Emphasising Defence

  • Egbert Boeker
  • Lutz Unterseher

Abstract

If one is searching for a military posture that could contribute to the solving of many, if not all of NATO’s problems, it might be worthwhile having a close look at those concepts which emphasise defence. Their application could enhance both military effectiveness and crisis-stability, whilst pressing nuclear weapons back into a purely retaliatory role.1

Keywords

Nuclear Weapon Defensive Posture Armoured Vehicle Rear Area Forward Zone 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. 1.
    There are a few English publications on these concepts, for example, Ben Dankbaar, ‘Alternative Defense Policies and the Peace Movement’, Journal of Peace Research, Vol. 21, No. 2 (1984) pp. 141–55 andCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. H. G. Brauch and L. Unterseher, ‘Getting Rid of Nuclear Weapons, a Review of a Few Proposals for Conventional Defence of Europe’, Journal of Peace Research, vol. 21, no. 2 (1984).Google Scholar
  3. 2.
    Norbert Hannig, Abschreckung durch konventionelle Waffen, das David-Goliath Prinzip (Berlin, 1984).Google Scholar
  4. 3.
    P. H. Vigor, Soviet Blitzkrieg Theory (London: Macmillan, 1983).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 4.
    Horst Afheldt, Defensive Verteidigung (Hamburg: Rowohlt, 1983).Google Scholar
  6. 5.
    Lutz Unterseher, ‘Für eine tragfähige Verteidigung der Bundesrepublik’, in Studiengruppe für Sicherheitspolitik (SAS), Strukturwandel der Verteidigung (Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag, 1984).Google Scholar
  7. 6.
    Guy Brossolet, ‘Das Ende der Schlacht; Versuch über die NichtSchlacht’, in Emil Spannocchi and Guy Brossolet (eds), Verteidigung ohne Schlacht, (München: Deutscher Taschenbuch Verlag, 1979).Google Scholar
  8. 7.
    Frank Barnaby and Egbert Boeker, Defence without Offence, Non-nuclear Defence for Europe, Peace Studies Paper No. 8, University of Bradford, (London: Housmans, 1982).Google Scholar
  9. By the same authors: ‘Non-provocative, Non-nuclear Defence of Western Europe’, ADIU-Report 5 (1983) pp. 5–10,Google Scholar
  10. and their contribution to Frank Barnaby and Terry Hopman, The Nuclear Weapon Dilemma and Europe (London: MacMillan, 1986).Google Scholar
  11. 8.
    Hans W. Hoffmann, Reiner K. Huber and Karl Steiger, ‘On Reactive Defense Options of Conventional Defense in Europe. Assessment of Improvement Options’, R. K. Huber (ed.), Modelling and Analysis (London, New York: Plenum, 1985).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Frank Barnaby and Marlies ter Borg 1986

Authors and Affiliations

  • Egbert Boeker
  • Lutz Unterseher

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations