Proving a negative: why deterrence does not work in the Baltics

References

• Almog, D., 2004. Cumulative deterrence and the war on terrorism. Parameters: United States Army War College quarterly, 34 (4), 4–19.
   Google Scholar
• Baločkaitė, R., 2010. Post-Soviet transitions of the planned socialist towns: Visaginas. Lithuania. Studies of transition states and societies, 2 (2), 63–81.
   Google Scholar
• Beaufre, A., 1965. An introduction to strategy. London: Faber and Faber.
   Google Scholar
• Betts, R.K., 1985. Conventional deterrence: predictive uncertainty and policy confidence. World politics, 37 (2), 153–179. doi: 10.2307/2010141
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Betts, R.K., 2013. The lost logic of deterrence. Foreign affairs, 92 (2), 87–99.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Buzan, B., 1987. An introduction to strategic studies. New York: St. Martin’s Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cameron, D., 2014. The prime minister’s letter to leaders from NATO’s member states. London: The Prime Minister's Office, 2 August.
   Google Scholar
• Cheskin, A. and Kachuyevski, A., 2019. The Russian-speaking populations in the post-Soviet space: language, politics and identity. Europe-Asia studies, 71 (1), 1–23. doi: 10.1080/09668136.2018.1529467
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clark, W., et al., 2016. Closing NATO’s Baltic gap. Tallinn: International Centre for Defence and Security.
   Google Scholar
• Colby, E. and Solomon, J., 2015. Facing Russia: conventional defence and deterrence in Europe. Survival, 57 (6), 21–50. doi: 10.1080/00396338.2015.1116146
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cook, L., 2017. NATO chief says allies concerned about Russian phone jamming. Brussels: The Associated Press, 26 October.
   Google Scholar
• Cornish, P., 2017. Integrated deterrence: NATO’s ‘first reset’ strategy. Bratislava: GLOBSEC Policy Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Danilovic, V., 2001. The sources of threat credibility in extended deterrence. Journal of conflict resolution, 45 (3), 341–369. doi: 10.1177/0022002701045003005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Department of Defense, 2019. European deterrence initiative: Department of Defense budget fiscal year 2020. Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller), March.
   Google Scholar
• Duffield, J.S., 1995. Power rules: the evolution of NATO's conventional force posture. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• EISS, 2016. Annual review 2015. Tallinn: Estonian Internal Security Service.
   Google Scholar
• Fearon, J.D., 1997. Signaling foreign policy interests: tying hands versus sinking costs. Journal of conflict resolution, 41 (1), 68–90. doi: 10.1177/0022002797041001004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fearon, J.D., 2002. Selection effects and deterrence. International interactions, 28 (1), 5–29. doi: 10.1080/03050620210390
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Freedman, L., 2004. Deterrence. Cambridge: Polity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Freedman, L., 2013. Strategy: a history. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Galeotti, M., 2016. Hybrid, ambiguous, and non-linear? How new is Russia’s ‘new way of war’? Small wars & insurgencies, 27 (2), 282–301. doi: 10.1080/09592318.2015.1129170
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harper, C., Lawrence, T., and Sakkov, S., 2018. Air defence of the Baltic states. Tallinn: International Centre for Defence and Security.
   Google Scholar
• Harris, H.B., 2016. America’s enduring interests in the Indo-Asia-Pacific. Address of the Commander of U.S. Pacific Command to the Lowy Institute, Sydney, 14 December.
   Google Scholar
• Harvey, F.P., 1999. Practicing coercion: revisiting successes and failures using Boolean logic and comparative methods. Journal of conflict resolution, 43 (6), 840–871. doi: 10.1177/0022002799043006008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heuser, B., 1998. Victory in a nuclear war? A comparison of NATO and WTO war aims and strategies. Contemporary European history, 7 (3), 311–327. doi: 10.1017/S0960777300004264
   Google Scholar
• Heuser, B. and Stoddart, K., 2017. Difficult Europeans: NATO and tactical/non-strategic nuclear weapons in the Cold War. Diplomacy & statecraft, 28 (3), 454–447. doi: 10.1080/09592296.2017.1347446
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huth, P.K., 1997. Reputations and deterrence: a theoretical and empirical assessment. Security studies, 7 (1), 72–99. doi: 10.1080/09636419708429334
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huth, P.K. and Russett, B., 1984. What makes deterrence work? Cases from, 1900 to 1980. World politics, 36 (4), 496–526.
   Google Scholar
• Huth, P.K. and Russett, B., 1990. Testing deterrence theory: rigor makes a difference. World politics, 42 (4), 466–501. doi: 10.2307/2010511
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huth, P. and Russett, B., 1993. General deterrence between enduring rivals: testing three competing models. American political science review, 87 (1), 61–73. doi: 10.2307/2938956
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jervis, R., Lebow, R.N., and Stein, J.G., 1989. Psychology and deterrence. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson, R., 2018. Hybrid war and its countermeasures: a critique of the literature. Small wars & insurgencies, 29 (1), 141–163. doi: 10.1080/09592318.2018.1404770
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Joubert, V., 2012. Five years after Estonia’s cyber attacks: lessons learned for NATO? Research Paper No. 76, NATO Defense College, Rome.
