weapons of mass destruction strategy and proliferation n.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Weapons of Mass Destruction: Strategy and Proliferation PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Weapons of Mass Destruction: Strategy and Proliferation

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 14

Weapons of Mass Destruction: Strategy and Proliferation - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 142 Views
  • Uploaded on

Weapons of Mass Destruction: Strategy and Proliferation. PO 325: International Politics. WMD. Three Kinds Nuclear Chemical Biological Small in Size, Moderate in Cost, Kill Numerous People Indiscriminately Very Rarely Used in Interstate War, But They Have Been Used Before

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Weapons of Mass Destruction: Strategy and Proliferation' - paki-irwin


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
slide2
WMD
  • Three Kinds
    • Nuclear
    • Chemical
    • Biological
  • Small in Size, Moderate in Cost, Kill Numerous People Indiscriminately
  • Very Rarely Used in Interstate War, But They Have Been Used Before
    • Hiroshima and Nagasaki, 1945 (Nuclear)
    • WWI and Iran/Iraq War (Chemical)
    • Slim Possibility in Gulf War (Biological)
  • Their Importance Derives Not From Their Use, But From the THREAT of Their Use
nuclear weapons
Nuclear Weapons
  • First Developed by US (Manhattan Project, WWII) – Relatively Small Fission Nukes
  • USSR, UK, France, and China (and Probably Israel) had all Developed Fission Weapons by Mid-1960s
nuclear weapons1
Nuclear Weapons
  • By that Time, the US and USSR Had Also Developed Fusion (Chain Reaction) Weapons (e.g., H-Bomb); Much Larger Yield
  • US and USSR Had Also Developed Delivery Systems to Strike the Other From their Homeland (ICBMs) and from International Bases and Submarines (SRBMs, Cruise Missiles)
proliferation
Proliferation
  • Since mid-1960s, Other States Have Acquired Nukes (India, Pakistan), Some Have Developed Technology and Then Stopped Programs (South Africa, Argentina, Brazil), and Others Appear to Be in The Process of Trying (Iran, North Korea)
  • Each Must Also Develop Capable Delivery Systems
proliferation1
Proliferation
  • Why Do States Want to Acquire WMD and Systems to Deliver Them?
  • It Conceivably Makes a Set of Central State Interests (Sovereignty of Government, Territorial Integrity) Immune From Revision By Other States, Because the Punishment That Potential Revisionists Stand To Incur Are Raised Dramatically
non proliferation
Non-Proliferation
  • States That Favor the Status Quo or Otherwise Feel That Proliferation Will Harm the Collective Good Have Been Party to Agreements Attempting to Stop the Proliferation of WMD and The Purchase/Development of Delivery Systems By Potential Proliferators (NPT, MTCR)
non proliferation1
Non-Proliferation
  • As Expected, Many States Who Derive Utility From Having Nukes Are Often Not Party to These Regimes (e.g., North Korea), But Some Have Yielded to International Opinion And Signed
  • Which States Have An Interest In Proliferating? Which Have an Interest In Strict Non-Proliferation?
mutually assured destruction mad
Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD)
  • Enough Nuclear Weapons Are Built Between Superpowers So That Neither Side Can Prevent The Other From Utterly Destroying It
  • Necessitates Second-Strike Capability (Withstand Attack and Still Destroy Enemy); Thus, Does Not Apply to Most New Proliferators
mutually assured destruction mad1
Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD)
  • This Means That Engaging in Conflict that Involves the Credible Threat of Nuclear Usage By Both Can Be Suicidal
  • BUT, There Are Gains to Be Had From Engaging In Brinkmanship (Extract Concessions and Make Others Lose Face By Relying on Their Forbearance)
  • There Can Therefore Be a “Slippery Slope” to Annihilation (Chicken)
nuclear brinkmanship as a game of chicken rules for our game
Nuclear Brinkmanship as a Game of “Chicken” – Rules for our Game
  • Two teams (“countries”); selected by nature – both possess second-strike capability
  • Assume existence of some basic, serious conflict of interest
  • Two iterations of the game
  • One team assigned a leader from their rank for the duration; the other team allowed to elect their leader and hold another election after the first iteration (all points tied to leaders’ decisions)
  • First iteration with no communication; next with communication
  • Game score is cumulative, BUT – If general nuclear war occurs:
    • The game ends
    • Previous scores do not matter; all receive -10