Mutual Deterrence or Nuclear Suicide

The Myth of Nuclear Deterrence

Nuclear deterrence is sometimes treated as a known quantity*a definite thing that keeps us safe and ensures our security. It has also often been used as a justification for possessing nuclear weapons. Nuclear deterrence, however, is based on an unexamined notion: the belief that the threat to destroy cities provides decisive leverage. An examination of history (including recent reinterpretation...

Conventional Deterrence in the Second Nuclear Age

D eterrence is once again a topic of discussion and debate among US defense and policy communities. Although the concept has received comparatively little attention since the end of the Cold War, it seems poised to take center stage in America's national security policy during the coming decades. With two ongoing wars already straining the military , concerns about a recalcitrant and militarize...

A Double-Edged Sword: Nuclear Deterrence and Nuclear Caution

Most empirical studies of the effects of nuclear weapons treat these weapons as a binary variable, but there are strong reasons to think that the effects of a state’s nuclear arsenal are conditioned by that state’s policies. I argue that the effect of nuclear weapons in non-existential disputes is determined by what I call nuclear risk: the overall likelihood that these weapons may be used with...

The Logic of Latent Nuclear Deterrence

Nuclear deterrence is central to international relations theory and practice. Most people assume that countries must possess nuclear weapons in order to reap deterrence benefits from their nuclear programs. This article shows, however, that latent nuclear powers – nonnuclear states that possess the capacity to make weapons – can deter aggression, despite their lack of assembled warheads. Latent...

Mutual Learning or Mutual Disappointment