{"title":"俄罗斯对乌克兰战争后的保证与威慑","authors":"J. Goldgeier, Lily Wojtowicz","doi":"10.1080/09636412.2022.2140597","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In response to Russia’s brutal, unprovoked, and expanded war against Ukraine in 2022, North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) member states rushed support to help the latter defend itself, while the United States also reassured NATO’s eastern members that they would be defended in the event that Russia expanded the war into alliance territory. Since the start of the Cold War, extended deterrence has been a critical issue for scholarly and practitioner communities. How could the United States signal to Moscow during the Cold War and again today that it was ready to come to the defense of its treaty allies? Would the Kremlin believe the United States would risk damage, including a Russian nuclear strike, to its homeland to deter an attack on allies located far from US soil? Though alliance reassurance has received more attention in recent years, the subject remains far less studied than topics such as credibility among adversaries and extended deterrence’s impact on nonproliferation. What does it take to reassure allies that the United States will protect them in the event of an attack? Focusing on the interplay between resolve and capabilities, Brian Blankenship and Erik Lin-Greenberg argue that a feature of US policy since the Cold War, namely the use of relatively small numbers of","PeriodicalId":47478,"journal":{"name":"Security Studies","volume":"31 1","pages":"736 - 743"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reassurance and Deterrence after Russia’s War against Ukraine\",\"authors\":\"J. Goldgeier, Lily Wojtowicz\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/09636412.2022.2140597\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In response to Russia’s brutal, unprovoked, and expanded war against Ukraine in 2022, North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) member states rushed support to help the latter defend itself, while the United States also reassured NATO’s eastern members that they would be defended in the event that Russia expanded the war into alliance territory. Since the start of the Cold War, extended deterrence has been a critical issue for scholarly and practitioner communities. How could the United States signal to Moscow during the Cold War and again today that it was ready to come to the defense of its treaty allies? Would the Kremlin believe the United States would risk damage, including a Russian nuclear strike, to its homeland to deter an attack on allies located far from US soil? Though alliance reassurance has received more attention in recent years, the subject remains far less studied than topics such as credibility among adversaries and extended deterrence’s impact on nonproliferation. What does it take to reassure allies that the United States will protect them in the event of an attack? Focusing on the interplay between resolve and capabilities, Brian Blankenship and Erik Lin-Greenberg argue that a feature of US policy since the Cold War, namely the use of relatively small numbers of\",\"PeriodicalId\":47478,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Security Studies\",\"volume\":\"31 1\",\"pages\":\"736 - 743\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-08-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Security Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/09636412.2022.2140597\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Security Studies","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09636412.2022.2140597","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Reassurance and Deterrence after Russia’s War against Ukraine
In response to Russia’s brutal, unprovoked, and expanded war against Ukraine in 2022, North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) member states rushed support to help the latter defend itself, while the United States also reassured NATO’s eastern members that they would be defended in the event that Russia expanded the war into alliance territory. Since the start of the Cold War, extended deterrence has been a critical issue for scholarly and practitioner communities. How could the United States signal to Moscow during the Cold War and again today that it was ready to come to the defense of its treaty allies? Would the Kremlin believe the United States would risk damage, including a Russian nuclear strike, to its homeland to deter an attack on allies located far from US soil? Though alliance reassurance has received more attention in recent years, the subject remains far less studied than topics such as credibility among adversaries and extended deterrence’s impact on nonproliferation. What does it take to reassure allies that the United States will protect them in the event of an attack? Focusing on the interplay between resolve and capabilities, Brian Blankenship and Erik Lin-Greenberg argue that a feature of US policy since the Cold War, namely the use of relatively small numbers of
期刊介绍:
Security Studies publishes innovative scholarly manuscripts that make a significant contribution – whether theoretical, empirical, or both – to our understanding of international security. Studies that do not emphasize the causes and consequences of war or the sources and conditions of peace fall outside the journal’s domain. Security Studies features articles that develop, test, and debate theories of international security – that is, articles that address an important research question, display innovation in research, contribute in a novel way to a body of knowledge, and (as appropriate) demonstrate theoretical development with state-of-the art use of appropriate methodological tools. While we encourage authors to discuss the policy implications of their work, articles that are primarily policy-oriented do not fit the journal’s mission. The journal publishes articles that challenge the conventional wisdom in the area of international security studies. Security Studies includes a wide range of topics ranging from nuclear proliferation and deterrence, civil-military relations, strategic culture, ethnic conflicts and their resolution, epidemics and national security, democracy and foreign-policy decision making, developments in qualitative and multi-method research, and the future of security studies.