Certainties and Uncertainties about Military Doctrines

  • Laszlo Valki


The Dolitical and military nature of military doctrines has been a subject of debate for a long time in scientific literature and journalism. It has been often discussed in official and semi-official NATO circles, and recent events indicate that the problem of military doctrines made its way also onto the agenda of the Warsaw Treaty Organization. The Appeal of WTO published on 12 June 1986 stated that:

From the point of view of the actual intentions of military-political groupings or of individual states, the issue of military doctrines is no less important.

Mutual suspicion and distrust, which accumulated over the years, have to be eliminated, and each other’s anxieties should be thoroughly analysed. For the security of Europe and the entire world, the military concepts and doctrines of the military alliances have to be of defensive character.


Nuclear Weapon Flexible Response EUROPEAN Security Nuclear Bomb Soviet Leadership 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    H.A. Kissinger, ‘NATO: The Next Thirty Years’, Survival, vol. 3 (1979) p. 266.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    See Lübkeimer’s announcement in Dieter Schuster-Ulrike C. Wasmuht, ‘Alternative Strategien’: Eine Auswertung der Öffentlichen Anhörung im Verteidigungsausshuss des Deutschen Bundestages. S+F Vierteljahresschrift für Sicherheit und Frieden, no. 3 (1984).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    F. Barnaby and M. ter Borg, ‘Which way NATO? Problems facing the Alliance’. Paper presented at the conference Emerging Technologies and Military Doctrine, Amsterdam (July 1985).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lord Carver, ‘Military and Political Role of Nuclear Weapons in Europe: The Problem of Extended Deterrence’. Paper presented at the conference Nuclear Weapons and Arms Control in Europe, Castiglioncello (October 1985).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    P. Deak, ‘The Question of Limited War in Europe’. Paper prepared for the Center for Peace Research Coordination, Budapest (1986).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    M. Thee, ‘Military Technology, Military Strategy and the Arms Race: Their Interaction’, PRIO Report 2/1985, Oslo.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    D.T. Plesch, ‘AirLand Battle and NATO’s Military Posture, ADIU Report, vol. 7, no. 2 (March–April 1985) p. 8 ff.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Field Manual 100–5 quoted by H. Alfheldt, ‘Defensive Verteidigung’ (Reinbeck bei Hamburg: Rowohlt 1983).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    D. Senghaas, ‘Noch einmal: Nachdenkens über Nachrüstung’, Leviathan, 12 — Jg. 1984. Heft 1, p. 5.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    B. Møller, ‘The Strategy of NATO and the Prospects of Non-Offensive Defence.’ Centre of Peace and Conflict Research at the University of Copenhagen, no. 6 (1985).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    See among others, L. Freedman, The Evolution of Nuclear Strategy (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1981);Google Scholar
  12. D. Holloway and Jane M.O. Sharp (eds), The Warsaw Pact: Alliance in Transition? (Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press, 1984);Google Scholar
  13. S.E. Miller (ed.), Strategy and Nuclear Deterrence (Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1984);Google Scholar
  14. J. Erickson, ‘The Soviet View of Deterrence: A General Survey’, Survival (November–December 1982);Google Scholar
  15. S. Meyer, ‘Soviet Perspectives on the Paths to Nuclear War’, in G. Allison, A. Carnesale and J. Nye (eds), Hawks, Doves and Owls (New York: Norton, 1985);Google Scholar
  16. M. Nincic, How War Might Spread to Europe (London, Philadelphia: Taylor and Francis, SIPRI, 1985); J. Mearsheimer, ‘Nuclear Weapons and Deterrence in Europe’, International Security (Winter 1984/85) vol. 9, no. 3; R.N. Lebow, ‘The Soviet Offensive in Europe: The Schlieffen Plan Revisited?, International Security (Spring 1985) vol. 9, no. 4.; A. Garthoff-Pipes, ‘Debate on Soviet Strategic Doctrine’, Strategic Review (1982) vol. 10, no. 4; S. Meyer, ‘Soviet Theater Nuclear Forces: Doctrine and Objectives’, Adelphi Papers, no. 187–188 (London: IISS, 1984); B.R. Posen, ‘Measuring the Conventional Balance’, International Security (Winter 1984/85) vol 9, no. 3.Google Scholar
  17. 12.
    Freedman, op. cit., p. 263.Google Scholar
  18. 13.
    M. Charlton, ‘“Star Wars” or Peace-in-the-Skies: A Short History of Dreams and Nightmares’, Encounter (1986) no. 1, p. 14.Google Scholar
  19. 14.
    V.D. Sokolovsky (ed), Voyennaya Stratagiya (Moskva: Voyenizdat, 1962).Google Scholar
  20. 15.
    S.A. Tyushkevich, Sovietskiye Vooruzhonnie Sili: Istoriya stroitelstva (Moskva: Voyenizdat, 1978) p. 476.Google Scholar
  21. 16.
    M. Kiryan, ‘Factors Influencing the Organizational Structure’. Selected Reading from Soviet Military Thought 1959–1973 (Arlington: Systems Planning Corporation, 1980) p. 39.Google Scholar
  22. 17.
    V.D. Sokolovsky and Tcherednyichenko, ‘Military Strategy and Its Problems’, ibid p. 383.Google Scholar
  23. 18.
    M.V. Ogarkov, ‘Military Strategy’, Sovetskaya Voennaya Entsiklopediya (Moskva: Voyenizdat, 1979) vol. 7, p. 558.Google Scholar
  24. 19.
    M. Gareyev, The Views of M.V. Frunze and Contemporary Military Theory (Moskva: Voyenizdat, 1985) p. 240.Google Scholar
  25. 20.
    N.V. Ogarkov, ‘The Defence of Socialism: The Lessons of History and the Modern Period’, Krasnaya Zvezda (9 May 1984) p. 3, and History Teaches Vigilence (Moskva: Voyenizdat, 1985) p. 89.Google Scholar
  26. 21.
    D.F. Ustinov, ‘Rejecting the Threat of Nuclear War’, Pravda, (12 July 1982) p. 4.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Pugwash Conferences on Science and World Affairs 1988

Authors and Affiliations

  • Laszlo Valki

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations