Abstract
The notion of adopting ‘Non-Offensive Defence’ strategies has attracted appreciable if often fleeting support in a number of European countries especially. Its advocates are for the most part closely associated with the international ‘Peace Movement’ and belong to the left of the political spectrum. They include such diverse ‘think-tanks’ as the British-American Security Information Council (which in April 1989 published a Comprehensive Concept of Defence and Disarmament for NATO that recommended the embracing of ‘Defensive Defence’ principles), the British ‘Just Defence’ organisation, the Alternative Defence Commission, and the Institute for Defense and Disarmament Studies at Brookline, USA. Some university-affiliated institutions have also been to the fore in presenting the merits of these military postures, notably the School of Peace Studies at Bradford, UK, the Institut für Friedensforschung und Sicherheitspolitik of Hamburg University, and the Centre for Peace and Conflict Research at the University of Copenhagen, which publishes the Non-Offensive Defence International Research Newsletter.
‘All opportunities should be explored, but … all consequent actions should take into account Soviet military capability as well as stated intentions. … If you live next door to an elephant, you watch his physique as well as his psyche.’
(Lord Carrington, when NATO’s Secretary-General, on détente)
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes and References
See, for example, D. Gates, ‘Non-Offensive Defence: A Strategic Contradiction?’, Occasional Paper, no. 29 (London: Institute for European Defence and Strategic Studies, 1987) pp. 20–8 re Denmark; The Alternative Defence Commission, Defence Without The Bomb (New York: Taylor and Francis, 1983); F. Barnaby and S. Windass, What Is Just Defence? (Oxford: Just Defence, 1983); A. Karkoszka, ‘Merits of the Jaruzelski Plan’, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, vol. 44, no. 7 (September 1988) pp. 32–4.
See Von Bonin’s essay in Opposition gegen Adenauers Sicherheitspolitik: Eine Dokumentation, H. Brill (ed.) (Hamburg: Verlag Neue Politik, 1976).
See, for instance, H. Afheldt, Defensive Verteidigung (Reinbeck: Rowohlt, 1983); E. Afheldt, Verteidigung ohne Selbstmord: Vorschlag für den Einsatz einer leichten Infanterie; A. von Bülow, ‘Strategie vertrauensschaffender Sicherheitsstrukturen in Europa: Wege zur Sicherheitspartnerschaft’, Blätter für deutsche und internationale Politik, no. 10 (1985); SAS, ‘Landstreitkräfte zur Verteidigung der Bundesrepublik Deutschland’, Strukturwandel der Verteidigung (Cologne-Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag, 1984), and Vertrauensbildende Verteidigung (Gerlingen: Bleicher, 1989); A. von Müller, The Integrated Forward Defence (Starnberg: Manus, 1985); N. Hannig, Abschreckung durch konventionelle Waffen: Das David-Goliath-Prinzip (Berlin: Arno Spitz, 1984); J. Löser, Weder rot noch tot: Überleben ohne Atomkrieg: Eine sicherheitspolitische Alternative (Munich: Olzog, 1981); and A. von Bülow, A. von Müller and H. Funk, Sicherheit für Europa (Koblenz: Bernard and Graefe Verlag, 1988).
Germany Debates Defence, p. 152.
J. Dean, ‘Alternative Defense: Answer To NATO’s Central Front Problems?’, International Affairs (Winter 1987–8) pp. 61–82; and S. Flanagan, ‘Nonprovocative and Civilian-based Defenses’, in Fateful Visions: Avoiding Nuclear Catastrophe, J.S. Nye et al. (ed.) (Cambridge: Ballinger Mass., 1988).
G. Brossolet, Essai sur la Non Bataille (Paris: Belin, 1975); ‘Das Ende der Schlacht: Versuch über die Nicht-Schlacht’, in Verteidigung ohne Schlacht (Munich: Carl Hanser, 1979).
See Chapter 4, Part 1.
See, for example, H.W. Hoffman, R.K. Hüber and K. Steiger, On Reactive Defence Options (Munich: Bericht No. S-8403, Institut für angewandte Systemforschung und Operations Research, Hochschule der Bundeswehr, 1984).
General H. von Sandrart, ‘Forward Defence: Mobility And The Use Of Barriers’, NATO’s Sixteen Nations, Special, vol. 30 (January 1985) pp. 37–43.
See, for example, Gates, ‘Non-Offensive Defence’, pp. 20–8; and The Guardian, 12 May 1988.
Quoted in J. Steele, ‘The New Weapon in the Soviet Defence Vocabulary’, The Guardian, 5 August 1987.
Pravda, 17 February 1987.
See, for instance, S. Shenfield, The Nuclear Predicament: Explorations in Soviet Ideology (London: Routledge/RIIA, 1987).
See, for example, R. Forsberg, ‘Toward A Nonaggressive World’, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, vol. 44, no. 7 (September 1988) pp. 49–54.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 1991 David Gates
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Gates, D. (1991). Supporters and Models of ‘Non-Offensive Defence’. In: Non-Offensive Defence. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-10585-4_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-10585-4_2
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-10587-8
Online ISBN: 978-1-349-10585-4
eBook Packages: Palgrave Political & Intern. Studies CollectionPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)