ABSTRACT
Western leaders need to know what has motivated this Soviet military expansion and how Soviet leaders see the evolution of their political and military options. If Western decision makers turn to their community of analysts for guidance, they find a considerable quantity of analysis but a quality that leaves much to be desired. Relative military weakness, however, may lie at the heart of the infrequent Soviet use of military force during the postwar period. Acquired military strength does not necessarily mean that it was doctrine which drove the acquisition of that strength, nor that it will necessarily be used more frequently. Robert Legvold has argued that although the Kremlin recognizes that military power in peacetime can exert enormous influence politically, the military is clearly subordinate to other foreign policy instruments. It is very common to find Western analysts of Soviet military doctrine quoting two phrases from Clausewitz. One is that ‘war is a continuation of policy by other means’.
