IS ARMS CONTROL THE ANSWER?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vUyQu5qSGDM•What makes WMDs different? Chem, bio, & nuke vs. conventional weapons •They seem so 20th Century, so why do (some) countries want WMDs?•How much is enough? Deterrence and mutually assured destruction (aka “massive retaliation's”; arguments for proliferation•The security dilemma. We don’t want them, but…•Why isn’t extended deterrence enough? •The stability-instability paradox: Once you have them, what else can you do? (Israel, Pakistan, and the US as examples?)•Legitimacy issues & claims to hegemony (domestic, regional, intl.)

Nuclear Warheads (Stockpiled, not deployed; the US and the Russia account for 95 % of the world’s nuclear

weapons)

THE WMD’STIMELINE•WWI: Extensive use of chemical weapons by all sides•1945 first nuclear weapon used; plutonium based (roughly equal to 15K tons of dynamite, killing 120K people)•1949 USSR tests, 1952 UK tests•1950s development of hydrogen bombs (a 20 megaton bomb = 20 million tons of dynamite) •1957 Soviets test first ICBMs (the space race)•1957 Atoms for Peace effort; Intl. Atomic Energy Agency•1958 France tests•1961 Cuban Missile Crisis •1964 China tests, today a few 100•Since then: Israel, Pakistan, India, South Africa & N. Korea •Other important developments: silo hardening, missile technology, MIRVs, tactical nukes, SLBMs (subs), ABMs, SDI (1987) grows up in the 2000s to be a “shield”

WHY HAVE WE SOUGHT TO IMPOSE ARMS LIMITATIONS?

•International norms and tipping points…Must stop early or the cat will get out of the bag and everyone will have•How valuable are nukes today to the most powerful states?: Not very valuable (Korea, Vietnam, and Afghanistan show that most powerful states will lose before using nukes)•Conventional vs. WMD capability gaps: What’s easiest and cheapest weapon for rising states to develop? •The credibility problem for major powers’ WMDs, especially with extended deterrence: USSR in Afghanistan, US in Vietnam•The morality issue (domestic and foreign) – How can we have them and say we believe in human rights?•Are nukes offensive or defensive? Hard to tell… This is a huge problem in relying on them. Nuclear subs are esp. problematic. •The rogue regime & terrorism problem: Even if they don’t use nukes, they can be more aggressive with them.•The number of actors and uncertainty

EFFORTS AT DISARMAMENT•First things first: What’s the problems with the way intl treaties work? You can back out•The Geneva Protocol of 1925 bans use of chemical weapons•1968/1970: NPT (Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons)•1963 Partial Test Ban Treaty; ‘67 Space, ‘59 Antarctica •1972 ABM/SALT treaties bw US/USSR

•Encode MAD assumptions and tries to limit mistakes•ICBM limits (1,500ish ) / SLBM limits (700ish)

•1974: SALT—Limits total warheads & number of MIRVs (800ish) •1980s START; Reagan wanted to look into no nuke policy•1987 Missile Technology Control Regime•1993 South Africa gives up nukes, joining Post-Soviet countries•Chemical Weapons Convention of 1993: Stockpiling & production•1995-NPT adopted permanently•1996 CTBT opens for signatures (US hasn’t signed)•The 2002 agreement: 2,200 warhead target & 1600 delivery vehicles apiece for the US/Russia•2010: US/RUSSIA 1500-1700 warheads & 800 vehicles (bombers + sea/land missiles)