Nuclear Theory, Politics, & Strategies

Nuclear weapons are often considered to pose humanity’s gravest danger. Yet despite nuclear threats and crises, states have managed to avoid the deliberate or inadvertent use of nuclear weapons since the end of World War II. Seventy-eight years after Hiroshima, how has nuclear war been avoided? Did the advent of nuclear weapons create a revolution in military affairs that stalemated major powers and dramatically reduced the prospects of great power war by the emergence of mutual vulnerability and mutual assured destruction (MAD) postures? Or are nuclear weapons central to great power competition and valuable instruments of force including for deterrence and coercion? Is there a taboo against nuclear use? Do the major theories about the nuclear era match actual practice and how has nuclear theory evolved? Are the strategies and approaches that were employed in the past still appropriate for the new multipolar nuclear age? Why do some states acquire nuclear weapons while others that have considered going nuclear (e.g., South Korea and Germany) so far forego the option, while still others (e.g., South Africa and Ukraine) have given up their nuclear weapons? What are the prospects for continued nuclear proliferation (e.g., Iran)? This class will explore past and current patterns of behavior among existing, potential, and former nuclear weapons states. Other questions that animate this course include: What do nuclear weapons actually deter? Can they be used for coercion? What are the incentives, disincentives and risks of strategies premised on deliberate escalation to nuclear use? Do they increase the probability of inadvertent use of nuclear weapons? What role do nuclear weapons play in U.S. strategy and security policies? How does the U.S. experience compare to those of other nuclear weapon states, such as USSR/Russia, China, India, Pakistan, and North Korea? This seminar will examine such questions to gain a better understanding of the impact of nuclear weapons on international relations.