This preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.
Unformatted text preview: 2. Deterrence: posits that war can be avoided through the threat of the use of force. Possible aggression by another state will not be taken because that state fears that the damage the opponent can inflict will be too high, thus rendering the costs of the war higher than the benefits. Assumptions of deterrence: a. Leaders are rational: therefore, they will avoid war in situations where the potential costs of the war outweigh the benefits of going to war b. Destructiveness of actually going to war is very large, posing an unacceptable cost. This is especially true where nuclear weapons are involved. During the Cold War, American policymakers, as well as Soviet ones, accepted the fact that the destructive potential of nuclear weapons was too great that using them became unacceptable. However, the threat to use them was used. c. Alternatives to war exist in the current situation. Insecurity can be managed and reduced through non-military options....
View Full Document
- Fall '11
- Balance Of Power