Abstract
This is essentially a three-dimensional analysis of interaction between the United States and the Soviet Union regarding their relations with Pakistan, Iran and Afghanistan; and the manner and style of relations of these three states with the superpowers; and finally, as neighbors of the USSR, the conduct of their relations with the Soviet Union, with each other, and the exogenous power, the United States. Despite the obvious dissimilarities in their political systems, (where the United States stands committed to free enterprise, multiple party system, and human rights and the Soviet Union espouses with an equal passion socialism, one-party rule, and classless social order), both superpowers have developed remarkable similarities in the conduct of their foreign policies.1 Among the similarities or instrumentalities of foreign policy may be included economic and military aid, the right to articulate the strategic interests in other continents, and above all, the right to exercise intervention in the affairs of neighboring, as well as distant, states.
Keywords
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.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
One scholar has singled out for scrutiny American and Soviet behavior in (1) aid relations with the Third World, (2) crisis management in the Middle East, and (3) nuclear non-proliferation. See Christer Jonnson Superpowers: Comparing American and Soviet Foreign Policy (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1984) p. 5
William J. Taylor, Jr., Steven A. Maaranen, and Jerrit W. Gong, Strategic Responses to Conflict in the 1980s (Lexington, Mass.: DC Heath & Co., 1984), p. 517.
See also, Prosser Gifford, Ed., The National Interests of the United States (Washington, DC: Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, 1981) p. 188.
Nikolai I. Lebedev, Great October and Today’s World (New York: Pergamon Press, 1981), pp. 134–142.
Edward Vose Gulick, Europe’s Classical Balance of Power (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1955), pp. 62–65.
This white paper contains more than 2000 pages of documents and statements of responsible officials of the US Government. See, Grenada Documents: An Overview and Selection (Washington, DC: Departments of State and Defense, 1984), p. 3. One study has expressed serious reservations about the ‘legality of the use of force’ in Grenada. William C. Gilmore, The Grenada Intervention: Analysis and Documentation (New York: Facts on File, 1984) p. 74.
Hedley Bull, Ed., Intervention in World Politics (Oxford: Clarendon Press. 1984) p. 195.
Richard Bernstein, ‘Remaking Afghanistan in the Soviet Image’, The New York Times, 24 March 1985, p. 53.
Christina Dameyer, ‘In Campaign to Sovietize Afghanistan USSR Uses School Media and Ethnic Ties’, The Christian Science Monitor, 26 March 1985, p. 13.
Selig Harrison, ‘Afghanistan Stalemate: Self-Determination and a Soviet Force Withdrawal’, Parameters (Journal of the US Army War College), Vol. XIV, #4, 1984, p. 36.
Louis Dupree, Afghanistan (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1980 edition), p. 662.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 1987 Hafeez Malik
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Malik, H. (1987). Introduction. In: Malik, H. (eds) Soviet-American Relations with Pakistan, Iran and Afghanistan. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-08553-8_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-08553-8_1
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-08555-2
Online ISBN: 978-1-349-08553-8
eBook Packages: Palgrave Political & Intern. Studies CollectionPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)