Search results

A review essay on a book by Jeffrey Record, Making War, Thinking History: Munich, Vietnam, and Presidential Uses of Force from Korea to Kosovo (Annapolis, MD: Naval Instit Press, 2002). Using a recent book by Jeffrey Record as a point of departure, this essay considers the role of historical analogies in decisions by US leaders to use force during the Cold War. The analogies considered by Record -- those of Munich & Vietnam -- may have had a bearing on some decisions, but it is often difficult to assess their relative weight compared to other critical variables. Moreover, several analogies not considered by Record -- Pearl Harbor, for example -- may have been far more salient during certain crises than the analogies he examines. In any case, we need a more systematic analysis of historical analogies than Record provides if we are to gauge the real influence & impact of historical analogies on the Cold War.

This article offers a conceptual framework that broadens & enhances our understanding of the role of "history" in contemporary governance & the attempts by policy-makers to "manage" critical issues. Building upon the literature on historical analogies in policy-making, we distinguish three dimensions that clarify how the past may emerge in & affect the current deliberations, choices, & rhetoric of policy-makers. We apply this in a comparative examination of two cases of crisis management where historical analogies played an important part: the Swedish response to (alleged) submarine intrusions in 1982, & the European Union sanctions against Austria in 1999. We induce from the case comparison new concepts & hypotheses for understanding the role of historical analogies in public policy-making & crisis management. 1 Table, 61 References. Adapted from the source document.

Examines the "social dimension" since the Treaty of Rome. Argues for choosing the correct social policies based upon the nature of the problem rather than ideological preconceptions or historical analogies; redistributing wealth, social integration, proper government intervention policies, and models for social policy without forming a European welfare state.

The author examines the way in which recent dialogue surrounding "redemocratization" of former authoritarian political systems has been shaped. Proponents of economic liberalization in Latin America claim that this policy is essential to any plan to stimulate economic development, and they consider "democratic liberalism" the only political ideology conducive to growth. The author points out that this assumption is based on historical analogies to the massive growth in the economies of the USA and Western Europe after World War II, and that these analogies cannot be applied to the current situation in Latin America. (DÜI-Sen)