ABSTRACT
Nuclear war has been avoided through deterrence and crisis management. Many defense analysts are convinced that if calibrated to meeting changing circumstances, deterrence can safeguard the peace for another forty years—or longer. Foreign policy analysts are of the opinion that neither side is interested in crisis prevention. This consensus includes those who believe the superpowers must develop a new, constructive relationship. The Soviets charge that the Reagan Administration has accelerated efforts to modernize US conventional and nuclear forces in the belief that this will change the correlation of forces between the superpowers. The United States is not blameless for the failure of crisis prevention. Avoidance of nuclear war is the most compelling reason for the United States to cooperate with Moscow in developing a crisis prevention regime. The United States cannot achieve the kind of nuclear edge it enjoyed during the period characterized as "Cold War I."
