Strategic Stability in the Cold War: Lessons for Continuing Challenges

During the Cold War, the phrase “strategic stability” gained currency both as a foreign policy objective and as an apt way of describing the fact that the United States and the Soviet Union never actually went to war.
To what extent did U.S. analytical models concerning “crisis stability,” “first-strike stability,” and “arms race stability” - and policies based on these models - contribute to the avoidance of war between the United States and the Soviet Union? This paper argues that, in light of Soviet and U.S. behavior at the time and in view of what has subsequently been learned about Soviet policies and decision-making, the proponents of these models have overestimated their utility. Today, the expression “strategic stability” is still widely used, for example in the U.S. 2010 Nuclear Posture Review Report. For this reason, and in the context of the forthcoming bilateral nuclear reductions, it may be useful to critically examine the cogency and relevance of these U.S. models from the Cold War period with a view to identifying lessons for current challenges.
Available in:
Regions and themes
ISBN / ISSN
Share
Download the full analysis
This page contains only a summary of our work. If you would like to have access to all the information from our research on the subject, you can download the full version in PDF format.
Strategic Stability in the Cold War: Lessons for Continuing Challenges
Related centers and programs
Discover our other research centers and programsFind out more
Discover all our analysesSaudi Arabia’s Nuclear Temptations. Lessons Learned from Regional Instability
Saudi Arabia’s integration in the international arena and regional stability, notably through reducing its dependence on fossil energies, are crucial elements for the success of the Kingdom’s Vision 2030, the Crown Prince’s top priority. However, Mohammed bin Salman’s declarations in 2018 and 2021, indicating that “if Iran develops a nuclear bomb, we will follow suit as soon as possible”, combined with the recent strikes on key Iranian nuclear facilities, do not bode well for the future of the Kingdom, the region and the non-proliferation regime at large.
The Future of Air Superiority. Command of the Air in High Intensity Warfare
Air superiority, understood as control of the air, is a cornerstone of the Western art of warfare. It is a decisive condition, albeit not sufficient by itself, to achieve military victory, as it enables the concentration of air power toward the achievement of wider strategic objectives and protects other components from unbearable attrition levels. It is best achieved through the offensive use of air power in a joint effort to neutralize the enemy’s air power.
Europe Uncovered?
As Russia continues to threaten Europe, the Trump administration is making no secret of its desire to withdraw—at least partially—from the defense of the Old
Continent in order to focus on strategic competition with China. It is thus putting pressure on its European allies to increase their investment in the military sector. The NATO Summit in The Hague in June 2025 resulted in ambitious commitments by member states to increase their defense spending.
How should Britain and France cooperate to realise the Northwood Declaration?
During his state visit to the United Kingdom (UK) last week, Emmanuel Macron, President of France, signed a joint declaration with Sir Keir Starmer, Prime Minister, on nuclear cooperation between Britain and France. The Northwood Declaration highlights that while both countries’ nuclear arsenals remain sovereign, cooperation on nuclear deterrence can ‘contribute significantly’ to the security of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) and the Euro-Atlantic region.