DOCSLIB.ORG

On Building Peace

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
On Building Peace Symposium THEBUILDINGON RETREAT OFPEACEBUILDING THE DEMO CRATICPEACE MODEL INFarewell AND Symposium ECONOMICLectorate International Peace, Justice and Security of Prof. dr. Joris Voorhoeve CHANGEAMONG15 March 2018 AS CONDITIONSTATESThe Hague University of Applied Sciences FOR PEACE W1802 0641 A5 boekje Symposium 02-18.indd 1 08-03-18 13:10 2 | Symposium On Building Peace W1802 0641 A5 boekje Symposium 02-18.indd 2 08-03-18 13:10 List of contents Building Peace In and Among States 4 Joris Voorhoeve The Retreat of the Democratic Model: 8 Implications for the Democratic Peace Mihaela Anghel Economic Change as Condition for Peace 14 Reitse Keizer 3 The Hague University of Applied Sciences 2018 | W1802 0641 A5 boekje Symposium 02-18.indd 3 08-03-18 13:10 JORIS VOORHOEVE Joris Voorhoeve (1945) is Fellow of THUAS and Emeritus Professor of International Organizations at Leiden University. He was minister of Defence and of Netherlands-Antillean and Aruban Affairs, Member of the Council of State and floor leader of the Liberal Party. He taught International Relations at the universities of Wageningen and Antwerp and the Netherlands Defence College. He chaired Oxfam Novib, Oxfam International and was Vice-Chair of the Global Partnership for the Prevention or Armed Conflict. Contact: [email protected] 4 | Symposium On Building Peace W1802 0641 A5 boekje Symposium 02-18.indd 4 08-03-18 13:10 Building Peace In and Among States Joris Voorhoeve March 2018 The Chinese general Sun Tzu wrote about avoids becoming suppressive, peace can 2500 years ago in The Art of War that a be maintained, and all participating political smart general does not fight but takes entities can contribute to maintaining security political and military positions in such when dealing with external threats. Since 1945, a way that his challengers refrain from this is the Pax Americana which Europe enjoys violent resistance. That is still good advice and which we took for granted untill recently. for national and international politics. But the hegemonic US is losing authority, wisdom and preponderance, at least in the What I want to briefly analyze is how the short run, and perhaps longer. What can we peaceful order which we enjoy in do to make it last? The Netherlands and most of Europe can be preserved, both within and among states. The second theoretical approach is balance Preventing violent aggression is the crucial of power. Inside a state this requires strong task of all governments. The art of war is to constitutional provisions and an equilibrium prevent war, while avoiding capitulation and among various domestic institutions. But oppression. balance of power does not work well at the international level, among states, as side We live in a world which is full of war and the A may interpret an increase in defenses threat of it. History shows a seeming endless of B as preparation for aggression. In an repetition of wars, interrupted by periods of international balance of power system there peace. In Western Europe, we enjoy peace is no enforcement of international public law since 1945, that is 72 years, as long as I live. by a strong world authority. Balance of power This is an unusually long peace. The task of systems may break down, as we learn from statecraft is to make peace last as long as the First World War, and they give rise to an possible, while preserving liberty and a high arms race, as we learn from the Cold War. So degree of justice and wellbeing. this is no safe solution to maintaining peace. Political science offers several theories on The third approach is collective security, as preserving peace. The classics wrote that a was tried after the First and the Second World stable rule-of-law state needs a monopoly War. This system requires that all political on coercive power to enforce peace and entities share in maintaining peace and the rule of law. This solution to civil war can enforcing law, led by a world sheriff, embodied be compared at the international level to an in the Council of the League of Nations or empire or an alliance led by a hegemon. The the UN Security Council. This is comparable hegemon needs large resources and a strong to the Wild West in the US in the 19th century: will to maintain the regional system around the government is far away, but all ranchers him. If the hegemon guides the member with guns should go after the bank robber if states in a strong and just fashion, allowing the sheriff calls on them. This seldom works the participating units much autonomy and internationally, which explains the failure of 5 The Hague University of Applied Sciences 2018 | W1802 0641 A5 boekje Symposium 02-18.indd 5 08-03-18 13:10 the League and the UN in the 20th century. from a deficit in leadership and government The sheriff and his posse also did not income. Most European allies run a deficit guarantee law and justice in the Wild West, in their defense contributions to common as many ranchers and militia participated security. Some Eastern members and