1718 



THE ESSENTIAL DIFFERENCES 



Perhaps the decisive element that distinguishes the initiative from 

 the reactive mode is that the reactive mode is defensive, and seeks to 

 reduce the adverse consequences of outside forces; conversely, the 

 initiative mode seeks to apply a strategy of pressures to create a 

 faA^orable s-et of external relationships. The reactive mode requires 

 analysis of the pressures, and ways of responding to them. The 

 initiative mode requires definition of diplomatic goals in terms of 

 desired external relationships or conditions and then proceeds to 

 formulate policies and design actions to produce them at minimum 

 cost and risk. The line of distinction between initiation and reaction 

 is often unclear, but in practice the range of diplomatic options is 

 likely to be wider with the first than with the second. At the same 

 time the scope and depth of analysis also must be greater. From the 

 point of view of timing, also, the initiative mode requires longer range 

 future planning and analysis, while the reactive mode tends to wait 

 for the event. It is not ])racticable to prejjare in advance to respond 

 to all possible diplomatic initiatives taken by other nations, nor indeed 

 to anticipate all the variations and subtleties against which responses 

 will need to be framed as an}^ one single initiative inifolds. However, 

 it is possible that the number of responses required will be lessened 

 if a nation successfully pursues the initiative mode. 



The range of events, })olitical developments, institutional evolution, 

 and massive technological and economic trends that form the matrix 

 of externalities with which diplomacy must deal is so great that — 

 according to one bod}^ of o})inion — planning for the long-term future 

 is unrealistic. But it is also i)os>ible that the quest for short-term 

 solutions in the reactive mode can lead by degrees to a situation for 

 which the only outcome is catastrophic. Such a progression is recorded, 

 for example, in Barbara Tuchman's Guns of August.^'* 



ESSENTIALITY OF LONG-RANGE PLANNING 



Thus it can be contended that attention to the long-range conse- 

 quences of national policy for either the initiative or the reactive mode 

 is essential for security and national well-being. However, the kinds 

 of questions to be asked in framing a broad national strategy would 

 seem to include : 



— Does the reactive mode characteristically require a larger 

 use of intellectual resources on a shorter (i.e., more urgent) time 

 scale than is required to design and execute initiatives? 



— Can initiatives be so effectively applied that the nation 

 applying them retains a commanding and constructive leadership 

 role in its relations with other nations? 



—Does the reactive mode tend to cause a nation's strategic 

 planners of foreign policy to become bogged down with detail and 

 the endless shredding out of alternative responses to foreign 

 initiatives: 



— in circumstances of great urgency ("crises")? 

 — ^in less urgent but equally important questions of national 

 interest? 



— in actions by other nations that require extensive 

 interpretive analysis? 



^* Barbara Tuchnian, Ouns of August, New York, MacniilJan, 19C2: 5U p. 



