For him the Cold War was primarily a means of managing the domestic populations and spheres of influence of the two superpowers: "I think the Cold War has been misinterpreted by the left and right from the beginning. If you look at the actual events of the Cold War, you find, in my view, a kind of tacit compact between the Soviet Union and the United States to allow them to share in world management. The official line is not totally false ... but a large part of the Cold War was a mechanism by which the United States could fight a war against the Third World and control its allies in Europe and the Soviet Union could maintain its own internal empire and its satellites, each appealing to the threat of the other." (_Chronicles of Dissent_, p. 209)
A different version of the same idea: "I think what the Soviet Union has wanted is essentially to be able to run their own dungeon without internal interference and to compete for influence in the Third World at targets of opportunity. The American version for world order has been much more expansive. And I think that essentially reflects the relative power of the two states, in particular immediately after the Second World War." (interview with Fred Halliday, _Voices: Writers and Politics_, p. 66)
I think this pox-on-both-superpowers-for-their-imperialism attitude is a direct result of Chomsky's anarchism, which finds most concentration of power illegitimate. He spends his time on the US because as an American he feels more responsibility for US actions and more in a position to do something about it, the illegitimacy of the Soviet Union's form of power is easier to see, the US directly contributed greater violence in the Third World than did the Soviets, and the US was the more powerful superpower. I think Chomsky's lack of attention to the Soviet Union means that the historical implications of the last argument are not adequately laid out (and the last argument also has implications for the one before it).
Even if he included the Soviets, though, I think Chomsky would build the same themes in his Cold War writings: consolidation and wielding of toxic super power, the use of this power to wreak havoc in Third World nations that get out of line, ideological management at home, and the suppression of possibilities other than a "Bolshevik dungeon" and the "authoritarian structures" of "corporate state capitalism." (_What Uncle Sam Really Wants_, p. 92) (For more on Chomsky's views on the betrayal of socialism from the beginning of the formation of the Soviet state, see his "The Soviet Union versus Socialism," _Our Generation_, spring/summer '86.) The Cold War becomes part of a long story of pillage and control of the weak by the powerful.
Do the bulk of Chomsky's writings on the Cold War emphasize one side of the story? Should he write a fuller account? But is his take a reasonable view of the world? Yes, yes, and yes, in my opinion.
Uday