Two main theorists of international relations, Kenneth Waltz and Scott Sagan have been debating on the issue of nuclear weapons and the proliferation of nuclear weapons in the 21st century. In their book The Spread of Nuclear Weapons: An Enduring Debate, they both discuss their various theories, assumptions and beliefs on nuclear proliferation and nuclear weapons. To examine why states would want to attain/develop a nuclear weapon and if increasing nuclear states is a good or bad thing. In my paper, I will discuss both of their theories and use a case study to illustrate which theory I agree with and then come up with possible solutions of preventing a nuclear war from occurring.
Since the invention of nuclear weapons, they have presented the world with a significant danger, one that was shown in reality during the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. However, nuclear weapons have not only served in combat, but they have also played a role in keeping the world peaceful by the concept of deterrence. The usage of nuclear weapons would lead to mutual destruction and during the Cold War, nuclear weapons were necessary to maintain international security, as a means of deterrence. However, by the end of the Cold War, reliance on nuclear weapons for maintaining peace became increasingly difficult and less effective (Shultz, et. al, 2007). The development of technology has also provided increasing opportunities for states
The Cold War was the start of the major changes in human history. Two important events that occurred were the arms race and the space race. “An arms race denotes a rapid increase in the quantity or quality of instruments of military power by rival states in peacetime. A close examination of the historical evidence reveals a different picture. Political purposes almost always drive and govern arms races. It is common for a major race to be initiated by a state interested in changing the political status quo” (Arms Race). The arms race was a major rearmament between the USSR and the United States. Each country was producing new weapons at an alarming rate to be better than the other. The newly created nuclear weapons were a major playing force for the arms race. Each country
Nuclear weapons pose a direct and constant threat to people. Not even close from keeping the peace, they breed fear and mistrust among nations. These ultimate instruments
The first atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima in 1945 to foreshadow the end of a long and bloody war. It killed an estimation of eighty thousand people with its detonation; one of the finest instruments of murder humanity has managed even to this day. Its presence was a catalyst. Decades after its first showing, World Powers across the globe continue the escalating stockpilation of their nuclear arsenals. In 1978 however, Canada came to an executive decision to rid itself of its nuclear weaponry. Canada acknowledged the mounting tensions of the nuclear competition and its potential to lead to war, as well as what the ramifications of such a war could mean for earth’s inhabitants—extinction—and decided, with its reputation and connections,
Although, the Cold War has been over for decades the threat of imminent nuclear destruction still looms over America; not from terrorist groups such as ISIS or Russia the country with the largest stockpile of nuclear weaponry, but rather, a persistent threat that many Americans do not even perceive as one. North Korea is not shy about demonstrating their nuclear weapons, with the most recent of their tests being fired into the Japanese ocean. Both the articles I’ll be addressing today give a clear statement of how America has addressed nuclear conflict in the past and how Americans still fear the same kinds of attacks without thinking of new ways their country could be compromised by nuclear weaponry.
Once all the countries of the world knew the power of the weapons they could create, an immediate competition arose to see who could construct the bomb first. America now had a nuclear monopoly over the world, and guessed it would take about twenty years before another country would be able to replicate America’s atomic bomb. In that time, America would be able to construct a hydrogen bomb capable of destruction far worse than a bomb composed of uranium or plutonium. Unfortunately, America’s monopoly was soon overthrown by the Soviet Union, who detonated their first atomic bomb only four years after Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Both countries strove to amass the largest nuclear arsenal the world has ever seen, and used them on each other igniting the Cold
The first use of nuclear weaponry in warfare occurred on the morning of August 6, 1945 when the United States dropped the atomic bomb known as “Little Boy” on Hiroshima, Japan. The result was devastating, demonstrating the true power of nuclear warfare. Since the incident, the world has been left fearing the possible calamity of another nuclear war. Joseph Siracusa’s Nuclear Weapons: A Very Short Introduction explains aspects of nuclear weaponry from simply what a nuclear weapon is, to the growing fear from nuclear warfare advancements in an age of terrorism. The book furthered my education on nuclear weapons and the effect they place on society, physically and mentally.
Having adopted the Nonproliferation Treaty in 1970, as well as keeping in mind the New START treaty in the Obama administration, the leaders of America and leaders around the world has come to the consensus that it is best to ban the use of nuclear weapons. As the public opinion of nuclear technology is usually negative, many would agree that a nuclear war could be dangerously fatal for lives world wide, therefore our group agrees that it is wise to be wary of powerful nations in possession of such hazardous and forceful arm, including our very nation, the United
“I have to bring to your notice a terrifying reality: with the development of nuclear weapons Man has acquired, for the first time in history, the technical means to destroy the whole of civilization in a single act.”- Joseph Rotblat. After the United States dropped an atomic bomb on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki on August 6 and 9, forcing Japan to surrender on the 14, people finally got to see the pure and utter destruction that a nuclear bomb had the potential of. Seeing this power, the United States and the USSR fought for supremacy in nuclear warfare in a competition called the Arms Race. Nobody, however, really understood how much a nuclear detonation could affect a society not only physically, but socially, politically and medically as well.
Toward Nuclear Abolition - 1971 to the Present- is the third book of the trilogy “The Struggle Against the Bomb” written by Lawrence S. Wittner, which follows the previous two: One World or None and Resisting the Bomb. Throughout his trilogy, the author provides a systematic and comparative study of the way in which countries, governments and especially Nuclear Disarmament Movements have confronted the rising menace of the arms race and the possibility of a Nuclear war. The studies are scheduled on a year by year, and country by country analysis which aim is to define the importance of the Nuclear Disarmament Movements’ pressure, “intelligence, courage and determination” in altering the course of the history.
The Next Decade, a novel by George Friedman, talks about the predictions of countries in the upcoming decade and how the United States should react to the various challenges. The novel’s first major claim is that the United States is actually an empire, similar to how Rome and Great Brian were. However, unlike the previous empires, the United States refuses to acknowledge its status as an empire. “What makes the United States an empire is the number of countries it affects, the intensity of the impact, and the number of people in those countries affected.” The implication of this quote is that the US has gotten to be so large, if the US decided to draw out of global affairs, the impact would be detrimental. Instead of escaping its duty to the world, Friedman claims that the United States must acknowledge its status as an empire and function as such in order to maneuver the next decade. This claim is a wise claim made by Friedman, but it his only claim of worth in the novel. In The Next Decade, Friedman fails to make his thesis credible because he doesn’t his sources, provide logical arguments on his predications of the future, or examine alternative possibilities.
Can you imagine yourself getting evaporated in a blink of an eye? I know no one wants to imagine that, but it might become reality soon if countries still keep possessing nuclear weapons. Furthermore, these weapons of mass eradication are an upcoming threat across the world because of its capacity for destruction which is why I chose to tell people my opinion on this matter. Additionally, I adopted this crisis as my essay topic because nuclear arms aren't just a domestic problem; it is a dilemma on a global scale. My aim today is to give you my two cents on why the prohibition of nuclear arsenals is the right thing to do! To stop this emergency, I will need all my readers help in protesting in peaceful ways against the arms because as Martin Luther once said: “Nothing good ever comes from violence.”
The existence of nuclear weapons for better or worse have indubitably impacted our lives in one way or the other. There are the some who find these weapons to be singularly beneficial. For example Defence Analyst Edward Luttwak said “we have lived since 1945 without another world war precisely because rational minds…extracted a durable peace from the very terror of nuclear weapons.” (Luttwak, 1983). Moreover, Robert Art and Kenneth Waltz both extrapolate that “the probability of war between American and Russia or between NATO and the Warsaw Pact is practically nil precisely because the military planning and deployments of each,
On August 1954, the United States dropped two atomic bombs on the cites of Hiroshima and Nagasaki killing over two hundred thousands instantly and more over time due to radiation and other injuries. These two bombs ended World War II and changed the public’s view of nuclear energy. Those bombs were the only nuclear weapons used in any war, but there were many more detonated for tests.(1) During a speech about the nuclear test ban Kennedy said “Eighteen years ago the advent of nuclear weapons changed the course of the world as well as the war.”(2) The invention of nuclear weapons changed the world by having the ability to destroy the human race, changing how countries fight wars, and building fear into people around the world.