From Crisis Management to Realignment of Forces
Author(s) -
Alsu Tagirova
Publication year - 2022
Publication title -
journal of cold war studies
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.207
H-Index - 11
eISSN - 1531-3298
pISSN - 1520-3972
DOI - 10.1162/jcws_a_01027
Subject(s) - compromise , negotiation , position (finance) , diplomacy , political science , politics , china , soviet union , settlement (finance) , political economy , state (computer science) , outcome (game theory) , crisis management , economic system , law , business , economics , mathematical economics , finance , algorithm , computer science , payment
In 1969, after a series of large-scale border clashes, the People's Republic of China (PRC) and the Soviet Union finally decided to enter negotiations to prevent a wider military confrontation. The de-escalation process that ensued gave Soviet and Chinese leaders two options: either to compromise and reach a settlement or to go back to a strategy of delay. This article shows that the choice between the two options depended on whether either state believed it could improve its relative position in a better political environment or could gain certain political advantage by immediately settling the dispute. Ultimately, both sides chose to return to a strategy of delay. The Chinese decision was influenced by the strategic configuration of U.S. “triangular” diplomacy and the hope that it would enhance the PRC's relative position. For Soviet officials, the outcome stemmed from a lack of trust in their Chinese counterparts.
Accelerating Research
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom
Address
John Eccles HouseRobert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom