Suri, Jeremi. Power and Protest: Global Revolution and the Rise of Détente. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2003.

== Summary ==
Jeremi
Suri’s Power and Protest looks at how
the U.S. USSR, and China had to “accommodate themselves to a stalemated Cold
War world that restricted policy flexibility.” (1) Suri writes (p. 213): The
protests – controlled in China, independent in the U.S. and Western Europe –
attempted to “escape the limits” of the Cold War stalemate. As a result, Suri
argues that “the widespread unrest of the 1960s had a direct effect on each
state’s foreign policy” and, simultaneously, relations among “the most powerful
nations inflamed domestic contention.” The Détente, then, had a social origin
in the “convergent response to disorder among the great powers.” (2) The decade
of the 1960s began with he charismatic politics of Kennedy, de Gaulle,
Khrushchev, and Mao who offered grandeur politics: “Kennedy would conquer new
frontiers, Krushchev would build real-existing communism, de Gaulle would
restore French grandeur, and Mao would guide China in a great industrial leap.”
(260) These promises, however, confronted nuclear dangers, Cold War divisions,
and large bureaucratic divisions and optimistic and college-educated citizens
quickly soured. Over time, as leaders accepted compromises, young men and women
grew more violent and adopted a “language of dissent” and accused “their elders
of hypocrisy and corruption.”  The global
disruption of 1968 – university students in all countries destructing symbols
of government power – is a direct result of these un-kept promises. (Thus,
domestic unrest combined with nuclear power to create a balance of power) The
result: a détente, as leaders “refrained from challenging one another as they
had throughout the Cold War” and, in a sense, created a secret group of men
that coordinated the political order and excluded most advocates of change. Suri
argues: “International collaboration among leaders furthered international
disillusion among citizens,” and only benefitted the leaders of each nation. Thus,
Suri contends, “large segments of each nation’s population remain politically
alienated as a consequence of détente.” (5