Third-World Conflict in Soviet Military Thought: Does the “New Thinking” Grow Prematurely Grey?

1989 ◽  
Vol 42 (1) ◽  
pp. 31-63 ◽  
Author(s):  
Celeste A. Wallander

“New thinking” in Soviet foreign policy may change Soviet understanding of the nature of conflict in the third world, Soviet interests in those conflicts, and therefore Soviet conflict behavior. While these shifts are widespread and significant, they are being resisted by military analysts, which indicates that Soviet policy may not be so easily or directly altered. Many military writers accept that escalation risks are extreme and threaten Soviet security, and others discuss local, nonclass, and intractable features of third-world conflicts. However, military analysts do not accept revisionist, class-transcendent definitions of Soviet internationalist duty. It is on this point that new thinking is most likely to founder in Gorbachev's attempts to change Soviet third-world policy and behavior. With the changes in Soviet domestic politics, military participation in security and foreign policy debates may be effective in restraining the more radical innovations implied in civilian analyses.

1987 ◽  
Vol 41 (4) ◽  
pp. 667-704 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bruce W. Jentleson

Amidst their other differences, the defeats suffered by the United States in Vietnam, Iran, and Lebanon have a common explanation. In all three cases American strategy was based on “global commitments theory.” Interests were to be defended and global credibility strengthened by the making, maintaining, reinforcing, and sustaining of American commitments to Third World allies. However, the core assumptions on which the logic of global commitments theory rests are plagued with inherent fallacies. These fallacies can be identified analytically as patterns of dysfunction along four dimensions of foreign policy: decision-making, diplomacy, military strategy, and domestic politics. They also can be shown empirically to have recurred across the Vietnam, Iran, and Lebanon cases. The central theoretical conclusion questions the fundamental validity of global commitments theory as it applies to the exercise of power and influence in the Third World. Important prescriptive implications for future American foreign policy are also discussed.


1983 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 245-267 ◽  
Author(s):  
Clemens Stubbe Østergaard

Change in China's policy towards the USA, the USSR and the Third World is analysed in terms of its immediate causes, and by means of a framework categorizing types of sources, processes of change and reappraisals, as well as stabilizers affecting all of these. It is shown that there has been a descriptive reappraisal since Afghanistan, based on perceived changes in conditions of policy towards important power groupings, changes that imply global multipolarity. Domestic politics, in particular the drive towards economic modernization and its ideological ramifications, has resulted in a normative reappraisal of policy. It is found that purges and professionalization have affected composition of the foreign policy-making system, while conflicts between representatives of technocratic and bureaucratic constituencies have affected the balance of power within the system. The article describes the resulting policy, which is marked by independence and equidistance towards the superpowers.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document