In this paper, I address three of the most frequently used arguments formaintaining a significant measure of dependence for international securityon nuclear deterrence both globally and regionally:1. Nuclear weapons have deterred great powers from waging waragainst each other, so a world without nuclear weapons will leadto, or at least might encourage, great-power war.2. The US nuclear umbrella has deterred nuclear proliferation, sothe reduction of the US nuclear arsenal will undermine thecredibility of US extended deterrence and create additionalincentives for nuclear proliferation.3. Nuclear weapons have deterred other powers from invading theterritory of those states that possess nuclear weapons and thus leaders of countries with relatively weak conventional capabilitieswill keep their weapons as an equalizer. A version of thisargument focuses on dictatorial regimes or “rogue states” whosevery existence depends on their having nuclear weapons.I argue that none of these arguments holds...
展开▼
