scholarly journals Nuclear Weapons as Symbols: The Role of Norms in Nuclear Policy Making

2006 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karsten J. Frey
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Weapons ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
Nuclear Policy

No First Use: The Next Step for U.S. Nuclear Policy

2010 ◽  
Vol 35 (2) ◽  
pp. 7-47 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael S. Gerson
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Cold War ◽  
National Security ◽  
Nuclear Weapons ◽  
The United States ◽  
Security Strategy ◽  
The Core ◽  
National Security Strategy ◽  
Nuclear Policy

The release of the Barack Obama administration's much-anticipated Nuclear Posture Review (NPR) concluded an intense, yearlong effort to revamp U.S. nuclear weapons policy to better address modern threats. Despite general agreement that the United States' nuclear policy and posture was in need of overhaul, there were strong disagreements over what kinds of changes should be made. At the core of these debates was the issue of U.S. declaratory policy—the stated role and purpose of U.S. nuclear weapons. Whereas some members of the administration advocated that the United States retain all of the flexibility and options afforded by the policy of calculated ambiguity, others contended that to fulfill President Obama's commitment to “put an end to Cold War thinking” and “reduce the role of nuclear weapons in U.S. national security strategy,” the United States should adopt a more restrictive nuclear policy such as no first use (NFU), perhaps in the form of a declaration that the “sole purpose” of U.S. nuclear weapons is to deter a nuclear attack. By not adopting NFU, the NPR missed an important opportunity to reduce the role of nuclear weapons in U.S. strategy. The traditional case for NFU hinges on the argument that the threat of nuclear first use is unnecessary for deterrence. Yet the continued U.S. option to use nuclear weapons first is not only unnecessary but dangerous. Given the size and accuracy of the current U.S. nuclear arsenal, and given the variation in the nuclear capabilities of current and potential adversaries, the first-use option risks creating instabilities in a severe crisis that increase the chances of accidental, unauthorized, or deliberate nuclear use. In a future crisis with a nuclear-armed state, the fear—whether real or imagined—that the United States might attempt a disarming nuclear first-strike increases the possibility of nuclear escalation.

scholarly journals ‘Peace through strength’: Europe and NATO deterrence beyond the US Nuclear Posture Review

2019 ◽  
Vol 95 (2) ◽  
pp. 277-295
Author(s):  
Trevor McCrisken ◽  
Maxwell Downman
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Weapons ◽  
Security Policy ◽  
Arms Control ◽  
The United States ◽  
Unintended Consequences ◽  
European Security ◽  
Alternative Vision ◽  
Nuclear Policy ◽  
The Us

Abstract With its 2018 Nuclear Posture Review, the Trump administration expanded the scope of US nuclear deterrence, re-emphasizing the importance of non-strategic nuclear weapons, perceptively lowering the threshold for nuclear use and casting doubt on the future of arms control. The authors argue that these changes are consistent with the administration's wider ‘peace through strength’ approach that draws on traditional Republican thinking on security policy. While designed to demonstrate credibility and resolve to both allies and adversaries, however, this assertive approach to security policy and specifically nuclear policy as a necessary precursor to renewed engagement in strategic negotiations may have unintended consequences. This article focuses on European reactions to the strategy and argues that the Trump administration's nuclear posture challenges common European understandings in three principal areas. First, changes to US declaratory policy contest European assumptions on the role of nuclear weapons in defending NATO. Second, US modernization plans and their implications for intra-alliance relations risk accentuating controversial debates about the US commitment to Europe. Third, the apparent US rejection of arms control widens the scope for discord with European leaders. If European leaders assert a clear and credible alternative vision advocating nuclear restraint, risk reduction and arms control they could rebuild trust and confidence between the United States, NATO and Russia, demonstrating real strength and ultimately leading to more genuine opportunities for peace and sustainable European security.

scholarly journals Evolution of Pakistans Nuclear Weapon Programme

2021 ◽  
Vol VI (I) ◽  
pp. 1-10
Author(s):  
Hina Shahid ◽  
Tahir Mahmood Azad
Keyword(s):  
Control System ◽  
Nuclear Weapons ◽  
Nuclear Explosion ◽  
Military Leadership ◽  
Nuclear Policy ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Peaceful Purpose ◽  
And Control ◽  
Command And Control System

The purpose of this paper is to discuss the development of Pakistan's nuclear progarmme before and after 1998. Pakistan started its nuclear programme solely for peaceful purpose, and it had no intention to develop nuclear weapons. However, India's objective to acquire nuclear weapons compelled Pakistan to make its own weapon to deter India. After the 1971 war and India's so-called Peaceful Nuclear Explosion (P.N.E.) in 1974, there was no option left for Pakistan but to build its bomb to deter Indian aggression. This paper comprehensively discusses the evolution of Pakistan's nuclear programme, the role of civil-military leadership and furthermore, the development of the command and control system. This paper further elaborates the development of missile technology and the nuclear policy of the country

scholarly journals THE TWOFOLD MEANING OF BRINKMANSHIP: EXPLAINING STRATEGIC AMBIGUITY IN RUSSIA’S NUCLEAR POLICY

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Frasca Caccia
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Weapons ◽  
Critical Analysis ◽  
Strategic Ambiguity ◽  
Nuclear Level ◽  
Western Countries ◽  
Strategic Manipulation ◽  
Nuclear Policy ◽  
Ballistic Missiles ◽  
Nuclear Warhead

