- “…a nuclear war was possible because events could have a momentum of their own, quite apart from the conscious intent of statesmen.” (141)
Lesson: Uncontrollable elements, such as accidents and miscalculations, may drive states to nuclear war.
————————————————————————–
- “…the highest officials in the American government clearly recognized that a confrontation with the Soviet Union would entail a certain risk of nuclear war. But they felt that this was a risk that simply had to be accepted… fear of escalation did not drive the threshold of acceptable risk down to zero.” (142, 156)
Lesson: One must be willing to accept a certain risk of escalation in order to prevent nuclear war.
————————————————————————–
- “…the specter of nuclear war was deliberately manipulated to support American objectives in the crisis… McNamara’s assumption was that nuclear preparations would serve to deter Soviet responses in general; that is, the implied nuclear threat was not directed simply at the possibility that the U.S.S.R. might consider using its nuclear forces… the risk of nuclear war did play a role. Indeed, this risk was overtly and deliberately exploited. But this was a deadly game, played reluctantly…” (142-143, 158)
Lesson: Nuclear weapons can be used for political purposes. The risk of nuclear war was consciously manipulated in order to affect Soviet options in the crisis and support American objectives.
Marc Trachtenberg, “The Influence of Nuclear Weapons in the Cuban Missile Crisis”, International Security, Vol. 10, No. 1 (Summer, 1985), pp. 137-163.
————————————————————————–