Linkage was a foreign policy that was pursued by the United States and championed by Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger in the 1970s détente, during the Cold War. The policy aimed to persuade the Soviet Union to co-operate in restraining revolutions in the Third World in return for concessions in nuclear and economic fields. Soviet interventions occurred in various conflicts such as the Angolan Civil War, the Mozambican Civil War, and the Ogaden War, while many revolutions still occurred in Third World countries, undermining the policy. The premise behind linkage, as a policy, was to connect political and military issues. This established a relationship making progress in area "A" dependent on progress in area "B."
An important aspect of the policy was that deviations from respecting the rights and interests would go punished. The intent of the action was to bring home to the offending state the limitations of acceptable international behaviour and demonstrate that attempts at expansion (and upsetting international stability) would go punished. This meant that conflict itself would contribute to stabilising the international order.
The Nixon-Kissinger approach did not link foreign and domestic areas.
Selective relaxation of tensions is an opposing policy to linkage. In that case, an issue of arms control could be addressed and tension diminished, with the status quo being maintained in other strategic areas.
Different uses of the term
There have been different uses of the term ‘linkage’ in reference to both domestic and international policy making. There is often debate over the true meaning of the term. Historians and academics have portrayed the meaning of ‘linkage’ in different lights. Common understandings of the term are that linkage means leverage – the linking of one event to another in order to maintain bargaining power or pressure on the opposing party involved. Another description of linkage comes from Marvin Kalb and Bernard Kalb. They describe linkage as "an up-to-date application of [Henry] Kissinger’s theories about balance of power." Specific types of linkages can be coercive or cooperative. They can also be prospective, such as promises or threats, and they can be retrospective, such as rewards or retaliation.
Since the 1970s, the term has been used to make reference to the influence and manipulation of US-Soviet and east–west connections. An example of coercive linkage policy would be the US seeking to tie arms control progress to what they thought was acceptable behaviour in the Third World. This was based on the assumption that the Soviet Union wanted arms control more than the US did.
The politics of linkage
There are multiple theories behind linkage politics. The basic differences behind these theories are that the parties involved are either different or similar – with respect to their issue positions.
For those parties that are different, the politics of linkage are based on the assumption that governments or parties involved make decisions as trade-offs. Linkage is "established by the players’ beliefs that cooperative behaviour in one setting influences the prospects for cooperation in other settings." By connecting events or issues that are not necessarily connected in a particular way, governments can boost their political and economic situations by surrendering less important issues for those that have a greater, all-round importance.
For those parties that are similar, linkage politics are based on the observation that mutually beneficial exchange is more prevalent between similar countries. One country would link positive incentives (such as technology transfers and arms control) to the expectation of the other country’s cooperation requital. With similar issues, it becomes more about bargaining power and convincing the other country involved that they are receiving something worthwhile in return.