IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/defpea/v8y1997i1p77-100.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Eisenhower, Kennedy, and the missile gap: Determinants of us military expenditure in the wake of the sputnik shock

Author

Listed:
  • Andreas Wenger

Abstract

The article examines the factors that influenced America's defense budget in the wake of Sputnik. It concludes that both Eisenhower and Kennedy for political purposes proposed bigger defense expenditure to Congress than they thought was justified from a military standpoint. Both were strongly influenced in their decisions by political and psychological considerations related to the credibility of the United States as a superpower and security guarantor. The importance of military expenditure as a signal of resolve grew parallel to the end of the age of American invulnerability. With the advent of mutual nuclear plenty, the impact of public - and in particular allied - perceptions on defense budget decisions multiplied. The fact that both Eisenhower and Kennedy perceived military expenditure as a means to reassure allies and deter adversaries put them into an essentially defensive position in their effort to contain bureaucratic and domestic political forces in favor of a larger defense budget.

Suggested Citation

  • Andreas Wenger, 1997. "Eisenhower, Kennedy, and the missile gap: Determinants of us military expenditure in the wake of the sputnik shock," Defence and Peace Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(1), pages 77-100.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:defpea:v:8:y:1997:i:1:p:77-100
    DOI: 10.1080/10430719708404870
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10430719708404870
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/10430719708404870?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:defpea:v:8:y:1997:i:1:p:77-100. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/GDPE20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.