The Spread of nuclear weapons

Discussion question Some scholars argue that the spread of nuclear weapons will bring more stability to the interstate relations, while others claim that unlimited spread of nuclear weapons will be hostile to the security of nation states. What are the bases of each argument? In what ways do you think the spread of nuclear weapons will affect the interstate relations?

Kenneth Waltz & Scott Sagan. First edition: 1995 . Kenneth Waltz & Scott Sagan . First edition: 1995 . Opposing views on whether nuclear proliferation makes the world more or less peaceful. . Why states would want to pursue a nuclear weapons development program and its political consequences.

Introduction 1945: Atomic Age started - USA tested atomic bomb in New Mexico -Hiroshima and Nagasaki -Nuclear weapons were a key factor during the Cold War. Nine declared nuclear weapon states: USA, UK, France, Russia, China, Israel,North Korea, Pakistan and India.

Non-Proliferation Treaty 1968: International treaty whose objective is to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons and weapons technology & to promote cooperation in the peaceful uses of nuclear energy. Further goal: achieving nuclear disarmament  2003: NK withdrawal 2016: 191 states have adhered to the treaty

What are the likely consequences of the spread of nuclear weapons What are the likely consequences of the spread of nuclear weapons? Two opposing arguments: Kenneth Waltz: “more may be better” Scott Sagan: “more will be worse”

Kenneth Waltz`s argument: “More may be better” Deterrence Theory: the possession of nuclear weapons by two powers can reduce the likelihood of war because it makes the costs of it so great. Realist- self help system Defense- deterrence Second-strike capabilities MAD: Mutually Assured Destruction Nuclear war: gain < loss Deterrence during the Cold War

Scott Sagan`s argument: “More will be worse” Organization Theory: Professional military organizations, unless professionally managed through a checks and balances system of strong civilian control, are unlikely to fulfill the operational requirements for stable nuclear deterrence. future nuclear states may lack the positive mechanisms of civilian control necessary to conduct state behavior in order to achieve objective interests of the state. Risk of miscalculations and catastrophic accidents Increase likelihood of preventive war

Opposite assumptions Walts Sagan The state is rational, self preserving It won`t risk its own destruction Leaders will make decisions rationally States are not necessarily rational Miscalculations and accidents can occur

My point of view Too risky to think NW will contribute to world stability in the future. Bipolarity  Multipolarity (theories look at the Cold War) Agree with Sagan: not all actors are rational, risk of accidents and misscalculations Not possible to predict that all countries will use a responsible use of their nuclear power in the future. New actors in the international system: controls become harder- terrorism, other interest beside national interest

In what ways do you think the spread of nuclear weapons will affect the interstate relations? -Change in interstate relations -Redistribution of power -Reduction in the freedom of action of the major powers, major powers can no longer make all de decisions and interfere freely in any conflict -new alliances -Stanley Hoffmann: extremely difficult issues of management, increase in difficulty in decision making, more nuclear powers will complicate calculations and miss-perceptions will become more dangerous.

Your point of view Do you agree with Waltz or do you agree with Sagan? Do think the spread of nuclear weapons will bring more stability to the world? Why or why not?

Thank you!