Deterrence Theory Revisited

1979 ◽  
Vol 31 (2) ◽  
pp. 289-324 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Jervis

Because of its parsimony and power, deterrence theory is the most important American theory of international relations. Yet it has many faults. The boundaries outside of which it does not apply are not clear; it does not tell how a state can change an adversary's motives; it does not deal with the use of rewards. Current scholarship of the third wave of deterrence theory, including George and Smoke'sDeterrence in American Foreign Policy, has increased our knowledge by providing empirical evidence on when and how deterrence fails. Examination of the details of decision making reveals the ways in which attempts to deter can go wrong. Recent work stresses the role of each side's intrinsic interest in an issue, and argues that earlier formulations of the theory exaggerated the importance of commitment. The third wave also introduces a larger political element by focusing attention on states' goals and the context of their behavior.

2001 ◽  
Vol 55 (3) ◽  
pp. 621-654 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard K. Herrmann ◽  
Vaughn P. Shannon

States defend norms in some cases but not in others. Understanding this variation sheds light on both U.S. foreign policy and the role of normative reasoning. We report the results of four experiments embedded in a survey of U.S. elites. The experiments identified the effects of felt normative obligation (that is, the logic of what is appropriate) and concern for U.S. economic and security interests (that is, the logic of utilitarian consequence) as well as the role played by individual perceptions. We find that perceptions of another actor's motivation, of conflicts as civil or cross-border wars, and of the democratic nature of victims affect decisions to defend a prescriptive norm. This finding means that theories of international relations that feature norms as structural concepts need to consider actor-level cognition when examining the operation of norms. Moreover, we find that when U.S. economic and security interests are at stake there is a much greater inclination to defend norms than when simply normative obligation is present. Most U.S. elites appear to treat the presence or absence of U.S. material interests as a legitimate criterion for deciding whether or not to defend an international prescriptive norm.


2020 ◽  
Vol 37 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Lesley Masters

This analysis considers the emergence of South Africa's parliamentary diplomacy, or the role of Parliament on the international stage, since 1994. The early discourse both within Parliament and in academic analysis, reflects an emphasis on the role of oversight and the role of Parliament in the foreign policy decision-making process. Recognition of the role of parliamentary diplomacy has been slow to develop, although Parliament is increasingly acknowledging its role as an international actor. This has seen the development of structures and policy to support this. The value of parliamentary diplomacy as part of a country's international relations, however, remains an area in need of further deliberation. This analysis begins by unpacking the concept of parliamentary diplomacy before addressing the emerging role and value of parliamentary diplomacy for South Africa, particularly through the linkages between parliamentary diplomacy and soft power in promoting foreign policy.


Slavic Review ◽  
1999 ◽  
Vol 58 (4) ◽  
pp. 854-882 ◽  
Author(s):  
Philip G. Roeder

As communism was collapsing, both the discipline of political science and American foreign policy were becoming captivated by two concepts—the third wave of democratization and the democratic peace. The third wave of democratization is the "worldwide movement to democracy" that occurred in more than thirty countries during the decade and a half that began with the Portuguese coup of 1974. The democratic peace is the special peace that develops among liberal states "because they exercise democratic caution and are capable of appreciating the international rights of foreign republics."


Slavic Review ◽  
1999 ◽  
Vol 58 (4) ◽  
pp. 883-884
Author(s):  
Peter H. Solomon

As communism was collapsing, both the discipline of political science and American foreign policy were becoming captivated by two concepts—the third wave of democratization and the democratic peace. The third wave of democratization is the "worldwide movement to democracy" that occurred in more than thirty countries during the decade and a half that began with the Portuguese coup of 1974. The democratic peace is the special peace that develops among liberal states "because they exercise democratic caution and are capable of appreciating the international rights of foreign republics."


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document