Turkey in genocide of native Indians. One cannot suffer from a deficit in democratic rule of count of the UN to guarantee rule of law, even law. Still, the Pax Americana is on average though it can be of help in smaller states when the best place to live, in terms of freedom, the veto-holding states do not block action. well-being and security. This also applies to some countries outside the North Atlantic The fourth approach to maintaining peace area, like Japan, South Korea, Australia and is very different: functional cooperation New Zealand. They are somewhat related to among political entities to serve common the Pax Americana. needs, weave a web of economic and technical organizations over all, in order that An indicator that the Pax Americana offers self-interest in maintaining peace becomes a good future is the road taken by most so strong that nobody wants to tear the refugees. People vote with their feet. It fabric apart by war. This approach became needs little academic proof that the Pax famous after the Second World War and Americana is worth preserving, but badly in led to countless organizations, both on a need of improvement. global scale and regionally in the form of the European Union. It has worked well in Western Preservation takes quite an effort, as the Europe, but many East European leaders system is in decay. I need not repeat the and nationalist parties in Western Europe prime weaknesses of the hegemon: its resist nowadays. If one wants to compare present leader and huge deficit. Increasing this functionalist approach in international inequality of income and property among affairs to national peacebuilding, it may its citizens worsen this, as happens also be somewhat comparable to the Social in many European countries. Tax aversion, Contract which makes a state work for consumerism, demoralization of democratic the well-being of its population, but only if citizenship, short term electoral gains, group there is a strong consensus. conflicts and authoritarianism are some of the many factors sapping the cohesion of During the 72 years since 1945, the peoples the system. The very success of decades living in the North Atlantic region have of social- , Christian-democratic and liberal successfully combined three of these four statecraft in the region attracts large migration approaches: hegemonic alliance, balance from failing states and wars outside it, which of power against the former Soviet Union, is a threat to social cohesion. The return of and functional cooperation. The overarching Russia to an arms race since 1999, stirring North Atlantic Security Community which regional wars around it, and the rapid rise arose consists of North America and most of China as a very productive non-liberal of Europe, excepting Russia and most of empire based on state capitalism, are serious Southeastern Europe. challenges. If present trends continue, the But the North Atlantic system, which grew in North Atlantic Security Community will weaken size, is weakening. Its leader, the US, suffers further and lose leadership to China. 6 | Symposium On Building Peace W1802 0641 A5 boekje Symposium 02-18.indd 6 08-03-18 13:10 Several therapies are being advocated. New Will the world see new big power wars, due populist nationalism will worsen the decay, as it to an increasing number of states with highly would break down the system from the inside. destructive new weapons, cyber and hybrid Encouragement of rapid economic growth and war, arms in outer space, nuclear arms and unrestrained economic globalization to satisfy automated weapons? These might sooner or consumers and producers will undermine the later cause a disaster by intent or accident. natural environment and increase economic inequality. Reducing development cooperation Surely, the competition among the giants will increase massive unemployment outside in the multipolar system like China, the the region and increase migratory pressures. North Atlantic region, India and Russia Tampering with representative democracy may will continue, and may get more intense in lead to slower formation of effective policies the quest for resources and political and and cater to the less-educated, ethnocratic economic power. But there is no law of and religious groupings. It seems to me these nature that forces them to make war, other are the answers that are likely to fail. than serious misperceptions and serious policy mistakes. In this situation I know of no There is some hope that the present lack of better policy than to continue improving the American leadership will encourage the EU to Pax Americana system, and the European become a stronger world player.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Understanding Fragmentation in Conflict and Its Impact on Prospects for Peace
