In a crisis, don’t bank on groupthink for a way out; Thrice during the Cold War, decisions by a single leader turn out to be the correct ones
June 17, 2014 Leave a comment
PUBLISHED JUNE 12, 2014
In a crisis, don’t bank on groupthink for a way out
Thrice during the Cold War, decisions by a single leader turn out to be the correct ones
HARISH MEHTA
Playing a key role: Mr Lee (right) with Mr Deng in September 1988. Mr Lee, on a visit to Beijing in November 1980, had told the Chinese leader that in order for Asean diplomacy at the UN to be credible, Asean must not be seen to be restoring Pol Pot to Cambodia. – SPH FILE PHOTO
ARE global diplomatic crises resolved more effectively by interventions of powerful political personalities, or by interventions of bureaucracies? In other words, is presidential or prime ministerial decision-making more influential than bureaucratic groupthink?
Three Cold War crises show both approaches at work: the Cuban Missile Crisis of October 1962, US President Richard Nixon’s Triangular Diplomacy with the Soviet Union and China to initiate nuclear arms control treaties with Moscow and diplomatic normalisation with Beijing in the 1970s, and the role of Singapore in resolving the Cambodian conflict in 1978-1991.
The Cuban Missile Crisis, a 13-day confrontation between the US and the Soviet Union, began when Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev secretly placed nuclear missiles in Cuba, which the US quickly detected. US President John F Kennedy employed bureaucratic groupthink in the early stages of the escalating crisis.
The Executive Committee of the National Security Council (Ex Comm, consisting of Secretary of State Dean Rusk, Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara, Attorney General and the president’s brother Robert F Kennedy, and others) met regularly to advise the president.
Subscribers, log in here to read the full story. If you do not have an account,subscribe here.

