Citation

Knudsen O. J. Peace Res. 1992; 29(1): 53-69.

Copyright

(Copyright © 1992, SAGE Publishing)

DOI

10.1177/0022343392029001005

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

The article raises the question of the optimal strategy for ensuring the long-term security of small, contiguous neighbors of great powers. The main options available to the small state may be called 'accommodation' and 'intransigence'. The author seeks to determine whether the small state's choice makes a difference to the great power next door. One of several possible avenues to an answer is to look for observable changes in great power policy which may conceivably be attributed to the small state's policy. Thus, the author evaluates possible effects of Turkish and Norwegian accommodative policies vis-a-vis the USSR in the 1964-88 period, by comparing the Soviet deployment of ground forces near these two neighbors. Data are drawn primarily from The Military Balance. The data show different patterns over time on the two NATO flanks: In the north there is no sign of change, whereas in the south there are easily observable reductions stretching over most of Turkey's most accommodative period. The author suggests in conclusion that accommodation is probably an inappropriate choice for Norway given strategic conditions in the north, while it may have fitted the south flank well during this period.