Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-tn8tq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-14T06:03:34.236Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Countercombatant Strategy: A New Balance of Terror?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 September 2018

Get access

Extract

Military planners, security-minded intellectuals and Secretary of Defense James Schlesinger himself have been reexamining current nuclear strategy in light of the Strategic Arms Limitation Talks. As always, caution and skepticism are advisable in appraising new proposals for military strategy and even for arms control, since such proposals often encourage the arms race to continue unabated in new, more volatile areas.

Because of Schlesinger's public / announced intention to modify American nuclear policy, one strategic proposal receiving attention is Bruce Russett's suggestion, published two years ago in Worldview (“Short of Nuclear Madness,” April, 1972), and in his contribution to The Military-Industrial Complex: A Reassessment, edited by Sam C. Sarkesian and Charles Moskos, that the United States should replace a countercity nuclear strategy with a counter-combatant strategy.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Carnegie Council for Ethics in International Affairs 1974

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Note

page 50 note• Examples of this problem are as diverse as, for example, Russian refusal to surrender to Napoleon and North Vietnam's refusal to surrender to the United States in recent years.