INR 3003 Lecture Notes - Lecture 43: Partial Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty, Start I

7 views10 pages
9 Feb 2017
School
Course

For unlimited access to Class Notes, a Class+ subscription is required.

11/8 Nuclear Weapons, Deterrence and proliferation
1. Why don’t we use our nuclear weapons?
a. Destructiveness?
i. Firebombing, daisy cutter
b. Battlefield utility?
i. Tactical nuclear weapon
c. They’re wrong/immoral?
i. Nuclear tabooNina Tannenwald
ii. Human Tragedy of Hiroshima and Nagasaki
2. Effects on Policy
a. NPT (1968)
b. Biological (1972) and chemical weapons (1993)
c. Disarmament vs. deterrence
3. Arms control history
a. From MAD to MAP
4. Nuclear proliferation
a. Realists on weak/new states
5. Constructivism and nuclear norm of non-use
Additional terms: balance of terror, first strike, second strike capability, nuclear
triad, balance of capabilities, mutual vulnerability, ICBM, SDI
Why don’t we use nuclear weapons?
We have all these weapons in our arsenal yet we never use themwhy?
o Constant state of wat since WWII and we have not really won those
wars
Nuclear weapons may have helped us win them but we did not
use them
Destructive
All weapons are designed to be destructivewhole point of weaponry
o No military would ever want to make less powerful weapons
o All weapons are destructive by design
Destructive of non-nuclear weapons
o Bombing in WWII
o Firebombing in Dresden and Tokyo
Tokyo est to kill 120,000 people
o Daisy cutter
Battle capacity
o Utility
o Since WWII we have worked to ensure we
have weapons with battlefield utility
Tactical weaponry
find more resources at oneclass.com
find more resources at oneclass.com
Unlock document

This preview shows pages 1-3 of the document.
Unlock all 10 pages and 3 million more documents.

Already have an account? Log in
o Missiles, torpedo’s, mines
o Yield impact of nuclear
weapons in a small, located
area
We do not use these
either
They’re wrong
Nuclear taboo: taboo to use or talk
about using themoff limits in
terms of weaponry
o Have they always been
seen as morally wrong? No
o Evolution in thought
process and norms have
occurred
o US used against Japan
did not view their use as
being morally wrong then
American public polled after the use of them and they
overwhelmingly supported the use of the A-bombs against
Japan (~80%)
Widely thought that nuclear weapons would become the new wave of
warfare
o Steady evolution in warfare and weaponry from industrialization
A-bomb continuation of this evolution
Coming out of WWII it was very common thinking that nuclear
weapons would be the new warfare looking for ways to
make them more useful
Make them nuclear impact but make it more tactical
nuclear weapons programs
World opinion began to change before we really got to that point of furthered
use
o Came down to the specific type of destructiveness that we had
Human tragedydifferent level of tragedy than other bombs
Effects of bomb
o On impact death toll might not be that different
from other bombingsHiroshima impact death
toll ~ 70,000
o At the end of 1945 ~140,00 people had died
1950 ~ 200,000
This is the differencepeople continue to
die from radiation
Kept killing after the war was over
o We were helping rebuild japan and trying to
befriend them and become allies
find more resources at oneclass.com
find more resources at oneclass.com
Unlock document

This preview shows pages 1-3 of the document.
Unlock all 10 pages and 3 million more documents.

Already have an account? Log in
Women who gave birth after often had children with
horrific birth defects, could not tell what animals were
mutated DNA
o Intelligent levels decline
o Was supported in the momentin total warbut when we realized
that it kept killing, people realized we could never use one again
Death in peace time and war time
Revolution against weapons of this sort to the point where they are seen as
immoral
Concern of contamination from radiation
o Atmosphere affect others, not just intended victims
Fear of atmospheric contamination
Norm of non-use
o International norm
o Balance of terror, if everyone has nuclear weapons it increases
security dilemma
Norms and changed thinking influenced policy
New norms affects on policy
Controlling nuclear weapons and other non-conventional weapons
Advances in weaponry since WWII have become more precise
Banning or controlling weapons
o US and USSR (first a-bomb 1949) would not agree to ban them
Why wouldn’t we ban them? Prisoners dilemma
We don’t trust USSR to get rid of there’s or to refrain
from developing
Crucial to our security without using them: deterrence
o Britain becomes nuclear power and then more countries
How do we control them
o 1968: Nuclear non-proliferation treaty (NPT): state that the existing
nuclear powers (US, Russia, Britain, France, China) would not help
anyone else become a nuclear power. Everyone else who signs is
agreeing that they would not seek to become a nuclear power
Different from nuclear energyoffensive nuclear capability
If 5 powers have agreed to non-use, why would countries try to develop?
Shows motives
Chemical and biological weapons
o Geneva protocols prohibit use of gas in 1925
o 1972 biological weapons ban
o 1993 chemical weapons ban
more willing to ban these because they are not crucial for
national security
cold war politics at play
o disarmament vs. arms control deterrence
find more resources at oneclass.com
find more resources at oneclass.com
Unlock document

This preview shows pages 1-3 of the document.
Unlock all 10 pages and 3 million more documents.

Already have an account? Log in

Get access

Grade+
$10 USD/m
Billed $120 USD annually
Homework Help
Class Notes
Textbook Notes
40 Verified Answers
Study Guides
1 Booster Class
Class+
$8 USD/m
Billed $96 USD annually
Homework Help
Class Notes
Textbook Notes
30 Verified Answers
Study Guides
1 Booster Class