    oslo FORUM papers N°006 - December 2016 Understanding fragmentation in conflict and its impact on prospects for peace Kathleen Gallagher Cunningham www.hd centre.org – www.osloforum.org Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue 114, Rue de Lausanne 1202 Geneva | Switzerland t : +41 22 908 11 30 f : +41 22 908 11 40 [email protected] www.hdcentre.org Oslo Forum www.osloforum.org The Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue (HD) is a private diplo- macy organisation founded on the principles of humanity, impartiality and independence. Its mission is to help pre- vent, mitigate, and resolve armed conflict through dialogue and mediation. © 2016 – Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue Reproduction of all or part of this publication may be author- ised only with written consent and acknowledgment of the source. Kathleen Gallagher Cunningham Associate Professor at the Department of Government and Politics, University of Maryland [email protected] http://www.kathleengallaghercunningham.com Table of contents INTRODUCTION 2 1. WHAT IS FRAGMENTATION? 3 Fragmented actors 3 Multiple actors 3 Identifying fragmentation 4 New trends 4 The causes of fragmentation 5 2. THE CONSEQUENCES OF FRAGMENTATION FOR CONFLICT 7 Violence 7 Accommodation and war termination 7 Side switching 8 3. HOW PEACE PROCESSES AFFECT FRAGMENTATION 9 Coalescing 9 Intentional fragmentation 9 Unintentional fragmentation 9 Mediation 10 4. RESPONSES OF MEDIATORS AND OTHER THIRD-PARTY ACTORS TO FRAGMENTATION 11 Negotiations including all armed groups 11 Sequential negotiations 11 Inclusion of unarmed actors and national dialogue 12 Efforts to coalesce the opposition 13 5. AFTER SETTLEMENT 14 CONCLUSION 15 ENDNOTES 16 2 The Oslo Forum Papers | Understanding fragmentation in conflict Introduction Complicated conflicts with many disparate actors have cators of fragmentation, new trends, and a summation of why become increasingly common in the international system.
    [Show full text]
  • Preserving the Long Peace in Asia the Institutional Building Blocks of Long-Term Regional Security
    REPORT Preserving the Long Peace in Asia The Institutional Building Blocks of Long-Term Regional Security Independent Commission on Regional Security Architecture Preserving the Long Peace in Asia The Institutional Building Blocks of Long-Term Regional Security SEPTEMBER 2017 A REPORT OF THE ASIA SOCIETY POLICY INSTITUTE INDEPENDENT COMMISSION ON REGIONAL SECURITY ARCHITECTURE With a solution-oriented mandate, the Asia Society Policy Institute tackles major policy challenges confronting the Asia-Pacific in security, prosperity, sustainability, and the development of common norms and values for the region. The Asia Society Policy Institute is a think- and do-tank designed to bring forth policy ideas that incorporate the best thinking from top experts in Asia and to work with policy makers to integrate these ideas and put them into practice. ABOUT THE INDEPENDENT COMMISSION ON REGIONAL SECURITY ARCHITECTURE This report represents a consensus view of the Asia Society Policy Institute’s Independent Commission on Regional Security Architecture. By serving as signatories to the report, Commissioners have signaled their endorsement of the major findings and recommendations in the document. Commissioners were not, however, expected to concur with every statement in the report. Members of the Commission participated in this study in their personal capacity, and their endorsement does not reflect any official position of the organizations with which they are affiliated. Commission members are: CHAIR Kevin Rudd, President of the Asia Society Policy
    [Show full text]
  • Colloquy Issue 1
    peace colloquy The Joan B. Kroc Institute for International Peace Studies University of Notre Dame Issue No. 1, Spring 2002 Peacekeeping: Defining Success A NTHONY L AKE The Fundamentalist Factor S COTT A PPLEBY Economic Causes of Civil Wars P AUL C OLLIER peace colloquy 2 From the Editor s anyone who has visited the Kroc Institute can attest, the place is abuzz with discussions of peace. This dialogue emerges in part from the diverse array of people who cross paths at the Kroc Institute. At the heart of the conversation are scholars in a variety of fields, both at Notre Dame and other institutions. Through analyses of cultural, political, religious, and ethical Adimensions of current international conflicts, they provoke new insights into the meaning and prospects for peace. Peacebuilding practitioners working on the ground around the world, including many of our students and alumni, bring another set of questions to the discussion. These voices challenge us to think concretely about how peace can be fostered through conflict resolution, human rights, human development, refugee assistance, and other peacebuilding programs. The Institute also has contacts with international policymakers at the UN, State Department, World Bank, and other institutions, who direct our attention to the need for more equitable and effective global strategies for peace. By bringing together these and many other voices, the Kroc Institute has become the focal point for an engag- ing colloquy — or “serious discussion” — on peace. As its name suggests, each issue of peace colloquy seeks to highlight important contributions to this ongoing dialogue through feature articles by faculty, visiting lecturers, and alumni.
