James H. Lebovic explores the logic of seeking peace in an arms race. Flawed Logics offers a compelling intellectual history of U.S.-Russian strategic nuclear arms control.
Lebovic thoroughly reviews the critical role of ideas and assumptions in U.S. arms control debates, tying them to controversies over U.S. nuclear strategy from the birth of the atomic age to the present. Each nuclear arms treatyfrom the Truman to the Obama administrationis assessed in depth and the positions of proponents and opponents are systematically presented, discussed, and critiqued. Lebovic concludes that the terms of these treaties with the Russians were never as good as U.S. proponents claimed nor as bad as opponents feared.
The comprehensive analysis in Flawed Logics is objective and balanced, challenging the logic of hawks and doves, Democrats and Republicans, and theorists of all schools with equal vigor. Lebovic’s controversial argument will promote debate as to the very plausibility of arms control.
|Publisher:||Johns Hopkins University Press|
|Product dimensions:||5.90(w) x 8.90(h) x 0.80(d)|
|Age Range:||18 Years|
About the Author
James H. Lebovic is a professor of political science and international affairs at the George Washington University. He is author of The Limits of U.S. Military Capability: Lessons from Vietnam and Iraq, also published by Johns Hopkins.
Table of Contents
Introduction: Arms Control and the Power of Belief
1. Initial U.S. Nuclear Arms Control Initiatives: The Truman through Eisenhower Years
2. Early Success at Arms Control: The Kennedy Administration and the Limited Test Ban Treaty
3. The Era of Bilateral Nuclear Arms Limitations: The Johnson through Carter Years
4. Nuclear Arms Reductions in the Final Cold WarDecade: The Reagan Years
5. Nuclear Arms Reductions after the Cold War: The George H. W. Bush through Obama Years 182
6. The United States and Strategic Nuclear Arms Control: Assessing Intentions, Constraining Capabilities
What People are Saying About This
"James Lebovic skillfully dissects the opposing viewpoints in the U.S. arms control community during and after the Cold War and demonstrates that both sides of the debate exhibited perversely illogical inconsistencies. The book is extremely well written, well organized, and thoroughly researched."