Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Neoclassical Realist Approach to Military Doctrines

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Book cover Neoclassical Realism and the Underdevelopment of China’s Nuclear Doctrine

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.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 44.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 59.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

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

  2. 2.

    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).

  3. 3.

    “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).

  4. 4.

    See Glenn et al. (2004).

  5. 5.

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

  6. 6.

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

  7. 7.

    On this point, see Taliaferro (2006).

  8. 8.

    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).

  9. 9.

    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).

  10. 10.

    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).

  11. 11.

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

  12. 12.

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

  13. 13.

    On this point, see Rosa (2008).

  14. 14.

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

  15. 15.

    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).

  16. 16.

    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).

References

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

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

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

    Book  Google Scholar 

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

    Book  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Book  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Book  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

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

    Book  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Trento, Trento, Italy

    Paolo Rosa

Authors
  1. Paolo Rosa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Paolo Rosa .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Rosa, P. (2018). A Neoclassical Realist Approach to Military Doctrines. In: Neoclassical Realism and the Underdevelopment of China’s Nuclear Doctrine . Palgrave Pivot, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-78640-7_2

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation