The United States has recently been in the news again, this time concerning the Trump administration's championing of the US building up its nuclear arsenal and a rejection of a new START nuclear disarmament treaty between the United States and Russia. This has serious implications for the world aside from signalling a departure from the foreign policy precedent of gradual nuclear disarmament. What is the potential rationale for such a policy shift? What are its implications? This week, I examine the logic of deterrence theory and point out its pros and cons in light of recent events.
Currently, there are over 15,000 nuclear missiles in the world, with the United States and Russia currently possessing over 93% of the world's total nuclear weapons (a leftover from the Cold War era). Besides the United States and Russia, only six other countries are confirmed to have nuclear weapons: China, India, Israel, France, the United Kingdom, Pakistan, and North Korea. (Note: While North Korea has conducted nuclear weapons tests, it is not officially known whether or not North Korea's nuclear program has advanced to the point of being able to miniaturize a nuclear warhead so that it fits on a missile). These countries, both inside and outside the nuclear club (i.e. the US, UK, China, France, and Russia), possess nuclear weapons due in large part to the logic of deterrence theory.
Deterrence theory states that multiple states possessing nuclear weapons will have significant disincentives to use them against other actors because of mutually assured destruction (MAD). In other words, countries don't want to fire on other countries if they know that there will be retaliation that will ensure both sides get destroyed. This theory, like other international relations theory, relies on the basic assumption that actors (i.e. states) are rational and wish to optimize their security in order to ensure their ultimate survival. Because there has been no nuclear war yet, does this mean that deterrence theory is sound and that nuclear weapons are the key to peace and prosperity in the international system?
While it may appear to have held up so far (we're all still here), there are critical flaws in the theory (like any other theory). One major one is that in a world in which non-state actors like terrorist groups pose transnational security threats, the logic of deterrence theory breaks down. This is because non-state actors cannot be easily located and some terrorists don't act in the assumed rational manner (i.e. they may not care about their survival, as seen with suicide bombers). Moreover, as more countries acquire nuclear weapons despite international treaties like the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), there is a greater chance that terrorists could acquire knowledge about nuclear weapons and use that against the rest of the international system.
I would argue that this latter risk is amplified with calls by the Trump administration to boost the US nuclear arsenal (potentially prompting other countries to possibly abandon the international nuclear disarmament regime). Secondly, the logic of deterrence doesn't hold in situations where someone accidentally launches nuclear weapons, misreads the intentions of other actors, or where leaders are not behaving rationally. Lastly, I would argue that the logic of deterrence is shaky also when it comes to instilling a potentially false sense of security.
There has to be a tipping point. This tipping point could come from any of the above situations I have outlined. Frankly, that scares me. Nuclear disarmament is probably the best way to prevent tensions from escalating between countries (despite the logic of deterrence) or between non-state actors and countries, instead of constantly being in an arms race to stay "on top of the pack." Arms races typically don't end well. Look at what almost happened in the Cold War. Deterrence theory itself almost gave way to an accidental launch, after all.
Sources Cited:
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-39073303
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/fact-sheet-who-has-nuclear-weapons-how-many-do-they-n548481
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-pacific-11813699
https://www.wagingpeace.org/ten-serious-flaws-in-nuclear-deterrence-theory/
No comments:
Post a Comment