Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T08:19:04.307Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The End of the Cold War, Attitude Change, and the Politics of Defense Spending

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2013

Bruce Russett ,
Thomas Hartley  and
Shoon Murray
Bruce Russett
Affiliation:
Yale University
Thomas Hartley
Affiliation:
Yale University
Shoon Murray
Affiliation:
Yale University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Throughout the Cold War, United States national security policy, and the public attitudes that supported it, seemed anchored in the great ideology and power rivalry with the Soviet Union. A basic component of that policy, the ups and downs of American military spending, was largely predictable by changes in the level of Soviet military spending and by public preferences, as expressed in opinion surveys, for increases or decreases in American military spending. Public beliefs about the appropriate level of military spending, moreover, appeared firmly rooted in a larger set of foreign policy beliefs. Attitudes toward the Soviet Union, toward the circumstances justifying the use of military force internationally, and toward cooperating with other countries were all part of a stable and well-defined system of beliefs. In turn, foreign policy attitudes frequently were predictable from a reasonably coherent set of attitudes toward domestic policy.

The end of the Cold War brought remarkable changes in both policy and attitudes. The major anchoring point for the rivalry—the Soviet Union itself—has ceased to exist, and Russia no longer poses the same level or kind of military threat. Rationales for U.S. military spending, for the use of military force abroad, and for international cooperation have likewise changed. But in some respects they have not changed so greatly. These historic events present us with an extraordinary opportunity to study the structure of Americans' foreign policy beliefs and the dynamics of attitude change. They also provide a chance to speculate about how changed and stable attitudes may affect national security policy.

Type
Research Article
Information
PS: Political Science & Politics , Volume 27 , Issue 1 , March 1994 , pp. 17 - 21
Copyright
Copyright © The American Political Science Association 1994

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bartels, Larry M. 1993a. “The American Public's Defense Spending Preferences in the Post-Cold War Era.” Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Washington, DC.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bartels, Larry M. 1993b. “Messages Received: The Political Impact of Media Exposure.” American Political Science Review 87: 267–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freeman, John R., Williams, T., and Lin, Tse-Min. 1989. “Vector Autoregression and the Study of Politics.” American Journal of Political Science 33:842–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hartley, Thomas. 1994. Public Opinion, Mass Media and Defense Spending. Ph.D. Dissertation, Yale University, New Haven, CT.Google Scholar
Hartley, Thomas, and Russett, Bruce. 1992. “Public Opinion and the Common Defense: Who Governs Military Spending in the United States?” American Political Science Review 86:905–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Higgs, Robert, and Kilduff, Anthony. 1992. “Public Opinion: A Powerful Predictor of U.S. Defense Spending.” Defence Economics 4:227–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holsti, Ole R., and Rosenau, James N.. 1988. “The Domestic and Foreign Policy Beliefs of American Leaders.” Journal of Conflict Resolution 32:248–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holsti, Ole R., and Rosenau, James N.. 1990. “The Structure of Foreign Policy Attitudes among American Opinion Leaders.” Journal of Politics 52:94–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holsti, Ole R., and Rosenau, James N.. 1993. “The Structure of Foreign Policy Beliefs Among American Opinion Leaders—after the Cold War.” Millennium: Journal of International Studies 22: forthcoming.Google Scholar
Jacobs, Lawrence R., and Shapiro, Robert Y.. 1993. “The Public Presidency, Private Polls and Policymaking: Lyndon Johnson.” Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Kinsella, David. 1990. “Defence Spending and Economic Performance in the United States: A Causal Analysis.” Defence Economics 1:295–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Monroe, Alan D. 1979. “Consistency Between Public Preferences and National Policy Decisions.” American Politics Quarterly 7:3–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murray, Shoon. 1992. “Turning an Elite Cross-sectional Survey into a Panel Study While Protecting Anonymity.” Journal of Conflict Resolution 36:586–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murray, Shoon. 1993. American Elites' Reaction to the End of the Cold War: A 1988–1992 Panel Study. Ph.D. Dissertation, Yale University, New Haven, CT.Google Scholar
Ostrom, Charles, and Marra, Robin. 1986. “U.S. Defense Spending and the Soviet Estimate .” American Political Science Review 80:819–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Page, Benjamin, and Shapiro, Robert. 1983. “Effects of Public Opinion on Policy.” American Political Science Review 77:175–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Page, Benjamin, Shapiro, Robert, and Dempsey, Glenn. 1987. “What Moves Public Opinion?” American Political Science Review 81:23–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peffley, Mark, and Hurwitz, Jon. 1992. “International Events and Foreign Policy Beliefs: Public Response to Changing Soviet-U.S. Relations.” American Journal of Political Science 36:431–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Russett, Bruce M. 1970. What Price Vigilance? The Burdens of National Defense. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Russett, Bruce M., and Hanson, Elizabeth C.. 1975. Interest and Ideology: The Foreign Policy Beliefs of American Businessmen. New York: W. H. Freeman.Google Scholar
Ward, Michael D. 1984. “Differential Paths to Parity: A Study of the Contemporary Arms Race.” American Political Science Review 78:297–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wittkopf, Eugene R. 1990. Faces of Internationalism: Public Opinion and American Foreign Policy. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Wlezien, Christopher. 1992. “The Dynamics of Representation: The Case of Spending on Defense.” Presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Chicago, IL.Google Scholar