Skip to main content

ETHNOS_APP

Home • Search • Journals • List 0

Strategic Command and Control

Redefining the Nuclear Threat

Bibliographic Data

ID9828720
AuthorsAndrew J Pierre (corresponding author), Daniel Ford (0000-0003-2666-2443), Daniel F Ford
Year1985
Volume64
Issue1
Pages172
Publication date1985-01-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessNo
TypeREVIEW
Review ofStrategic command and control: Redefining the Nuclear Threat, Bruce G Blair, 1985
VenueForeign Affairs (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0015-7120 • E-ISSN: 2327-7793
PublisherJSTOR (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.2307/20042478
OpenAlexW2152781659
LanguageEN

During the past twenty-five years, U.S. strategists have argued that avoiding nuclear war depends on deterring a Soviet first strike by ensuring that U.S. forces could survive a surprise attack in numbers sufficient to inflict unacceptable damage in retaliation. U.S. military and political leaders have thus emphasized acquiring more powerful and accurate weaponry and providing better protection for it, while defense analysts have focused on assessing the relative strength and survivability of U.S. and Soviet forces. In the process neither has given sufficient attention to the vulnerability of the U.S. command, control, and communications system that would coordinate warning of an attack in progress and the response to it. In this study Bruce G. Blair examines accepted assumptions about mutual deterrence, force strength, and survivability, and concludes that the vulnerability of command, control, and communications not only precludes an effective retaliatory strike but also invites a preemptive Soviet first strike. After summarizing the assumptions and evaluative methodology behind mainstream strategic theory, the study describes the current decentralized command and control system that, under conditions of surprise attack, could be unable to communicate with decisionmakers or with units responsible for executing the decisions. Blair traces in detail the development of the system over three decades; the attempts to improve it through the use of procedural guidelines, alternative and redundant communications channels, and survival tactics; and the continuing vulnerabilities from improved Soviet weapons and the environmental forces engendered by massive nuclear detonations. Blair also analyzes the probable effects of proposals by the Reagan administration to strengthen command, control, and communications systems and provides recommendations for further strengthening and for altering related policies, deployments, and strategies to improve the stability of deterrence

Arms control · Business · Command and control · Control (management · Economic system · Economics · Grand strategy · International trade · Management · Nuclear strategy · Nuclear weapon · Political economy · Political science · Computer Science · European and Russian Geopolitical Military Strategies · International Relations and Foreign Policy · Law · Nuclear Issues and Defense · Public Administration

  • Norad’s Combat Operations Center

    Layne Karafantis•Information & Culture•2017

  • The contribution of strategic studies

    Joseph S Nye•The Adelphi Papers•1989

  • US–China Rivalry in the twenty-first century

    Open Access•Avery Goldstein•China International Strategy Review•2020

  • The practice of deterrence

    Open Access•Patrick M Morgan•International Practices•2011

  • Existential Security

    Open Access•Nathan Alexander Sears•Global Policy•2020

  • Anarchy, Technology, and the Self-Destruction Hypothesis

    Nathan Alexander Sears•World Futures•2020

  • Loose cannons

    Bruce G Blair•Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists•2020

  • Strategic Defense

    Open Access•David A Bella•Journal of Peace Research•1989

  • The Probability of Nuclear War

    Open Access•Rudolf Avenhaus, John Fichtner et al.•Journal of Peace Research•1989

  • Nuclear weapons as a Faustian bargain

    Bradley A Thayer•Security Studies•1995

  • Less is more

    Jordan Seng•Security Studies•1997

  • Deterrence Theory Discussion

    Open Access•Barry O’neill, Barry O'Neill•Journal of Theoretical Politics•1992

  • Nuclear weapons after the gold war

    Michael J Mazarr•The Washington Quarterly•1992

  • International Security Studies

    Joseph S Nye, Sean M Lynn-Jones•International Security•1988

  • Would China Go Nuclear? Assessing the Risk of Chinese Nuclear Escalation in a Conventional War with the United States

    Caitlin Talmadge•International Security•2017

  • U.S. Strategic Air Power, 1948-1962

    Richard H Kohn, Joseph P Harahan•International Security•1988

  • Beyond START

    Harold A Feiveson, Frank von Hippel et al.•International Security•1990

  • Command and Control in Emerging Nuclear Nations

    Peter D Feaver, Peter Feaver•International Security•1992

  • First Things First

    Avery Goldstein•International Security•2013

  • The U.S. Manned Bomber and Strategic Deterrence in the 1990s

    Michael E Brown•International Security•1989

  • Should the United States Reject MAD? Damage Limitation and U.S. Nuclear Strategy toward China

    Charles L Glaser, Steve Fetter•International Security•2016

  • Inexcusable Restraint

    Colin S Gray, Jeffrey G Barlow et al.•International Security•1985

  • The End of MAD? The Nuclear Dimension of U.S. Primacy

    Keir A Lieber, Daryl G Pre et al.•International Security•2006

  • The Trident and the Triad

    Owen Cote, Owen R Coté•International Security•1991

  • The Case for JCS Reform

    William J Lynn, Barry R Posen•International Security•1985

  • A Model Disagreement

    Stephen M Walt•International Security•1999

  • Exploding the Powder Keg Myth

    Dan Reiter•International Security•1995

  • Why China Cannot Conquer Taiwan

    Michael O’hanlon, Michael O'Hanlon•International Security•2000

  • Nuclear strategy

    Colin S Gray•Comparative Strategy•1990

  • Beyond counterforce

    Michael J Mazarr•Comparative Strategy•1990

  • Rethinking the NSC role

    Carnes Lord•Comparative Strategy•1987

  • The international system and the use of weapons of mass destruction

    Yannis A Stivachtis•Journal of Strategic Studies•2000

  • Emerging technology and intra-war escalation risks

    Caitlin Talmadge•Journal of Strategic Studies•2019

  • Posturing for great power competition

    Evan Braden Montgomery•Journal of Strategic Studies•2022

  • How dawn turned into dusk

    Open Access•Benoît Pelopidas, Hebatalla Taha et al.•Journal of Strategic Studies•2024

  • Robust and affordable security

    Avery Goldstein•Journal of Strategic Studies•1992

  • Delegating strategic decision-making to machines

    James Johnson•Journal of Strategic Studies•2022

  • ICBMs and deterrence

    Colin S Gray•Journal of Strategic Studies•1987

  • Nuclear weapons in the new world order

    Stephen J Cimbala•Journal of Strategic Studies•1993

  • Deadly or Impotent? Nuclear Command and Control in Pakistan

    Sébastien Miraglia•Journal of Strategic Studies•2013

  • Targeting Soviet mobile missiles

    Michael Brower•Survival•1989

  • Controlling nuclear SLCM

    Terry Terriff•Survival•1989

  • Nuclear strategy and the problem of command and control

    Daniel Shuchman•Survival•1987

  • Winding Down if Preemption or Escalation Occurs

    Open Access•Steven J Bram, Steven J Brams et al.•Journal of Conflict Resolution•1987

  • The Renaissance of Security Studies

    Stephen M Walt•International Studies Quarterly•1991

  • Hacking Nuclear Stability

    Open Access•Jacquelyn G Schneider, Benjamin Schechter et al.•International Organization•2023

  • International Politics in the Age of Existential Threats

    Open Access•Nathan Alexander Sears•Journal of Global Security Studies•2020

  • Strategy in flux

    Matthew J Morgan, Matthew Morgan•Defence Studies•2015

  • European Perspectives on the Strategic Defense Initiative

    Open Access•Andrew White•Millennium Journal of International…•1986

  • The influence of analysis on U.S. defense policys

    Open Access•Peter Deleon•Policy Sciences•1987

  • Arms control does not control arms

    Open Access•Colin S Gray•Orbis•1993

  • Enduring Misconceptions of Strategic Stability

    Open Access•Robert Glasser, ROBERT D GLASSER•Journal of Peace Research•1992

  • Controlling Theatre Nuclear War

    Open Access•Desmond Ball•British Journal of Political…•1989

Citation velocityhistorical
Highly citedNo

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub
Ethnos_APP • Open Source Project • MIT License • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacy and Cookies • API Documentation: api.ethnos.app/docs • API Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Frontend Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae