitized retrospectives on the revolution of '63. (Note: The source of the Kennedy audio tape on civil rights is the Miller Center at the University of Virginia, excerpted by Thomas Jackson).

This is the final episode in a three-part series about "Oppenheimer" and the historical debates raised by the blockbuster film. By the time he left office in early 1961, President Dwight Eisenhower had overseen the expansion of the nation's nuclear arsenal to 20,000 weapons. The United States had dramatically outpaced the USSR in the opening years of the arms race. The Soviet Union had roughly 2,000 bombs after the first full decade of the Cold War. The "missile gap" notwithstanding, both superpowers had more than enough nuclear firepower to destroy the world many times over, and this was the actual point of the policy of "mutually-assured destruction." Robert Oppenheimer and like-minded scientists had hoped to avoid this outcome by trying to influence national defense policy after the Second World War. Christopher Nolan's blockbuster film "Oppenheimer" shines a light on the physicist's opposition to the H-bomb program and his support for international arms control and openness, rather than secrecy, in national security policy. In this episode, historian Gregg Herken, author of "Brotherhood of the Bomb," discusses whether the U.S. missed a chance to avoid an arms race and decades of Cold War by ignoring Oppenheimer's advice in the late-1940s and early 1950s.