    [Show full text]
  • Globalization and the Diffusion of Military Capabilities
    GLOBALIZATION AND THE DIFFUSION OF MILITARY CAPABILITIES by Eddie Stokes A thesis submitted in fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Political Science Boise State University December 2019 © 2019 Eddie Stokes ALL RIGHTS RESERVED BOISE STATE UNIVERSITY GRADUATE COLLEGE DEFENSE COMMITTEE AND FINAL READING APPROVALS of the thesis submitted by Eddie Stokes Thesis Title: Globalization and the Diffusion of Military Capabilities Date of Final Oral Examination: 07 October 2019 The following individuals read and discussed the thesis submitted by student Eddie Stokes, and they evaluated their presentation and response to questions during the final oral examination. They found that the student passed the final oral examination. Michael A. Allen, Ph.D. Chair, Supervisory Committee Ross Burkhart, Ph.D. Member, Supervisory Committee Stephen Utych, Ph.D. Member, Supervisory Committee The final reading approval of the thesis was granted by Michael A. Allen, Ph.D., Chair of the Supervisory Committee. The thesis was approved by the Graduate College. DEDICATION To my parents Ed and Tracey Stokes, none of this would have been possible if not for your endless emotional, intellectual, and financial support. iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS First, I would like to thank my parents, Ed and Tracey Stokes, for their immense support over the course of this long process. I would next like to thank Dr. Michael A. Allen for his patience in helping me navigate the intricacies associated with writing this thesis. My sincere thanks also go to Dr. Stephen Utych and Dr. Ross Burkhart, who were so kind as to always find time in their busy schedules to meet with me and help me work through rigorous theoretical and analytical problems.
    [Show full text]
  • Charles S. Maier Harvard University an American Empire?
    Charles S. Maier Harvard University (AmericanEmpireRev.doc; rev.3/07, 4/08,4/17,4/29,10/22) An American Empire? Implications for Democracy, Order and Disorder in World Politics* 1. Dialectics of Empire Is it now America’s turn at that international preeminence we call empire? If empires can be “evil,” can they also be benevolent? Can they be run on democratic principles? What relationship to global violence or “disorder” does the state structure known as “empire” have? Can states that strive for peace generate conflict and hatred? Recall the most famous literary apologia for empire: Virgil’s prophecy of the Pax Romana: Roman, remember by your strength to rule Earth’s peoples – for your arts are to be there To pacify, to impose the rule of law, To spare the conquered, battle down the proud.1 But contrast J. M. Coetzee’s melancholy allegory of a minor official confronting the encroaching tribes at a remote imperial outpost: Empire has created the time of history. Empire has located its existence not in the smooth recurrent spinning time of the cycle of the seasons but in the jagged time of rise and fall, of beginning, and end, of catastrophe. Empire dooms itself to live in history and plot against history. One thought alone preoccupies the submerged mind of Empire: how not to die, how to prolong its era. By day it pursues its enemies. It is cunning and ruthless, it send its bloodhounds everywhere. By night it feeds on images of disaster: the sack of cities, the rape of populations, pyramids of bones, acres of desolation.