Discussions and debates about whether or not the role of Russia’s Non-Strategic Nuclear Weapons underpins a so-called “Escalation to De-Escalation” strategy culminated in the 2018 Nuclear Posture Review, which declared the need for deploying a new low-yield nuclear warhead for submarine-launched ballistic missiles in order to prevent Russia from escalating to the limited nuclear level and successfully terminate the conflict. While unofficial evidence barely suggests that Russia may exhort to its NSNWs in order to stave off the adversary in crisis situations, common Western discussions on Escalation to De-Escalation revolve around the alleged existence of an “offensive” Escalation to De-Escalation strategy. Thereby, Moscow would pre-emptively escalate to the limited nuclear level over NATO's Eastern flank in order to take over it while leaving Western countries without no escalation options, given the doubts surrounding the ability of B61s’ delivery systems at going beyond Russian air-defence. However, while Western countries are often busy with self-deterrence, thus perceiving immediate threats at each deployment by the adversary, they tend to overlook strategic manipulation of deployed capabilities. That is why analysis of ambiguity surrounding Russian NSNWs have been less popular in Western contexts. Based upon critical analysis of Escalation to De-Escalation and classic deterrence and escalation studies, this paper argues that ambiguity surrounding Russia’s NSNWs is part of a brinkmanship strategy, which inadvertently triggered destabilizing dynamics in US-Russia relations. The article proceeds as follows. First, an introduction sets the scene and the aim of the article, as well as the methodology, including the scope and background of facts. Second, the Escalation to De-escalation debate is broken down in the attempt of shedding light on the ambiguity it builds on. Third, it is argued that ambiguity surrounding NSNWs is strategically exploited according to Schelling’s concept of brinkmanship, though exacerbating the risk of inadvertent escalation with Western countries. Finally, a conclusion wraps up the argument and indicates its implications.

The SORS Decision-Making Support System: A statistical tool for better policy making in the Republic of Serbia

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-11
Author(s):  
Miladin Kovačević ◽  
Katarina Stančić
Keyword(s):  
Policy Making ◽  
Modern Society ◽  
Monitoring And Evaluation ◽  
Public Debate ◽  
Statistical Tool ◽  
The Public ◽  
System A ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Trusted Data

Modern society is witnessing a data revolution which necessarily entails changes to the overall behavior of citizens, governments and companies. This is a big challenge and an opportunity for National Statistics Offices (NSOs). Especially after the outbreak of COVID-19, when the public debate about the number of mortalities and tested and infected persons escalated, trusted data is required more than ever. Which data can modern society trust? Are modern societies being subjected to opinion rather than fact? This paper introduces a new statistical tool to facilitate policy-making based on trusted statistics. Using economic indicators to illustrate implementation, the new statistical tool is shown to be a flexible instrument for analysis, monitoring and evaluation of the economic situation in the Republic of Serbia. By taking a role in public policy management, the tool can be used to transform the NSO’s role in the statistical system into an active participant in public debate in contrast to the previous traditional, usually passive role of collecting, processing and publishing data. The tool supports the integration of statistics into public policies and connects the knowledge and expertise of official statisticians on one side with political decision makers on the other.

scholarly journals Can Mandated Political Representation Increase Policy Influence for Disadvantaged Minorities? Theory and Evidence from India

2003 ◽  
Vol 93 (4) ◽  
pp. 1132-1151 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rohini Pande
Keyword(s):  
Policy Making ◽  
Political Representation ◽  
Representative Democracy ◽  
Indian States ◽  
Basic Premise ◽  
Policy Influence ◽  
Disadvantaged Groups ◽  
Institutional Features

A basic premise of representative democracy is that all those subject to policy should have a voice in its making. However, policies enacted by electorally accountable governments often fail to reflect the interests of disadvantaged minorities. This paper exploits the institutional features of political reservation, as practiced in Indian states, to examine the role of mandated political representation in providing disadvantaged groups influence over policy-making. I find that political reservation has increased transfers to groups which benefit from the mandate. This finding also suggests that complete policy commitment may be absent in democracies, as is found in this case.

Agricultural Policy Networks of the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland

1995 ◽  
Vol 43 (4) ◽  
pp. 664-682 ◽  
Author(s):  
Neil Collins
Keyword(s):  
Northern Ireland ◽  
Agricultural Policy ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
Analytical Framework ◽  
Policy Networks ◽  
Republic Of Ireland ◽  
European Literature ◽  
The Republic

This paper provides an analytical framework within which to understand the contrasting way farmers' interests are aggregated and articulated in Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland. The analysis draws on the dominant European literature on state-farmer relations which emphasizes the role of policy networks and explores whether the concepts of pluralism or corporatism best characterize policy making in the two states.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document