Abstract
Whatever position people take on the elimination of INF missiles brought about by the December 1987 treaty, whatever they believe the direct policy consequences are, there is one assumption held in common. Abolishing intermediate-range nuclear weapons actually makes a significant difference to the balance of forces in Europe. Their absence would have a discernible effect if war were to break out on the central front.1
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
Bruce D. Berkowitz, Calculated Risks: A Century of Arms Control and Why It Has Failed (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1987).
A good account is given in Lawrence Freedman, The Evolution of Nuclear Strategy (London: Macmillan, 1981).
See Paul Rogers, Guide to Nuclear Weapons 1984–85 (Bradford: School of Peace Studies, University of Bradford, 1984).
See Joseph A. Lovece, ‘Joint UAV Program Office Pushes to Meet Its Charter’, Armed Forces Journal International (April 1989), p. 49.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 1990 Institute for East-West Security Studies
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Cuthbertson, I.M., Robertson, D. (1990). Why Was INF Needed, and Would It Have Been Used?. In: Enhancing European Security. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-20682-7_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-20682-7_2
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-0-333-51361-3
Online ISBN: 978-1-349-20682-7
eBook Packages: Palgrave Political & Intern. Studies CollectionPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)