Superpower Cooperation in Eastern Europe

  • Roger E. Kanet


The present chapter focuses on the competitive-cooperative relationship between the superpowers in Eastern Europe and is divided into four major sections. The first examines the nature of the interests of both the Soviet Union and the United States in Eastern Europe. The second part traces the evolution of the East European security regime. Special attention is given to the evidence of superpower ‘cooperative’ arrangements as they evolved over the course of the past forty years. The third part of the chapter delineates the specific nature of the European community system and the rules of behavior (or ‘operational code’) that emerged during that period. The discussion responds to the question: to what extent has ‘cooperation’ become an operative element in Soviet-American relations as they relate to Eastern Europe? The final section of the chapter outlines the reasons for the recent revolutionary changes in Eastern Europe and the prospects for the expansion and strengthening of superpower cooperation concerning Eastern Europe.


Nuclear Weapon East European Country Soviet Bloc Soviet Policy Security Regime 
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.
    See the classic treatment of the process in Hugh Seton-Watson, The East European Revolution (New York: Frederick A. Praeger, 1956), 3rd ednGoogle Scholar
  2. Zbigniew Brzezinski, The Soviet Bloc: Unity and Conflict (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1967), rev. edn.Google Scholar
  3. 2.
    See Vojtech Mastny, Russia’s Road to the Cold War (New York: Columbia University Press, 1979).Google Scholar
  4. 3.
    Charles Gati, ‘From Cold War Origins to Détente: Introduction to the International Politics of Eastern Europe’, in Charles Gati (ed.), The International Politics of Eastern Europe (New York: Praeger, 1976), p. 6.Google Scholar
  5. 4.
    The following discussion of Soviet objectives draws on James F. Brown, ‘Soviet Interests and Policies in Eastern Europe’, in Richard D. Vine (ed.), Soviet-East European Relations as a Problem for the West (London/New York: Croom Helm, 1987), pp. 43–5Google Scholar
  6. Sarah Meiklejohn Terry, ‘The Soviet Union and Eastern Europe: Implications of US Policy’, in Dan Caldwell (ed.), Soviet International Behavior and US Policy Options (Lexington, MA/Toronto: Lexington Books, 1985), pp. 11–26.Google Scholar
  7. 6.
    On the policy of differentiation see Charles Gati, Hungary and the Soviet Bloc (Durham: Duke University Press, 1986), pp. 219–20Google Scholar
  8. Bennett Kovrig, The Myths of Liberation: East-Central Europe in US Diplomacy and Politics since 1941 (Baltimore/London: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1973)Google Scholar
  9. John Lewis Gaddis, Strategies of Containment: A Critical Appraisal of Postwar American National Security Policy (New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1982), pp. 65–71.Google Scholar
  10. 7.
    Zbigniew Brzezinski and William E. Griffith, ‘Peaceful Engagement in Eastern Europe’, Foreign Affairs, vol. 39, no. 4 (1961), p. 642.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 9.
    An excellent analytic treatment of the crisis appears in Hannes Adomeit, Soviet Risk-Taking and Crisis Behavior: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis (London/Boston: George Allen & Unwin, 1982), pp. 67–182.Google Scholar
  12. 11.
    Cited in Bruno Kreisky, Die Herausforderung (Dusseldorf: Econ, 1963), p. 103.Google Scholar
  13. 12.
    See Kurt Steiner, ‘Negotiations for an Austrian State Treaty’, in Alexander L. George, Philip J. Farley, and Alexander Dallin (eds), US-Soviet Security Cooperation: Achievements, Failures, Lessons (New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1988), pp. 106–22.Google Scholar
  14. 13.
    A. W. DePorte, Europe Between the Superpowers: The Enduring Balance (New Haven/London: Yale University Press, 1979), pp. 165–6.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Theodore C. Sorensen, Kennedy (New York: Harper & Row, 1965), pp. 593–4.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    This discussion draws on Karen Dawisha, The Kremlin and the Prague Spring (Berkeley/London: University of California Press, 1984)Google Scholar