   Google Scholar
• Kahn, H., 1960. On thermonuclear war. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kaljulaid, K., 2017. Remarks by the President of Estonia at the Lennart Meri conference. Office of the President. Tallinn, 12 May.
   Google Scholar
• Kaljulaid, K., 2018a. Keynote speech by the President of Estonia at Munich security conference side event. Office of the President. Munich, 15 February.
   Google Scholar
• Kaljulaid, K., 2018b. Face à la Russie, l'Estonie réclame des troupes et missiles américains. Agence France-Presse, Washington, 5 April.
   Google Scholar
• Karber, P.A. and Combs, J.A., 1998. The United States. NATO, and the Soviet threat to Western Europe: military estimates and policy options, 1945–1963. Diplomatic history, 22 (3), 399–429.
   Google Scholar
• Kaufmann, W., 1954. The requirements of deterrence. Princeton: The Center of International Studies.
   Google Scholar
• Kroenig, M., 2015. Facing reality: getting NATO ready for a new Cold War. Survival, 57 (1), 49–70. doi: 10.1080/00396338.2015.1008295
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lanoszka, A., 2016. Russian hybrid warfare and extended deterrence in Eastern Europe. International affairs, 92 (1), 175–195. doi: 10.1111/1468-2346.12509
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lebow, R.N. and Stein, J.G., 1990. Deterrence: the elusive dependent variable. World politics, 42 (3), 336–369. doi: 10.2307/2010415
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ludvik, J., 2017. Nuclear asymmetry and deterrence: theory, policy and history. Abingdon: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Luik, J. and Jermalavičius, T., 2017. A plausible scenario of nuclear war in Europe, and how to deter it: a perspective from Estonia. Bulletin of the atomic scientists, 73 (4), 233–239. doi: 10.1080/00963402.2017.1338014
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mattis, J., 2017. Remarks by Secretary Mattis and Minister von der Leyen at the George C. Marshall European Center for Security Studies in Garmisch-Partenkirchen, Germany. Washington: U.S. Department of Defense. Press Operations transcript, 28 June.
   Google Scholar
• Merkel, A., 2015. Rede von Bundeskanzlerin Angela Merkel anlässlich der 51. Münchner Sicherheitskonferenz. Munich: Presse- and Informationsamt der Bundesregierung, 7 February.
   Google Scholar
• Ministry of Defence, 2017. UK troops arrive in Estonia for major NATO deployment. Gov.uk, 18 March. Available from: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-troops-arrive-in-estonia-for-major-nato-deployment [Accessed 16 April 2019].
   Google Scholar
• Mölling, C., Schütz, T., and Stanley-Lockman, Z., 2019. A new dimension of air-based threats: Germany, the EU, and NATO need new political initiatives and military defense systems. DGAP Kompakt, Nr. 8, June 2019.
   Google Scholar
• Moody, S.J., 2017. Enhancing political cohesion in NATO during the 1950s or: how it learned to stop worrying and love the (tactical) bomb. Journal of strategic studies, 40 (6), 817–838. doi: 10.1080/01402390.2015.1035434
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morgan, P.M., 1977. Deterrence: a conceptual analysis. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Morgan, P.M., 2003. Deterrence now. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• NATO, 2008. Bucharest summit declaration. Bucharest: North Atlantic Council. Press Release 049 issued on 3 April.
   Google Scholar
• NATO, 2010. Strategic concept: active engagement, modern defence. Brussels: NATO Public Diplomacy Division.
   Google Scholar
• NATO, 2014. Wales summit declaration. Newport: North Atlantic Council. Press release 120 issued on 5 September.
   Google Scholar
• NATO, 2016. Warsaw summit communiqué. Warsaw: North Atlantic Council. Press Release 100 issued on 9 July.
   Google Scholar
• NSC, 1990. Saddam’s message of friendship to President Bush. U.S. Embassy in Baghdad, 25 July. Memorandum of the National Security Council (NSC), Declassified document from The Library of George Bush Sr. in College Station, Texas.
   Google Scholar
• Nye, J.S., 2017. Deterrence and dissuasion in cyberspace. International security, 41 (3), 44–71. doi: 10.1162/ISEC_a_00266
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• NYT, 1990. Excerpts from Iraqi document on meeting with U.S. envoy. The New York Times, 23 September, p. 1019.
   Google Scholar
• Obama, B., 2014. Remarks by President Obama to the people of Estonia. Tallinn: Office of the Press Secretary, The White House, 3 September.
