1. Introduction to International Relations Nuclear Revolution and Its Impact on International Security Prof. Jaechun Kim

2.  Development of Nuclear Revolution  Little Boy (Hiroshima, August 6, 1945) Exploded 1,800 feet over Hiroshima with a force of 13 kilotons of TNT; immediate deaths of 130,000 uranium gun-type device Unstable  Fat Man (Nagasaki, August 9, 1945) plutonium implosion weapon 20 kilotons of TNT; immediate deaths of 45,000  Reaction to danger and inefficiency of WWII fission weapon  boosted fission weapons  Ivy Mike - first real fusion bomb (1952)  era of hydrogen (thermonuclear) bomb - 10.4 megaton of TNT Why did Truman decide to develop fusion bomb? Nuke arms race bet. the US and USSR was very competitive in the early Cold War era…

3. Fatman – Little Boy

4. Enola gay

5. Hiroshima

6. Nagasaki

7.  Technical effects of the nuclear revolution  Effect 1: Hydrogen bombs offer an increase of six orders of magnitude over the power of the TNT Hydrogen bomb changed strategic paradigm!  Effect 2: Nuclear weapons pack tremendous explosive power in devices that are cheap, light, easily hidden, protected, and delivered! Nuclear Revolution

8.  Effect 3: Due to the effect 1 and 2, “MAD” develops between nuclear powers; “Second Strike Retaliatory Capacity” – not that difficult to obtain this ability…  Effect 4: Flat of the Curve dynamics develop… Capabilities are absolute… second strike retaliatory capacity  Effect 5: Multiplier Effect - second strike retaliatory capacity increases if you have more… in relations between nuke powers, more maybe better…!! Alternative Nuclear Strategies : Countervalue vs. Counterforce 1. Countervalue: Enemy’s society is targeted Political aims are achieved by threatening to punish your enemy by destroying its population and industry. second-strike countervalue capability Capacity required: A second-strike countervalue capability; relatively easy to execute

9. 2. Counterforce: Enemy’s nuclear forces is targeted Political aims are achieved by threatening to disarm the enemy … by threatening to remove the enemy’s second strike capacity… A first-strike counterforce capability Capacity required: A first-strike counterforce capability; almost impossible!  Effect 6: Defense Dominance? Between nuclear power preemptive (or preventive) war is (almost) impossible… the only way to make nukes more offensive is to eliminate the defender’s second-strike capacity (to build first-strike counterforce capability)…  very difficult… Hence defense dominance! Hence defense dominance! Therefore ‘Nukes’ are fundamentally defensive weapons..  Long Peace in the latter half of the 20 th century – Why? Because of Nukes? Because of defense dominance? Realist account…  The Impact of the Nuke Revolution  If states are sane and civilized…  What if the states are not sane and civilized?

10.  MAD may be pacifying, but the road to MAD can be dangerous.  Think about the relationship between the US and North Korea, and the relationship between the US and Iran  But what about the relationship between India and Pakistan?

11.  More nukes better then (the little book)? Waltz vs. Sagan  Waltz – more maybe better Waltz advocates both horizontal and vertical nuclear proliferation… ???  Rational deterrence theory  Sagan – not necessarily Nuclearization may invite preventive wars What if new nuke states fail to develop 2 nd strike capability? What if civilians won’t have control over the nukes in new nuke states? Accidents do happen…  Bureaucratic politics (organizational) theory

12.  Development of American Strategic Thinking Regarding Nukes  Americans in the late 40s and early 50s thought nuclearized world would be inherently unstable; nuke arms race with the Soviets would lead to disaster.. Preventive war thinking!!! Rejected by Truman and Ike… Didn’t think of the relationship with the Soviets in terms of MAD; The US initially thought that nukes were offensive weapons..

13.  1980s – Reagan – SDI = Star Wars Space-based missile defense system Technologically impossible… Militarization of space… Destabilization of nuclear parity…  2001 – American withdrawal from the Treaty; MD Land-based and sea-based missile defense system NMD: a military strategy and associated systems to shield an entire country against incoming Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles (ICBMs) TMD: Targets medium-range theater ballistic missiles, which travel at about 3 km/s (6,700 mph) or less. In this context the term “theater” means the entire localized region for military operations, typically a radius of several hundred kilometers. Criticisms… why?  2002 – NPR(Nuclear Posture Review)  2005 – Nuclear Bunker Busters ‘Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator’  Conventional Bunker Buster  Controversy over Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD)

14. Nuclear Nonproliferation Regime  Establishment of IAEA  Nuclear competition between great powers; the US (45), USSR (49), US (51, H bomb), USSR (53, H bomb), the UK (52)  too dangerous!  1953, Ike calling for “Atoms for Peace”; calling for establishing IO that can promote peaceful use of nuke energies and monitor nuclear operations…  1957 IAEA(International Atomic Energy Agency:) was established! Support Peaceful Use of Nuclear Power…!! Monitor and inspect to make sure that peaceful use of nuke energies would not be diverted to military purposes… Member countries have to enter Safeguards Agreement with IAEA – obligation to receive monitoring and inspection…

15.  IAEA’s limitations and ratification of NPT  IAEA member countries going nuclear in 1960 (France), 1964 (China)  need for more stringent non-proliferation system  need for NPT(Non-Proliferation Treaty)  US and USSR playing a proactive role…! (1966)  Opposition from non-nuke countries.. It encourages non-nuke countries to abandon nuclear ambition.. but doesn’t specify that nuke countries need to get rid of existing nukes! It discourages even peaceful use of nukes!  Rewrote NPT, and 1970 NPT ratified…

16.  Objective of NPT  Clauses 1,2,3 – deal with horizontal proliferation  4, 5 – recognizes inherent rights to use nuke for peaceful purposes..  6, 7 – deals with vertical proliferation; nuke countries have duty to disarm nukes..  Attitude of Nuke Countries…  Keep the status quo!  Enthusiastic about stopping horizontal proliferation, but haven’t really abided by 4, 5, 6, 7..

17.  Limitations of IAEA and NPT  Non NPT members, India, Pakistan, Israel going nuclear.. NPT didn’t do anything…!  When withdrawing IAEA and NPT, they are not able to do anything meaningful! North Korean example!  Perception that NPT is discriminatory.. Nuke countries do not interpret NPT 6, 7 as obligatory clauses.. Hence IAEA cannot monitor nuke activities of nuke power..  1995 NPT review conference – NPT will be ratified indefinitely…!  2005 review conference – stalemate… non-nuke member countries want to secure and develop nuclear power for peaceful purposes…  2010, 2015 review conferences???

18.  Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty: CTBT  1963 US, USSR, UK signed Partial Test Ban Treaty (PTBT) – ban nuclear test in the air and on the ground and under water…  What about underground? So CTBT was signed aiming to ban any kinds of tests anywhere… at 1993 UN Conference.  154 signatories.. Only 51 ratified…  US, Russia, China not ratifying the treaty!  Clinton and Obama pushing for ratification…