ABSTRACT
The main analysis proposes a limited role for nuclear deterrence in the form of a sharply restricted "counter-combatant" strategy. As is well known, the European allies vigorously resisted that shift in emphasis, preferring the deterrent effect of reliance on nuclear weapons to the risk that non-nuclear deterrence would fail and result in the massive destruction of another conventional war on European soil. As extended nuclear deterrence has declined in credibility with the rise of Soviet retaliatory capabilities, contradictions within strategic doctrines, and among different perspectives, have become salient. In this chapter, the author explores some reasons why both assumptions are exaggerated, but first the people need to look at the possible roles of nuclear weapons in different forms of deterrence.
