Why Was INF Needed, and Would It Have Been Used?

  • Ian M. Cuthbertson
  • David Robertson

Abstract

Whatever position people take on the elimination of INF missiles brought about by the December 1987 treaty, whatever they believe the direct policy consequences are, there is one assumption held in common. Abolishing intermediate-range nuclear weapons actually makes a significant difference to the balance of forces in Europe. Their absence would have a discernible effect if war were to break out on the central front.1

Keywords

Europe Transportation Aired Geted Monopoly 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. 5.
    Bruce D. Berkowitz, Calculated Risks: A Century of Arms Control and Why It Has Failed (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1987).Google Scholar
  2. 6.
    A good account is given in Lawrence Freedman, The Evolution of Nuclear Strategy (London: Macmillan, 1981).Google Scholar
  3. 7.
    See Paul Rogers, Guide to Nuclear Weapons 1984–85 (Bradford: School of Peace Studies, University of Bradford, 1984).Google Scholar
  4. 19.
    See Joseph A. Lovece, ‘Joint UAV Program Office Pushes to Meet Its Charter’, Armed Forces Journal International (April 1989), p. 49.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Institute for East-West Security Studies 1990

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ian M. Cuthbertson
    • 1
  • David Robertson
    • 2
  1. 1.Institute for East-West Security StudiesUK
  2. 2.St Hugh’s CollegeOxfordUK

Personalised recommendations