nach oben

Erschienen in:

2018 | OriginalPaper | Buchkapitel

2. A Neoclassical Realist Approach to Military Doctrines

verfasst von : Paolo Rosa

Erschienen in: Neoclassical Realism and the Underdevelopment of China’s Nuclear Doctrine

Verlag: Springer International Publishing

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

This chapter describes some of the major explanations of military doctrines. In particular, three approaches are analysed: The balance of power model; the organisational model; and the strategic culture approach. The balance of power model emphasises the role of international factors to explain the development of military doctrines. It emphasises the international structure, the distribution of power and the role played by external threats and action-reaction logic in stimulating the development of military doctrines. The organisational model stresses the role played by organisational culture and bureaucratic interests. The strategic culture approach stresses the importance of socially embedded images of international politics and war for the development of military doctrine. After a review of these approaches, a neoclassical realist model is advanced.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Vorheriges Kapitel Introduction: Competing Explanations for the Underdevelopment of China’s Nuclear Doctrine

Nächstes Kapitel China’s Nuclear Programme: Origins and Progress

AAP-6(V) NATO Glossary of Terms and Definitions (https://fas.org/irp/doddir/other/nato2008.pdf).

Soviet definition of military doctrine included both the socio-political dimension of war and the military-technical aspects of security policy (Odom 1988/1989). In this study, the concept of military doctrine mainly refers to the second aspect. On the different terminologies used by Chinese military policymakers, see also Shambaugh (2002: 56–60).

“Actually, there is little in the principles, strategy and tactics of Maoist military doctrine that is original. Mao was deeply influenced by the heroic literature and the military classics of China’s past. He is also indebted to the Marxist-Leninist military tradition and especially to the writing of Lenin. Yet Mao’s military concepts have also been heavily influenced by the long military experience of his own Communist Party” (Powell 1968: 247, italics added).

See Glenn et al. (2004).

A strong argument for an eclectic approach that considers variables from different levels of analysis is in Sil, Katzenstein (2010).

For an in-depth review, see Rose (1998).

On this point, see Taliaferro (2006).

October 05, 1958 Meeting Minutes, Zhou Enlai’s Conversation with S.F. Antonov on the Taiwan Issue (excerpt) (Wilson Center/Digital Archive, International History Declassified, hereafter WC/DAIHD: http://digitalarchive.wilsoncenter.org/document/117018).

See Finel (2001/2002), Schweller (2004a, b, 2006), Lobell et al. (2009, 2012), Rathbun (2008), Devlen and Özdamar (2009), Kitchen (2010), Toje and Kunz (2012), and Ripsman et al. (2016).

This is a point underlined by Raymond Aron (1966), who is considered to be one of the main sources of inspiration for neoclassical realism (Battistella 2012).

On overreaction caused by domestic processes, see Hagan (1995). On domestic sources of underbalancing, see Schweller (2004b, 2006).

On this point, see in particular Christensen (1996) and Ross (2009).

On this point, see Rosa (2008).

The model draws heavily on Schweller (2004, 2006).

This line of argument draws from Steven Lobell’s idea that policymakers are not free to decide on foreign policy when “constraints and inducements that emanate from systemic, subsystemic, and domestic levels” do not converge (Lobell 2009: 64).

This is a case of intentional selection of observations, in particular of “selection on the dependent variable”, to see whether the observed change of values of the dependent variable is associated with the expected variations of the indipendent variable (King et al. 1994: 141–142).

Allison, G. T. (1971). Essence of Decision. Glenview: Scott Foresman.

Aron, R. (1966). Peace and War. A Theory of International Relations. Garden City, NY: Doubleday.

Bachman, D. (1998). Structure and Process in the Making of Chinese Foreign Policy. In S. Kim (Ed.), China and the World: Chinese Foreign Policy Faces the New Millennium. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

Battistella, D. (2012). Raymond Aron: A Neoclassical Realist Before the Term Existed? In A. Toje & B. Kunz (Eds.), Neoclassical Realism in European Politics: Bringing Power Back in. Manchester: Manchester University Press.

Benedict, R. (1946). Chrysanthemum and the Sword: Patterns of Japanese Culture. Boston: Houghton and Mifflin.

Bennett, A., & George, A. L. (2005). Case Studies and Theory Development in Social Science. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Bo, Z. (2007). China’s Elite Politics: Political Transition and Power Balancing. Singapore: World Scientific.CrossRef

Bo, Z. (2010). China’s Elite Politics: Governance and Democratization. Singapore: World Scientific.CrossRef

Booth, K. (1979). Strategy and Ethnocentrism. New York: Holmer & Meier Publishers Inc.

Checkel, J. (1998). The Constructivist Turn in International Relations Theory. World Politics, 50(2), 324–348.CrossRef

Christensen, T. (1996). Useful Adversaries: Grand Strategy, Domestic Mobilization, and Sino-American Conflict, 1947–1958. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Cordesman, A. H. (1982). Deterrence in the 1980s: American Strategic Forces and Extended Deterrence. Adelphi Papers, 175.

Crowl, P. A. (1986). Alfred Thayer Mahan: The Naval Historian. In P. Paret (Ed.), Makers of Modern Strategy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Desch, M. (1998). Culture Clash: Assessing the Importance of Ideas in Security Studies. International Security, 23(1), 141–170.CrossRef

Devlen, B., & Özdamar, O. (2009). Neoclassical Realism and Foreign Policy Crises. In A. Freyberg-Inan, E. Harrison, & P. James (Eds.), Rethinking Realism in International Relations: Between Tradition and Innovation. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Dittmer, L. (2002). Reflections on Elite Informal Politics. In J. Unger (Ed.), The Nature of Chinese Politics: From Mao to Jiang. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.

Dogan, M., & Higley, J. (Eds.). (1998). Elites Crisis and the Origins of Regimes. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.

Elman, C. (1996). Horses for Courses: Why Not Neorealist Theories of Foreign Policy? Security Studies, 6(1), 7–53.CrossRef

Farrell, T. (1998). Culture and Military Power. Review of International Studies, 24(3), 407–416.CrossRef

Fewsmith, J. (2002). The Evolving Shape of Elite Politics. In J. Unger (Ed.), The Nature of Chinese Politics: From Mao to Jiang. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.

Finel, B. I. (2001/2002). Black Box or Pandora’s Box: State Level Variables and Progressivity in Realist Research Programs. Security Studies, 11(2), 187–227.

Freedman, L. (1989). The Evolution of Nuclear Strategy. London: Macmillan.CrossRef

Gittings, J. (1967). The Role of the Chinese Army. London: Oxford University Press.

Glenn, J., Howlett, D., & Poore, S. (Eds.). (2004). Neorealism Versus Strategic Culture. Aldershot: Ashgate.

Goldstein, A. (1991). From Bandwagon to Balance of Power Politics. Structural Constraints and Politics in China, 1949–1976. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

Gray, C. (1981). National Style in Strategy: The American Example. International Security, 6(2), 21–47.CrossRef

Hagan, J. D. (1995). Domestic Political Explanations in the Analysis of Foreign Policy. In L. Neack, J. A. K. Hey, & P. J. Haney (Eds.), Foreign Policy Analysis. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.

Halperin, M. H. (1974). Bureaucratic Politics and Foreign Policy. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.

Huntington, S. P. (1961). The Common Defense. New York: Columbia University Press.

Janis, I. (1982). Groupthink. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.

Jervis, R. (1976). Perception and Misperception in International Politics. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Jervis, R. (1989). Perceiving and Coping with Threat. In R. Jervis, R. N. Lebow, & J. G. Stein (Eds.), Psychology and Deterrence. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Johnston, A. I. (1995). Thinking About Strategic Culture. International Security, 19(4), 32–64.CrossRef

Katzenstein, P. (Ed.). (1996). The Culture of National Security. New York: Columbia University Press.

Kier, E. (1995). Culture and Military Doctrine: France Between the Wars. International Security, 19(4), 65–93.CrossRef

King, G., Keohane, R. O., & Verba, S. (1994). Designing Social Inquiry. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Kitchen, N. (2010). Systemic Pressures and Domestic Ideas: A Neoclassical Realist Model of Grand Strategy Formation. Review of International Studies, 36(1), 117–143.CrossRef

Klein, B. S. (1988). Hegemony and Strategic Culture: American Power Projection and Alliance Defense Politics. Review of International Studies, 14(2), 133–148.CrossRef

Krasner, S. (1978). Defending the National Interest. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Lantis, J. (2009). Strategic Culture: From Clausewitz to Constructivism. In J. L. Johnson, K. M. Kartchner, & J. E. Larsen (Eds.), Strategic Culture and Weapons of Mass Destruction. Basingstoke: Palgrave-Macmillan.

Lieberthal, K., & Lampton, D. M. (Eds.). (1992). Bureaucracy, Politics, and Decision Making in Post-Mao China. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Lobell, S. E. (2009). Threat Assessmnet, the State, and Foreign Policy: A Neoclassical Realist Model. In S. E. Lobell, N. M. Ripsman, & J. W. Taliaferro (Eds.), Neoclassical Realism, the State, and Foreign Policy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Lobell, S. E., Ripsman, N. M., & Taliaferro, J. W. (Eds.). (2009). Neoclassical Realism, the State, and Foreign Policy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Lobell, S. E., Ripsman, N. M., & Taliaferro, J. W. (Eds.). (2012). The Challenge of Grand Strategy: The Great Powers and the Broken Balance Between the World Wars. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Nathan, A. J. (1973). A Factionalism Model for CCP Politics. The China Quarterly, 53, 34–66.

O’Sullivan, R. J. (1990). Dealing with the Soviets. In S. Foerster & E. N. Wright (Eds.), American Defense Policy. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Odom W. E. (1988/1989). Soviet Military Doctrine. Foreign Affairs, 67(2), 114–134.

Posen, B. (1984). The Source of Military Doctrine: France, Britain, and Germany Between the World Wars. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

Powell, R. L. (1968). Maoist Military Doctrines. Asian Survey, 8(4), 239–262.CrossRef

Powell, R. (2015). Nuclear Brinkmanship, Limited War, and Military Power. International Organization. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818315000028.

