Skip to main content

khrushcheva161_Underwood ArchivesGetty Images_cuban missile crisis

Politics

从古巴导弹到普京的危机

Oct 27, 2022 Nina L. Khrushcheva

纽约—古巴导弹危机60年后，世界再次面临核对抗的幽灵。俄罗斯总统普京眼看要在乌克兰的战争中失败，继续升级他的威胁，声称他可能不得不使用核武器来保护俄罗斯，包括其新“吞并”的乌克兰领土。普京将世界推向边缘，现在的问题是他是否会像苏联领导人赫鲁晓夫在 1962 年所做的那样后退一步。

那年夏天，美国决定在包括土耳其在内的北约国家部署核武器并瞄准苏联城市，作为回应，赫鲁晓夫下令在古巴秘密部署中程核导弹，以牙还牙。 .这些武器还将保护古巴政权免受美国入侵。

美国总统肯尼迪在 10 月 16 日发现了赫鲁晓夫的动作，非常愤怒。苏联不仅在美国海岸附近安装了核武器；还把美国瞒在鼓里长达几个月。

To continue reading, register now.

Subscribe now for unlimited access to everything PS has to offer.

As a registered user, you can enjoy more PS content every month – for free.

Already have an account? Log in

WEIM_1200x628-Event

PS Events: What Economics is Missing

Our latest event, What Economics is Missing, is now live.

Click the link below for opening remarks from Dani Rodrik, followed by a discussion among Ashwini Deshpande, Raquel Fernández, Minouche Shafik, and Vera Songwe on how to achieve inclusivity in economics.

The Kremlin’s Suicidal Imperialism
MIKHAIL METZEL/SPUTNIK/AFP via Getty Images

Politics 0

The Kremlin’s Suicidal Imperialism

Nina L. Khrushcheva argues that the illegal annexation of four more Ukrainian territories will handicap future Russian leaders.
The Origins of Putin’s Totalitarianism
ALEXEY NIKOLSKY/Sputnik/AFP via Getty Images

Politics 17

The Origins of Putin’s Totalitarianism

Nina L. Khrushcheva shows how Russia came to be controlled – and terrorized – by faceless security services all over again.

new comment has been posted. new comments have been posted.

0 Comments on this paragraph, 4 Comments on this article

Marius Van Andel Nov 3, 2022

Whitewashing her grandpa's failed policies!
- Adam Huszar Nov 5, 2022
  
  Why to blame the professor of whitewash? Her article describes the 1963 events in same context 'as we all know' and widely accepted as the facts. One could highlight the article's discrepancies between the actors and their actions back then and those of Putin and Biden today (in butchering Ukraine) in the context of potential nuclear confrontations. In the 1963 conflict Khrushchev was the one traveling with the nukes to JFK's back yard and (accepted commonly as) wisely stand down and left for home with the nukes. Today Biden is in the Putin's backyard with old and newer (B61-12) nuclear weapons and he shows no signs of letting it go. But this makes sens for Biden as he could have backed down from Ukraine's NATO membership push and avoid the catastrophic mess of the 'special military operation'.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Robert Johnston Oct 30, 2022

As I understand it, a nuclear launch by the Russian navy off Cuba was only avoided by a local commander who disregarded orders, allowing time for resolution at the top. That may be our best hope for avoiding a nuclear launch in Ukraine, allowing time for Putin to be sidelined, for example by a slow walk away from support by the military. It is pretty hard right now to see where a "quid pro quo" might come from, but Lavrov can be pretty creative in a tight situation and the military, though lethargic, realistic when confronted.
- Adam Huszar Nov 1, 2022
  
  Some argue that the nuclear 'no-launch' by the Russian submarine on the US aircraft carrier was a professional (not ideological) decision by Arkhipov, who argued that the US 'attack' on the Russian subs was a standard procedure at that place and time and not necessarily a hostile one. (as far a deep-charge can be non-hostile to a sub). Arkhipov's agreement to fire was necessary along the other two in order to launch the torpedoes, so there was no treason, no heroics, no 'disregarding orders' or such, only two out of three decision makers agreed, so no fire. (surprisingly democratic for a soviet military).
  
  As Arkhipov's impact on the no-war in 1963 was marginal if any since the sub did not fire the torpedoes, we have to take professor Khruscheva's words that first secretary Khrushchev was the cool mind deciding to back down publicly while secretly achieving European missile withdrawal. Understandably his back-down was not so popular with the politburo, leading to his quick replacement. One has to wonder if Arkhipov's submarine would have fired or Khrushchev would have pushed to the limit back then, or in 1983 Russians would have reacted and not wait and see, wouldn't we all take the nuclear apocalypses threat more seriously today and act more carefully to avoid it.
  
  As things look today, sidelining president Putin at home will be a long term project, one could also question the logic behind hoping that 'The Military' will walk away from a leader waging war on the 'Enemy'. The best way to avoid nuclear war with Russia is to stop pushing it towards nuclear war.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.

https://prosyn.org/ONKwSm3zh

New Comment

Pin comment to this paragraph

After posting your comment, you’ll have a ten-minute window to make any edits. Please note that we moderate comments to ensure the conversation remains topically relevant. We appreciate well-informed comments and welcome your criticism and insight. Please be civil and avoid name-calling and ad hominem remarks.

Please select an option

Cancel

Send

Log in/Register

Email required

Password required Remember me?

or

Sign in with