   Google Scholar
• Osgood, R.E., 1957. Limited war: the challenge to American strategy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Paul, T.V., 2009. Complex deterrence: an introduction. In: T.V. Paul, P.M. Morgan, and J.J. Wirtz, eds. Complex deterrence: strategy in the global age. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1–27.
   Google Scholar
• Pompeo, M., 2018. Remarks at a press availability in NATO headquarters in Brussels, Belgium. Washington: U.S. Department of State, 27 April.
   Google Scholar
• Pridham, G., 2018. Latgale and Latvia’s post-Soviet democracy: the territorial dimension of regime consolidation. East European politics, 34 (2), 194–216. doi: 10.1080/21599165.2018.1457956
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Quackenbush, S.L., 2010. General deterrence and international conflict: testing perfect deterrence theory. International interactions, 36 (1), 60–85. doi: 10.1080/03050620903554069
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rasmussen, A.F., 2014. NATO is back: a conversation with Anders Fogh Rasmussen. Foreign affairs, 21 March. Available from: https://www.foreignaffairs.com/interviews/2014-03-21/nato-back [Accessed 16 April 2019].
   Google Scholar
• Rasmussen, A.F., 2016. Sanctions against Russia should be extended to 12 months. Defence matters. Available from: https://www.defencematters.org/news/rasmussen-sanctions-russia-extended/ [Accessed 16 April 2019].
   Google Scholar
• Rid, T., 2012. Deterrence beyond the state: the Israeli experience. Contemporary security policy, 33 (1), 124–147. doi: 10.1080/13523260.2012.659593
   Google Scholar
• Ringsmose, J. and Rynning, S., 2017a. Can NATO’s new Very High Readiness Joint Task Force deter? In: K. Friis, ed. NATO and collective defense in the 21st century: an assessment of the Warsaw summit. London: Routledge, 16–22.
   Google Scholar
• Ringsmose, J. and Rynning, S., 2017b. The NATO response force: a qualified failure no more? Contemporary security policy, 38 (3), 443–456. doi: 10.1080/13523260.2017.1350020
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rising, D., 2019. US testing new rapid-deployment strategy in Europe. The Associated Press, Berlin, 21 March.
   Google Scholar
• Sheinin, D.M.K., 2006. Argentina and the United States: an alliance contained. Athens: University of Georgia Press.
   Google Scholar
• Shimshoni, J., 1988. Israel and conventional deterrence: border warfare from 1953 to 1970. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Shlapak, D.A. and Johnson, M.W., 2015. Reinforcing deterrence on NATO’s Eastern Flank. Santa Monica: RAND Corporation.
   Google Scholar
• Snyder, G.H., 1961. Deterrence and defense: toward a theory of national security. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sobelman, D., 2017. Learning to deter: deterrence failure and success in the Israel-Hezbollah conflict, 2006–16. International security, 41 (3), 151–196.
   Google Scholar
• Sorokin, G.L., 1994. Alliance formation and general deterrence: a game-theoretic model and the case of Israel. Journal of conflict resolution, 38 (2), 298–325. doi: 10.1177/0022002794038002006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stavridis, J., 2019. Poland isn’t getting its ‘Fort Trump’ – yet. Bloomberg News, 13 June.
   Google Scholar
• Stein, J.G., 1991. Reassurance in international conflict management. Political science quarterly, 106 (3), 431–451. doi: 10.2307/2151741
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stoltenberg, J., 2015. Keynote speech by NATO Secretary General. NATO Transformation Seminar. Washington DC, 25 March.
   Google Scholar
• Stoltenberg, J., 2016. Doorstep by the NATO Secretary General at the meeting of NATO ministers of defence, Brussels. 10 February.
   Google Scholar
• Stoltenberg, J., 2019. Remarks at the cyber defence pledge conference, London. 23 May.
   Google Scholar
• Stone, J., 2012. Conventional deterrence and the challenge of credibility. Contemporary security policy, 33 (1), 108–123. doi: 10.1080/13523260.2012.659591
   Google Scholar
• Sutyagin, I. and Bronk, J., 2017. Russia’s new ground forces: capabilities. Limitations and implications for international security. Whitehall papers, 89 (1), 43–129. doi: 10.1080/02681307.2017.1338467
   Google Scholar
• Thornton, R., 2017. The Russian military’s new ‘main emphasis’. The RUSI Journal, 162 (4), 18–28.
   Google Scholar
• Tor, U., 2017. ‘Cumulative deterrence’ as a new paradigm for cyber deterrence. Journal of Strategic Studies, 40 (1–2), 92–117. doi: 10.1080/01402390.2015.1115975
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zagare, F., 1987. The dynamics of deterrence. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Zapfe, M., 2017. Deterrence from the ground up: understanding NATO’s enhanced forward presence. Survival, 59 (3), 147–160. doi: 10.1080/00396338.2017.1325604
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar