Coercive Diplomacy & Laos & Cuba

Coercive diplomacy is defined as a defensive diplomatic strategy that is employed in the international arena to deal with the efforts of an adversary to change a status quo situation in his own favor. Coercive diplomacy is distinct from deterrence theory in that coercive diplomacy is a response to a hostile action already taken while deterrence attempts to prevent a hostile action. Coercive diplomacy is also distinct from normal forms of diplomacy in that the former implies a coercive element of perceived or actual threats while normal diplomacy consists of international negotiations minus any coercive component.

There are three major types of coercive diplomacy defined by different objectives. The first (Type A) is the use of a mix of threats and diplomatic channels to persuade an opponent to stop short of the final objectives of a hostile action. The second (Type B) is the use of coercive and diplomatic measures to persuade an opponent to reverse the gains of a hostile action. And the last and most

. . .
d when not coercive diplomacy will work. However, that does not mean some generalities cannot be derived from experience. George and Simons highlight two conflict situations out of seven in which coercive diplomacy clearly paid off. These are America's conflicts with Laos in 1961 and the Cuban missile crisis in the following year. At least eight general factors have been identified as contributing to the success or failure of coercive diplomacy. (There are, of course, many other factors that have been identified contributing to the success or failure of any particular crisis situation.) These eight factors include: clarity of objective; strength of motivation; asymmetry of motivation; sense of urgency; strong leadership; adequate domestic and international support; unacceptability of threatened escalation; and clarity concerning the precise terms of settlement. The eight conditions differ in importance depending on the situation, but several of these criteria have consistently proven of critical importance to the fate of diplomatic efforts. The single most important factor is "clarity of objective." This is a double-edged sword. Clarity of objective assists policymakers in the home country in analyzing the real costs of the a
. . .

Some common words found in the essay are:
Cuba Coercive, George Simons, Pathet Lao, United Nations, Soviet Union, Japan United, George Simons--is, President Kennedy, President Kennedy's, Coercive Diplomacy, coercive diplomacy, clarity objective, strong leadership, hostile action, coercive diplomacy defined, cuban missile, armed conflict, contributing success, diplomacy defined, united nations, missile crisis, cuban missile crisis, coercive diplomacy distinct, factors identified contributing, limits coercive diplomacy,
Approximate Word count = 1559
Approximate Pages = 6 (250 words per page)

More Essays on Coercive Diplomacy & Laos & Cuba