Evolution of Nuclear Strategy

Rating:
Summary: A Comprehensive History of Nuclear Strategy
Review: Lawrence Freedman was written many important articles and books but _The Evolution of Nuclear Strategy_ is probably his best. He presents a comprehensive analysis of the development nuclear strategy from 1945 to the end of the Cold War. The book usefully explains a multitude of concepts such as second strike capabilities, massive retaliation, and selective options. Freedman gives added depth by covering nuclear strategy in China, Europe, and the Soviet Union.

One of the great strengths of this book is its objectivity. Most works on nuclear strategy focus on arguing whether nuclear war is still possible, how a nuclear war would be fought, or if mutually assured destruction is a stable and inevitable strategy. Freedman definitely questions the logic of strategies that aim to fight nuclear wars and favors mutually assured destruction. However, the text is devoid of rhetoric or argumentation that would cloud his historical analysis.

Some may criticize the book because it does not concentrate on certain issues relevant today, such as non-proliferation or nuclear terrorism. From the perspective of 2001, though, Freedman's work serves as a history of the major strategic discourse of the Cold War. In a way, his work serves as a the cap on fifty years of writings on nuclear strategy.

For students of strategy, _The Evolution of Nuclear Strategy_ is an essential read. In terms of comprehensiveness, objectivity, and good explanation, this book cannot be matched.

Rating:
Summary: A Comprehensive History of Nuclear Strategy
Review: Lawrence Freedman was written many important articles and books but _The Evolution of Nuclear Strategy_ is probably his best. He presents a comprehensive analysis of the development nuclear strategy from 1945 to the end of the Cold War. The book usefully explains a multitude of concepts such as second strike capabilities, massive retaliation, and selective options. Freedman gives added depth by covering nuclear strategy in China, Europe, and the Soviet Union.

One of the great strengths of this book is its objectivity. Most works on nuclear strategy focus on arguing whether nuclear war is still possible, how a nuclear war would be fought, or if mutually assured destruction is a stable and inevitable strategy. Freedman definitely questions the logic of strategies that aim to fight nuclear wars and favors mutually assured destruction. However, the text is devoid of rhetoric or argumentation that would cloud his historical analysis.

Some may criticize the book because it does not concentrate on certain issues relevant today, such as non-proliferation or nuclear terrorism. From the perspective of 2001, though, Freedman's work serves as a history of the major strategic discourse of the Cold War. In a way, his work serves as a the cap on fifty years of writings on nuclear strategy.

For students of strategy, _The Evolution of Nuclear Strategy_ is an essential read. In terms of comprehensiveness, objectivity, and good explanation, this book cannot be matched.

Rating:
Summary: arcane and heavy poli sci approach
Review: This is a book for extreme experts: academics, nuclear strategy buffs, and the occasional pundit in search of its peculiar logic. Forgive my naivete, but it also exemplifies why academia is viewed by so many as a boring world of, well, extreme experts of recondite trivia - even when it deals with the potential destruction of industrial civilization. In my view, this book utterly fails to cross over to the interested non-specialist or those who are not writing a dissertation but just want a good read. I never would have cracked this if it wasn't for work.

That being said, the book summarises an absoulutely enormous amount of scholarship and the thinking of the mysterious "wizards" who argued in little offices in the Pentagon for this type of bomb, that type of missile or artillery shell, and this type of treaty. Fortunately, a lot of this is now more history with the end of the Cold War and the arms race, but it still appears like a bizarre parallel universe of microeconomics applied to massiave destructive capabilites with a cold rationality and words like "deterrence" and "mutual assured destruction." Alas, very little of the political context or the human drama is covered in its quirky detail, so don't seek that here. The prose is clear, if a bit like a massive vanilla milkshake when you read it in one sitting (as I had to). I learned from this, but simply did not enjoy it past the first chapter or even the introduction. The achievement is inarguable, but this book is like a tough home work assignment in undergraduate school.

Recommended for academic purposes, but not for the interested layman.

Rating:
Summary: arcane and heavy poli sci approach
Review: This is a book for extreme experts: academics, nuclear strategy buffs, and the occasional pundit in search of its peculiar logic. Forgive my naivete, but it also exemplifies why academia is viewed by so many as a boring world of, well, extreme experts of recondite trivia - even when it deals with the potential destruction of industrial civilization. In my view, this book utterly fails to cross over to the interested non-specialist or those who are not writing a dissertation but just want a good read. I never would have cracked this if it wasn't for work.

That being said, the book summarises an absoulutely enormous amount of scholarship and the thinking of the mysterious "wizards" who argued in little offices in the Pentagon for this type of bomb, that type of missile or artillery shell, and this type of treaty. Fortunately, a lot of this is now more history with the end of the Cold War and the arms race, but it still appears like a bizarre parallel universe of microeconomics applied to massiave destructive capabilites with a cold rationality and words like "deterrence" and "mutual assured destruction." Alas, very little of the political context or the human drama is covered in its quirky detail, so don't seek that here. The prose is clear, if a bit like a massive vanilla milkshake when you read it in one sitting (as I had to). I learned from this, but simply did not enjoy it past the first chapter or even the introduction. The achievement is inarguable, but this book is like a tough home work assignment in undergraduate school.

Recommended for academic purposes, but not for the interested layman.