  17. Galia Golan, Reform Rule in Czechoslovakia, 1968–1969 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1973)Google Scholar
  18. H. Gordon Skilling, Czechoslovakia’s Interrupted Revolution (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1976).Google Scholar
  19. 17.
    This discussion draws from Roger E. Kanet ‘The Polish Crisis and Poland’s “Allies”: The Soviet and East European Response to Events in Poland’, in Jack Bielasiak and Maurice D. Simon (eds), Polish Politics: Edge of the Abyss (New York: Praeger, 1984), pp. 317–44Google Scholar
  20. 18.
    John L. Gaddis, ‘The Evolution of US Policy Goals Toward the USSR in the Postwar Era’, in Seweryn Bialer and Michael Mandelbaum (eds), Gorbachev’s Russia and American Foreign Policy (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1988), p. 327.Google Scholar
  21. 19.
    On the role of Eastern Europe in the Third World, see Roger E. Kanet, ‘Eastern Europe and the Third World: The Expanding Relationship’, in Michael J. Sodaro and Sharon L. Wolchik (eds), Foreign and Domestic Policy in Eastern Europe in the 1980s: Trends and Prospects (London: Macmillan; New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1983), pp. 234–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 20.
    On the concept of’ spheres of influence’ see Roger E. Kanet, ‘Esferas de Influencia de la Política Exterior Soviética’, Foro Internacional, vol. 14, no. 2 (1973), pp. 220–34Google Scholar
  23. 21.
    This coincides with Alexander George conclusions in ‘Crisis Prevention Reexamined’, in Alexander L. George (ed.), Managing US-Soviet Rivalry: Problems of Crisis Prevention (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1979), p. 384.Google Scholar
  24. 22.
    For an argument in favor of linkage in policy toward the USSR written several years later see Helmut Sonnenfeldt, ‘Linkage: A Strategy for Tempering Soviet Antagonisms’, NATO Review, vol. XXVII, no. 1 (1979), pp. 3–5, 21–2.Google Scholar
  25. 23.
    For the discussion of these rules see Seweryn Bialer, ‘Lessons of History: Soviet-American Relations in the Postwar Era’, in Arnold L. Horelick (ed.), US-Soviet Relations: The Next Phase (Ithaca/London: Cornell University Press, 1986), p. 91Google Scholar
  26. Alexander L. George, ‘US-Soviet Efforts to Cooperate in Crisis Management and Crisis Avoidance’, in George, Farley, and Dallin (eds), US-Soviet Security Cooperation, pp. 583–4.Google Scholar
  27. 28.
    This discussion draws from a number of sources. Especially important are Mikhail Gorbachev, Perestroika: New Thinking for Our Country and the World (New York: Harper & Row, 1987)Google Scholar
  28. Abel Aganbegyan, The Economic Challenge of Perestroika (Bloomington-Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 1988)Google Scholar
  29. Tat’iana I. Zaslavskaia, A Voice of Reform: Essays By Tat’iana I. Zaslavskaia (Armonk, NY/London: M. E. Sharpe, 1989)Google Scholar
  30. A. Hewett, Reforming the Soviet Economy: Equality versus Efficiency (Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution, 1988)Google Scholar
  31. Jerry F. Hough, Opening up the Soviet Economy (Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution, 1988).Google Scholar
  32. 29.
    For a perceptive analysis of recent Soviet-East European relations see Charles Gati, The Bloc That Failed: Soviet-East European Relations in Transition (Bloomington-Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 1990).Google Scholar
  33. 30.
    Kennan’s 1947 ‘Mr X’ article on containment is reprinted in Charles Gati (ed.), Caging the Bear: Containment and the Cold War (Indianapolis/New York: Bobbs-Merrill, 1974).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Roger E. Kanet and Edward A. Kolodziej 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • Roger E. Kanet

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations