{"title":"超越“宿醉”:冷战后核战略的新参数","authors":"N. Leveringhaus","doi":"10.22459/NDST.07.2018.07","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We are now more than a quarter-century into the post–Cold War period. Yet vestiges of a ‘Cold War mentality’ are said to remain, limiting our understanding of nuclear strategy today. For some, concepts and capabilities specifically developed with US and Soviet nuclear strategy in mind, such as mutual assured destruction (MAD) as an optimal strategic condition or a Second Strike Force, have become conceptual ‘hangovers’ that strategists have struggled to improve upon, leaving little room for innovation in the nuclear domain.1 This chapter seeks to push back at this ‘hangover’ narrative by drawing out global developments that have shaped thinking about nuclear strategy since 1990. It will also be argued that the global conditions under which nuclear strategies have been formulated are fundamentally different post-1990. This might seem a rather uncontroversial statement. Most would agree that, compared to the Cold War period, the prospects of nuclear war are thankfully much reduced today. However, there are relatively few academic accounts of how nuclear strategies have developed since 1990.2","PeriodicalId":346795,"journal":{"name":"New Directions in Strategic Thinking 2.0: ANU Strategic & Defence Studies Centre's Golden Anniversary Conference Proceedings","volume":"91 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Beyond ‘hangovers’: The new parameters of post–Cold War nuclear strategy\",\"authors\":\"N. Leveringhaus\",\"doi\":\"10.22459/NDST.07.2018.07\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"We are now more than a quarter-century into the post–Cold War period. Yet vestiges of a ‘Cold War mentality’ are said to remain, limiting our understanding of nuclear strategy today. For some, concepts and capabilities specifically developed with US and Soviet nuclear strategy in mind, such as mutual assured destruction (MAD) as an optimal strategic condition or a Second Strike Force, have become conceptual ‘hangovers’ that strategists have struggled to improve upon, leaving little room for innovation in the nuclear domain.1 This chapter seeks to push back at this ‘hangover’ narrative by drawing out global developments that have shaped thinking about nuclear strategy since 1990. It will also be argued that the global conditions under which nuclear strategies have been formulated are fundamentally different post-1990. This might seem a rather uncontroversial statement. Most would agree that, compared to the Cold War period, the prospects of nuclear war are thankfully much reduced today. However, there are relatively few academic accounts of how nuclear strategies have developed since 1990.2\",\"PeriodicalId\":346795,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"New Directions in Strategic Thinking 2.0: ANU Strategic & Defence Studies Centre's Golden Anniversary Conference Proceedings\",\"volume\":\"91 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"New Directions in Strategic Thinking 2.0: ANU Strategic & Defence Studies Centre's Golden Anniversary Conference Proceedings\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.22459/NDST.07.2018.07\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"New Directions in Strategic Thinking 2.0: ANU Strategic & Defence Studies Centre's Golden Anniversary Conference Proceedings","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22459/NDST.07.2018.07","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

我们现在进入后冷战时期已超过四分之一个世纪。然而,据说“冷战思维”的残余仍然存在,限制了我们今天对核战略的理解。对于一些人来说,专门针对美国和苏联核战略开发的概念和能力,例如作为最佳战略条件的相互保证破坏(MAD)或第二次打击力量,已经成为概念上的“宿醉”,战略家们一直在努力改进,在核领域几乎没有创新的空间本章试图通过引出1990年以来形成对核战略思考的全球发展来推翻这种“宿醉”叙事。还将指出,制订核战略所依据的全球条件在1990年以后有了根本的不同。这似乎是一个毫无争议的说法。大多数人都会同意,与冷战时期相比,今天发生核战争的可能性已经大大降低。然而,关于核战略自1990年以来如何发展的学术报道相对较少
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Beyond ‘hangovers’: The new parameters of post–Cold War nuclear strategy
We are now more than a quarter-century into the post–Cold War period. Yet vestiges of a ‘Cold War mentality’ are said to remain, limiting our understanding of nuclear strategy today. For some, concepts and capabilities specifically developed with US and Soviet nuclear strategy in mind, such as mutual assured destruction (MAD) as an optimal strategic condition or a Second Strike Force, have become conceptual ‘hangovers’ that strategists have struggled to improve upon, leaving little room for innovation in the nuclear domain.1 This chapter seeks to push back at this ‘hangover’ narrative by drawing out global developments that have shaped thinking about nuclear strategy since 1990. It will also be argued that the global conditions under which nuclear strategies have been formulated are fundamentally different post-1990. This might seem a rather uncontroversial statement. Most would agree that, compared to the Cold War period, the prospects of nuclear war are thankfully much reduced today. However, there are relatively few academic accounts of how nuclear strategies have developed since 1990.2
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The future of strategic studies: Lessons from the last ‘golden age’ Economics and security The decline of the classical model of military strategy American grand strategy in the post–Cold War era A bias for action? The military as an element of national power
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1