Putnam, R. (1988). Diplomacy and Domestic Politics: The Logic of Two-Level Games. International Organization, 42(3), 427–460.CrossRef

Pye, L. (1981). The Dynamics of Chinese Politics. Cambridge: Oelgeschlager, Gunn & Hain.

Rathbun, B. (2008). A Rose by Any Other Name: Neoclassical Realism as the Logical and Necessary Extentions of Structural Realism. Security Studies, 17(2), 294–321.CrossRef

Ripsman, N. M., Taliaferro, J. W., & Lobell, S. E. (2016). Neoclassical Realist Theory of International Politics. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRef

Rosa, P. (2006). Sociologia politica delle scelte internazionali. Bari-Roma: Laterza.

Rosa, P. (2008). Stato, società e politica estera in Cina. Quaderni di sociologia, 52(3), 123–153.CrossRef

Rosa, P. (2014). Who Won? Power and Factional Balance in China After the 18th Congress of the CCP. Journal of Political Power, 7(2), 233–251.CrossRef

Rose, G. (1998). Neoclassical Realism and Theories of Foreign Policy. World Politics, 51(1), 144–172.CrossRef

Ross, R. S. (2009). Chinese Security Policy. Structure, Power, and Politics. London: Routledge.

Rothenberg, G. E. (1986). Moltke, Schlieffen, and the Doctrine of Strategic Envelopment. In P. Paret (Ed.), Makers of Modern Strategy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Schweller R. (1994). Bandwagoning for Profit: Bringing Revisionist States Back in. International Seurity, 19(1): 72–107.

Schweller, R. (1998). Deadly Imbalances: Tripolarity and Hitlers Strategy of World Conquest. New York: Columbia University.

Schweller R. (2004a). The Progressiveness of Neoclassical Realism. In C. Elman & M. Elman (Eds.), Progress in International Relations Theory: Appraising the Field. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Schweller, R. (2004b). Unanswered Threats. A Neoclassical Realist Theory of Underbalancing. International Security, 29(2), 159–201.

Schweller, R. (2006). Unanswered Threats: Political Constraints on the Balance of Power. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Shambaugh, D. (2000). The Chinese State in the Post-Mao Era. In D. Shambaugh (Ed.), The Modern Chinese State. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Shambaugh, D. (2002). Modernizing China’s Military. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Sil, R., & Katzenstein, P. (2010). Beyond Paradigms. Analytic Eclecticism in the Study of World Politics. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

Snyder, G. H. (1962). The ‘New Look’ of 1953. In W. Schilling, P. Hammond & G. H. Snyder (Eds.), Strategy, Politics and Defense Budgets. New York: Columbia University Press.

Snyder, J. (1977). The Soviet Strategic Culture: Implications for Limited Nuclear Operations. Santa Monica: RAND.

Taliaferro, J. W. (2006). State Building for Future Wars: Neoclassical Realism and the Resource-Extractive State. Security Studies, 15(3), 464–495.CrossRef

Tan Eng Bok, G. (1984). Strategic Doctrine. In G. Segal & W. T. Tow (Eds.), Chinese Defence Policy. London: Macmillan.

Teiwes, F. C. (1984). Leadership, Legitimacy, and Conflict in China: From a Charismatic Mao to the Politics of Succession. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.CrossRef

Teiwes, F. C. (1990). Politics at Mao’s Court. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.

Teiwes F. C. (1993). Politics and Purge in China. Rectifications and the Decline of Party Norms, 1950–1965. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.

Toje, A., & Kunz, B. (Eds.). (2012). Neoclassical Realism in European Politics: Bringing Power Back in. Manchester: Manchester University Press.

Tsou, T. (2002). Chinese Politics at the Top: Factionalism or Informal Politics? Balance-of-Power or a Game to Win All? In J. Unger (Ed.), The Nature of Chinese Politics: From Mao to Jiang. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.

Unger, J. (Ed.). (2002). The Nature of Chinese Politics: From Mao to Jiang, Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.

Uz Zaman, R. (2009). Strategic Culture: A ‘Cultural’ Understanding of War. Comparative Strategy, 28(1), 68–88.

Van Evera, S. (1984). The Cult of the Offensive and the Origins of the First World War. International Security, 9(1), 58–107.CrossRef

Waltz, K. (1979). Theory of International Politics. Boston: McGraw-Hill.

Wohlforth, W. C. (1987). The Perception of Power: Russia in the Pre-1914 Balance. World Politics, 39(3), 353–381.CrossRef

Zhao, Q. (1992). Domestic Factors of Chinese Foreign Policy: From Vertical to Horizontal Authoritarianism. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 519, 158–175.CrossRef

Titel: A Neoclassical Realist Approach to Military Doctrines
verfasst von: Paolo Rosa
Verlag: Springer International Publishing
Buch: Neoclassical Realism and the Underdevelopment of China’s Nuclear Doctrine
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-78639-1

Electronic ISBN: 978-3-319-78640-7

Copyright-Jahr: 2018
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-78640-7_2