Skip to Main Content
Have library access? Log in through your library
No End in Sight

No End in Sight: The Continuing Menace of Nuclear Proliferation

Nathan E. Busch
Copyright Date: 2004
Pages: 512
https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt130j1g9
  • Cite this Item
  • Book Info
    No End in Sight
    Book Description:

    The global threat of nuclear weapons is one of today's key policy issues. Using a wide variety of sources, including recently declassified information, Nathan E. Busch offers detailed examinations of the nuclear programs in the United States, Russia, China, Iraq, India, and Pakistan, as well as the emerging programs in Iran and North Korea. He also assesses the current debates in international relations over the risks associated with the proliferation of nuclear weapons in the post--Cold War world.

    Busch explores how our understanding of nuclear proliferation centers on theoretical disagreements about how best to explain and predict the behavior of states. His study bridges the gap between theory and empirical evidence by determining whether countries with nuclear weapons have adequate controls over their nuclear arsenals and fissile material stockpiles (such as highly enriched uranium and plutonium). Analyzing the strengths and weaknesses of various systems of nuclear weapons regulation, Busch projects what types of controls proliferating states are likely to employ and assesses the threat posed by the possible theft of fissile materials by aspiring nuclear states or by terrorists.

    No End in Sightprovides the most comprehensive and up-to-date analysis of issues at the forefront of contemporary international affairs. With the resurgence of the threat of nuclear terrorism, Busch's insights and conclusions will prove critical to understanding the implications of nuclear proliferation.

    eISBN: 978-0-8131-5662-0
    Subjects: Political Science

Table of Contents

Export Selected Citations Export to NoodleTools Export to RefWorks Export to EasyBib Export a RIS file (For EndNote, ProCite, Reference Manager, Zotero, Mendeley...) Export a Text file (For BibTex)
  1. Front Matter
    (pp. i-vi)
  2. Table of Contents
    (pp. vii-vii)
  3. List of Tables and Figures
    (pp. viii-ix)
  4. List of Abbreviations and Acronyms
    (pp. x-xiv)
  5. Acknowledgments
    (pp. xv-xvi)
  6. 1 Introduction: The Proliferation Debate
    (pp. 1-32)

    One of the highest security priorities of the United States and the international community in the post–Cold War era has been to prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons to aspiring nuclear states and terrorist groups. The underlying assumption for these efforts is that the proliferation of these weapons of mass destruction is against U.S. and international interests. For example, the second Bush administration has concluded that “Weapons of mass destruction (WMD)—nuclear, biological, and chemical—in the possession of hostile states and terrorists represent one of the greatest security challenges facing the United States.... An effective strategy for countering...

  7. 2 The United States
    (pp. 33-83)

    Why study the United States? As we have seen in chapter 1, optimists such as Kenneth Waltz, John Mearsheimer, and Bruce Bueno de Mesquita and William Riker have pointed to the relative stability that arose between the United States and the Soviet Union during the Cold War as a major source of evidence for their position. They therefore conclude that the U.S. case helps demonstrate that NWSs will control their nuclear weapons safely.¹ But were the specific weapons systems and nuclear controls employed by the United States as safe as the optimists assume? A number of pessimists, such as Bruce...

  8. 3 Russia
    (pp. 84-131)

    Why study Russia? In early rounds of the debate, Waltz and other optimists pointed to the relative stability that arose between the superpowers during the Cold War as evidence for their position.¹ In response, a number of pessimists in the early 1990s argued that the Cold War was not as stable as the optimists would like to think because the superpowers had actually encountered significant command-and-control difficulties over the years, and that the spread of nuclear weapons would be destabilizing because emerging nuclear weapons states (NWSs) would likely experience more severe command-and-control difficulties than the superpowers did.² Thus, in the...

  9. 4 China
    (pp. 132-173)

    Why is China an important case to study? China has had a nuclear weapons arsenal since its first nuclear test in 1964, and like the United States and Russia, it is officially recognized as a nuclear weapons state by the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). Although China is clearly one of the most important states to examine when assessing the probable actions of NWSs, there have been no systematic studies of China’s nuclear program in the context of the optimist-pessimist debate. It is an important case to study for the following reasons.

    First, a major issue in the debate is whether...

  10. 5 India and Pakistan
    (pp. 174-223)

    Why study South Asia? India and Pakistan are critical cases for the optimis-tpessimist debate. They are important for two essential reasons. First, because India and Pakistan have a history of conflict, they are useful for determining whether or not the spread of nuclear weapons increases or decreases stability. Indeed, optimists have generally argued that nuclear weapons have increased stability in the region.¹ Pessimists, on the other hand have argued that nuclear weapons have increased tensions and the risks of nuclear war.² As we will see, a close examination of the history of the tensions in the region and the directions...

  11. 6 Newly Proliferating States: Iraq, North Korea, and Iran
    (pp. 224-280)

    The issue of WMD proliferation came to dominate international politics in 2002 and 2003. Although the United States and Western intelligence agencies have long believed that “rogue states” such as Iraq, North Korea, Iran, and Libya were pursuing nuclear weapons, these issues developed into crises in 2002.¹ For most of 2002 and early 2003, the United States, Great Britain, and other key allies pushed for a war to disarm Iraq and replace the regime headed by Saddam Hussein. After a short period of inspections overseen by the United Nations, the United States led the invasion of Iraq in April 2003....

  12. 7 Conclusions
    (pp. 281-314)

    The evidence from the case studies examined in this project suggests that there is significant reason to be pessimistic about the further spread of nuclear weapons. In these conclusions, I return to the various arguments and predictions of the optimists and pessimists outlined in chapter 1. Part I of this chapter examines what these case studies have taught us about the proliferation debate, and Part II discusses some steps that the U.S. government and the international community might take to prevent the further spread of nuclear weapons and to reduce nuclear dangers among current NWSs.

    Optimisists and pessimists each have...

  13. Appendix: Current IAEA-Related Standards for MPC&A
    (pp. 315-330)
  14. Notes
    (pp. 331-428)
  15. Bibliography
    (pp. 429-461)
  16. Index
    (pp. 462-492)