Show simple item record

The Extended Deterrent Value of Nuclear Weapons

dc.contributor.authorHuth, Paulen_US
dc.date.accessioned2010-04-13T19:47:22Z
dc.date.available2010-04-13T19:47:22Z
dc.date.issued1990en_US
dc.identifier.citationHuth, Paul (1990). "The Extended Deterrent Value of Nuclear Weapons." Journal of Conflict Resolution 34(2): 270-290. <http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/67765>en_US
dc.identifier.issn0022-0027en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/67765
dc.description.abstractThree questions are addressed in this study: (1) Does a nuclear retaliatory capability contribute to extended deterrence against a nonnuclear power? (2) If so, is the deterrent value of nuclear weapons contingent upon the prior credible threat of conventional armed engagement by the defender? (3) Or, is the deterrent impact of nuclear weapons so potent that the conventional balance of forces has little deterrent impact? Competing hypotheses are formulated and then tested by probit analysis. The empirical findings indicate that (a) nuclear weapons do contribute to extended deterrence success, but (b) that effect is not contingent upon the prior threat of conventional armed conflict, and (c) there is an inverse relationship between the conventional balance of forces and the extended deterrent role of nuclear weapons.en_US
dc.format.extent3108 bytes
dc.format.extent1858759 bytes
dc.format.mimetypetext/plain
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.publisherSage Publicationsen_US
dc.titleThe Extended Deterrent Value of Nuclear Weaponsen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelPolitical Scienceen_US
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelGovernment, Politics and Lawen_US
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelSocial Sciencesen_US
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Revieweden_US
dc.contributor.affiliationumUniversity of Michiganen_US
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/67765/2/10.1177_0022002790034002005.pdf
dc.identifier.doi10.1177/0022002790034002005en_US
dc.identifier.sourceJournal of Conflict Resolutionen_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceArkin, W., and R. Fieldhouse. 1985. Nuclear battlefields. Cambridge: Ballinger.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBetts, R. 1987. Nuclear blackmail and nuclear balance. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBlair, B. 1985. Strategic command and control. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBlechman, B., and D. Hart. 1982. The political utility of nuclear weapons: The 1973 Middle East crisis. International Security7:273-297.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBlechman, B., and S. Kaplan. 1978. Force without war. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBracken, P. 1983. The command and control of nuclear forces. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBrams, S. 1985. Superpower games. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBundy, M. 1969. To cap the volcano. Foreign Affairs48:1-20.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBundy, M. 1984. The unimpressive record of atomic diplomacy. In The nuclear crisis reader, edited by G. Prins, 42-54. New York: Random House.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBundy, M. 1989. Danger and survival. New York: Random House.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCarlyle, M., ed. 1952. Documents on international affairs: 1947-1948. London: Oxford University Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCharles, D. 1987. Nuclear planning in NATO. Cambridge: Ballinger.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceForeign Broadcast Information Service. November 1975 and June-July 1977. Daily report Latin America. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGaddis, J. L. 1986. The long peace: Elements of stability in the postwar international system. International Security10:99-142.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGlaser, C. In press. Analyzing strategic nuclear weapons policy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGreat Britain Foreign Office. 1946. Documents on Iran, series 371.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHalperin, M. 1987. Nuclear fallacy. New York: Harper & Row.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHanushek, E. A., and J. E. Jackson. 1977. Statistical methods for social scientists. New York: Academic Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHuth, P. 1988a. Extended deterrence and the outbreak of war. American Political Science Review82:423-443.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHuth, P. 1988b. Extended deterrence and the prevention of war. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHuth, P., and B. Russett. 1984. What makes deterrence work? Cases from 1900 to 1980. World Politics36:496-526.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHuth, P., and B. Russett. 1988. Deterrence failure and crisis escalation. International Studies Quarterly32:29-45.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHuth, P., and B. Russett. 1990. Testing deterrence theory: Rigor makes a difference. World Politics42.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceJervis, R. 1989. The meaning of the nuclear revolution. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKahneman, D., and A. Tversky. 1979. Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica47:263-291.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKeesing's Contemporary Archives. 1976. London: Longman.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKeesing's Contemporary Archives. 1977. London: Longman.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKugler, J. 1984. Terror without deterrence: Reassessing the role of nuclear weapons. Journal of Conflict Resolution28:470-506.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKuniholm, B. 1980. The origins of the Cold War in the Near East. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLebow, R. N. 1987. Nuclear crisis management. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLebow, R. N., and J. Gross Stein. 1990. Deterrence: The elusive dependent variable. World Politics42.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMaddala, G. S. 1983. Limited-dependent and qualitative variables in econometrics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMc Kelvey, R. D., and W. Zavonia. 1975. A statistical model for the analysis of ordinal level dependent variables. Journal of Mathematical Sociology4:103-120.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMc Namara, R. 1983. The military role of nuclear weapons. Foreign Affairs62:59-80.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMueller, J. 1988. Retreat from doomsday. New York: Basic Books.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceOrganski, A. F. K., and J. Kugler. 1980. The war ledger. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceOye, K., ed. In press. The deterrence debate. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferencePowell, R. 1987. Crisis bargaining, escalation, and MAD. American Political Science Review81:717-735.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferencePowell, R. 1989a. Crisis stability in the nuclear age. American Political Science Review83:61-76.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferencePowell, R. 1989b. Nuclear deterrence and the strategy of limited retaliation. American Political Science Review83:503-520.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceQuattrone, G., and A. Tversky. 1988. Contrasting rational and psychological analyses of political choice. American Political Science Review82:719-736.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRussett, B. 1988. Extended deterrence with nuclear weapons: How necessary, how acceptable?Review of Politics (Spring): 282-302.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRussett, B. 1989. The real decline of nuclear hegemony. In Global changes and theoretical challenges, edited by E. O. Czempiel and J. N. Rosenau, 177-193. Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSagan, S. 1985. Nuclear alerts and crisis management. International Security9:99-139.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSchelling, T. 1960. The strategy of conflict. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSchelling, T. 1966. Arms and influence. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSnyder, G. 1961. Deterrence and defense. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceThies, W. 1980. When governments collide. Berkeley: University of California Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceU.S. Department of State. 1962. Public papers of the presidents of the United States - Harry Truman 1946. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWeede, E. 1983. Extended deterrence by superpower alliance. Journal of Conflict Resolution27:231-254.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceZagare, F. 1987. The dynamics of deterrence. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.en_US
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.