    [Show full text]
  • Peacekeeping and the Peacekept Questions, Definitions, and Research Design
    One PEACEKEEPING AND THE PEACEKEPT QUESTIONS, DEFINITIONS, AND RESEARCH DESIGN The Questions IN COUNTRIES WRACKED BY CIVIL WAR, the international com­ munity is frequently called upon to deploy monitors and troops to try to keep the peace. The United Nations, regional organizations, and some­ times ad hoc groups of states have sent peacekeepers to high-profile trou­ ble-spots such as Rwanda and Bosnia and to lesser-known conflicts in places like the Central African Republic, Namibia, and Papua New Guinea. How effective are these international interventions? Does peacekeeping work? Does it actually keep the peace in the aftermath of civil war? And if so, how? How do peacekeepers change things on the ground, from the perspective of the “peacekept,” such that war is less likely to resume? These are the questions that motivate this book. As a tool for maintaining peace, international peacekeeping was only rarely used in internal conflicts during the Cold War, but the number, size, and scope of missions deployed in the aftermath of civil wars has exploded since 1989. Early optimism about the potential of the UN and regional organizations to help settle internal conflicts after the fall of the Berlin Wall was soon tempered by the initial failure of the mission in Bosnia and the scapegoating of the UN mission in Somalia.1 The United States in particular became disillusioned with peacekeeping, objecting to anything more than a minimal international response in war-torn countries (most notoriously in Rwanda). Even in Afghanistan and Iraq, where vital interests are now at stake, the United States has been reluctant to countenance wide­ spread multilateral peacekeeping missions.
    [Show full text]
  • Profound Forces: the Pandemic As Catalyst
    the new normal in Asia A series exploring ways in which the Covid-19 pandemic might shape or reorder the world across multiple dimensions Profound Forces: The Pandemic as Catalyst Kenneth B. Pyle May 21, 2020 The eminent British historian A.J.P. Taylor often referred to the way in which “profound forces” influence the course of human history. By this, he meant that history in certain times has been changed by forces seemingly beyond the ability of humans to control. He wrote about the political and social trends that roiled Europe and led to both world wars. The profound forces seem “so overwhelming as to carry all that is before them.” If ever that was true, it is so today. We are in the thrall of driving forces. The Covid-19 pandemic is the most recent. In my view, it has acted as a kind of catalyst speeding up and intensifying the other motive forces that predated it. By distracting and further dividing nations, the pandemic has made cooperation more difficult. The cumulative effect is to create an epochal time of crisis and looming danger. The pandemic itself has a solution. A vaccine may cure it, although not the human and economic consequences. The other forces do not yet have a solution. They require collective action. Their locus is primarily in Asia, now the center of gravity in world power. Kenneth B. Pyle is the Henry M. Jackson Professor Emeritus at the University of Washington and founding president of the National Bureau of Asian Research. 1 The New Normal in Asia Together these profound forces make existential Third, there is the nuclear revolution.
    [Show full text]
  • Nuclear Perils in a New Era Bringing Perspective to the Nuclear Choices Facing Russia and the United States
    Nuclear Perils in a New Era Bringing Perspective to the Nuclear Choices Facing Russia and the United States Steven E. Miller and Alexey Arbatov Nuclear Perils in a New Era Bringing Perspective to the Nuclear Choices Facing Russia and the United States Steven E. Miller and Alexey Arbatov © 2021 by the American Academy of Arts & Sciences. All rights reserved. ISBN: 0-87724-139-2. This publication is available online at www.amacad.org/project/dialogue-arms-control -disarmament. Suggested citation: Steven E. Miller and Alexey Arbatov, Nuclear Perils in a New Era: Bringing Perspective to the Nuclear Choices Facing Russia and the United States (Cambridge, Mass.: American Academy of Arts and Sciences, 2021). Cover image: Helsinki, Finland, July 16, 2018: The national flags of Russia and the United States seen ahead of a meeting of Russia’s President Vladimir Putin and U.S. President Donald Trump. Photo by Valery Sharifulin/TASS/Getty Images. This publication is part of the American Academy’s project on Promoting Dialogue on Arms Control and Disarmament. The statements made and views expressed in this publication are those held by the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the Officers and Members of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. Please direct inquiries to: American Academy of Arts & Sciences 136 Irving Street Cambridge, MA 02138 Telephone: 617-576-5000 Fax: 617-576-5050 Email: [email protected] Web: www.amacad.org Contents Introduction 1 The Rise and Decline of Global Nuclear Order? 3 Steven E. Miller Unmanaged Competition,
    [Show full text]
  • Deterrence in the Twenty-First Century Proceedings
    Deterrence in the Twenty-first Century Proceedings London, UK 18–19 May 2009 September 2010 Muir S. Fairchild Research Information Center Cataloging Data Deterrence in the twenty-first century: proceedings / [edited by Anthony C. Cain.] p. ; cm. Includes bibliographical references. ISBN 978-1-58566-202-9 1. Deterrence (Strategy)—Congresses. 2. Security, International—Forecasting— Congresses. 3. National security—United States—Planning—Congresses. 4. Arms control—Planning—Congresses. 5. Weapons of mass destruction—Prevention— Congresses. I. Title. II. Cain, Anthony C. 355.02/17––dc22 Disclaimer The analysis, opinions, and conclusions either expressed or implied within are solely those of the au- thor and do not necessarily represent the views of the Air Force Research Institute, Air University, the United States Air Force, the Department of Defense, or any other US government agency. Nor do they necessarily represent the views of the Joint Services Command and Staff College, the United Kingdom Defence Academy, the United Kingdom Ministry of Defence, or any other British government agency. Cleared for public release: distribution unlimited. ii Contents Chapter Page DISCLAIMER . ii PREFACE . vii 1 Framing Deterrence in the Twenty-first Century: Conference Summary . 1 Adam Lowther 2 Defining “Deterrence” . 15 Michael Codner 3 Understanding Deterrence . 27 Adam Lowther 4 Policy and Purpose . 41 Gen Norton A Schwartz, USAF Lt Col Timothy R. Kirk, USAF 5 Waging Deterrence in the Twenty-first Century . 63 Gen Kevin Chilton, USAF Greg Weaver 6 On Nuclear Deterrence and Assurance . 77 Keith B. Payne 7 Conference Agenda . 121 8 Contemporary Challenges for Extended Deterrence . 123 Tom Scheber 9 Case Study—The August 2008 War between Russia and Georgia .
    [Show full text]
  • Hiroshima, 1945. the Devastation That a Great Power War Would Create In
    M04_BOVA2407_00_SE_C04 1/7/11 5:01 PM Page 98 Hiroshima, 1945. The devastation that a great power war would create in the nuclear era raises the question of whether war, especially that between the great powers, can continue to be viewed as the “continuation of policy.” M04_BOVA2407_00_SE_C04 1/7/11 5:01 PM Page 99 CHAPTER 4 War and Violence in World Politics The Realist’s World Unlike breathing, eating, or sex, war is not something that is somehow required by the human condition or the forces of history. Conflicts of interest are inevitable and continue to exist within the developed world. But the notion that war should be used to resolve them has increasingly been discredited and abandoned.1 —John Mueller, 1989 The optimists’ claim that security competition and war among the great powers have been burned out of the system is wrong. In fact, all of the major states around the globe still care deeply about the balance of power and are destined to compete for power among themselves for the foreseeable future. In short, the real world remains a realist world.2 —John Mearsheimer, 2001 hroughout human history, war and the threat of war have been a constant part of international life and central to understanding how the world works. Though Tall of the international relations paradigms provide explanations for the existence and frequency of war, the structural realist view that war is rooted in international anarchy provides least cause to expect that war can ever be substantially eliminated. In a world with no effective and reliable higher authority to impose order, realists insist that states will from time to time need to protect their vital interests through the use of force and violence.
    [Show full text]
  • Three Narratives of Civil War: Recurrence, Remembrance … 3
    Layout: A5 HuSSci Book ID: 427254_1_En Book ISBN: 978-3-319-61179-2 Chapter No.: 1 Date: 12 August 2017 10:20 Page: 1/18 1 2 Three Narratives of Civil War: 3 Recurrence, Remembrance and Reform 4 from Sulla to Syria 5 David Armitage 6 For most of their history, from the ancient world until the nineteenth 7 century, civil wars were a subject primarily for orators, poets, historians 8 and novelists. They have been of pressing concern to lawyers for barely a 9 hundred and ffty years, for social scientists only since the 1960s and for 10 literary scholars mostly during the twenty-frst century. Civil wars have 11 accordingly been absent from social theory and from interdisciplinary 12 study more generally: there is as yet no great treatise on civil war to sit 13 alongside Clausewitz’s On War or Arendt’s On Revolution, for example.1 14 Civil War and Narrative is therefore especially welcome for joining felds 15 that have been put asunder and for bringing practitioners and scholars 16 together to examine the centrality of narratives to the experience of civil This essay has benefted from the comments of audiences in London, Berlin, New Haven and Athens. Translations are my own, unless otherwise specifed. A1 D. Armitage (*) A2 Department of History, Harvard University, Robinson Hall, A3 35 Quincy St, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA A4 e-mail: [email protected] PROOF © The Author(s) 2018 1 K. Deslandes et al. (eds.), Civil War and Narrative, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-61179-2_1 Layout: A5 HuSSci Book ID: 427254_1_En Book ISBN: 978-3-319-61179-2 Chapter No.: 1 Date: 12 August 2017 10:20 Page: 2/18 2 D.
    [Show full text]
  • BOOK REVIEW ROUNDTABLE: the Revolution That Failed
    BOOK REVIEW ROUNDTABLE: The Revolution that Failed June 14, 2021 Table of Contents 1. “Introduction: The Gap Between Theory and Practice,” Thomas G. Mahnken 2. “Who and What Made the Revolution that Failed?” Jayita Sarkar 3. “Nuclear Revelations About the Nuclear Revolution,” Scott D. Sagan 4. “Revolutionary Thinking: Questioning the Conventional Wisdom on Nuclear Deterrence,” Jasen J. Castillo 5. “Author Response: The Meaning of the Nuclear Counterrevolution,” Brendan Rittenhouse Green 2 Texas National Security Review 1. Introduction: The Gap Between Theory and Practice Thomas G. Mahnken Brendan Rittenhouse Green’s The Revolution that Failed: Nuclear Competition, Arms Control, and the Cold War makes an important contribution to our understanding of the history of the nuclear competition that took place between the United States and the Soviet Union during the Cold War.1 The book calls into question the extent to which Cold War-era theories, many of which argued that the existence of a mutually assured destruction (MAD) would stabilize the Soviet- American nuclear relationship, actually influenced American policymakers in practice. Indeed, Green documents in rich detail the disconnect between the theory of MAD and the way that U.S. policymakers actually behaved between 1969 and 1979. As Green shows, American policymakers did not share theorists’ belief that the advent of nuclear weapons had transformed international relations. Nor were they convinced that the United States and Soviet Union had, by the 1970s, reached a condition of nuclear stalemate, a claim that lay at the heart of the notion of MAD. It turns out that it was far from obvious to policymakers confronted with the task of deterring the Soviet Union that nuclear deterrence was robust.2 To the contrary, most U.S.
    [Show full text]