alternatehistory.com

Eisenhower's nuclear policy was massive retaliation. This was an exercise in intimidation against the Soviet Union, with the idea being that any overt provocation by the USSR would be met with atomic destruction. The nuclear policy of the Eisenhower White House was allowed to be rather at the discretion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and was based on an immediate nuclear genocide of the Soviet population and it's military assets throughout the world in the event the USSR sneezed too hard. The problem being that it was very simple in it's thinking, and did not offer flexibility in response. And the latter is the exact definition of Kennedy's nuclear policy; a nuanced approach for a complex Cold War.

If Eisenhower's policy had been pursued in the case of a Cuban Crisis, or a similar alternate situation, it would have led to disaster. As soon as the U2 was shot down, there would be immediate nuclear retaliation. Prior to that, Eisenhower himself would have launched an invasion anyway. It was his suggestion that JFK do so, and that the USSR would just back down. Which now we know they would not, and had missile installations already that would have been used, resulting in nuclear war. In the meantime, they'd also move into Berlin in retaliation, which Eisenhower had also told Kennedy they would never do and would just back down. I do not hold Eisenhower's nuclear policy in high esteem, as should be apparent here.

If Eisenhower had been faced with a situation similar to the Cuban Missile Crisis under his administration, how would that crisis have progressed? I'm not restricting this to the Cuban Missile Crisis as it was, and it is open to a similar crisis of similar complexity and entanglement anywhere in the world. Would Eisenhower have launched a nuclear attack or a conventional attack? If the USSR did make overt aggressive overtures, such as shooting down a U2, would he maintain a massive retaliation policy and respond, or would he adjust his plan and take a more nuanced approach? One could make the argument that his policies were such that such a crisis would never have occurred anywhere in the world, and that the Soviets really were intimidated. I would disagree with that, but you could make that argument.
Top