Arms Control, Deterrence, Missile Defense
Arms Control, Deterrence, Missile Defense PSC 321
Popular in US National Security
One Day of Notes
verified elite notetaker
Popular in Political Science
This 6 page Class Notes was uploaded by Erica Kugler on Friday April 10, 2015. The Class Notes belongs to PSC 321 at University of Alabama - Tuscaloosa taught by Dr. Frazier in Spring2015. Since its upload, it has received 150 views. For similar materials see US National Security in Political Science at University of Alabama - Tuscaloosa.
Reviews for Arms Control, Deterrence, Missile Defense
Report this Material
What is Karma?
Karma is the currency of StudySoup.
You can buy or earn more Karma at anytime and redeem it for class notes, study guides, flashcards, and more!
Date Created: 04/10/15
Arms Control Deterrence NonProliferation and Missile Defense 0 Arms control vs disarmament o Arms control agreements to regulate limit or restrict the use of weapon I Quantity control on weapons 0 Disarmament focusing on reducing or eliminating weapons I Elimination of weapons History of Arms Control 0 The goal of arms control agreements limit the states who have weapons or limit the of weapons that countries can possess o Hague Conference 1899 1907 o Focused on how the thenworld powers could use weapons and what types of weapons they could have 0 Balance out the of armaments among the thenworld powers 0 Washington Naval Conference 1921 0 Balance out naval power among world powers 0 Baruch Plan 1946 0 UN given authority over use of atomic energy 0 Rapacki Plan 1957 o Prevent the appearance of nuclear weapons in Central Europe Superpower Arms Control 0 Strategic Arms Limitation Talks gt SALT 0 Purpose stabilize nuclear arms race bwn US and USSR 0 Strategic Offensive Reductions Treaty gt SORT 2002 o Called for a 23 reduction in strategic nuclear warheads over a 10 year period I Would result in each superpower having only 2000 nuclear warheads 0 Strategic Arms Reduction Talks gt START 0 Purpose reduce the superpowers nuclear arsenals Global Arms Control 0 Several treaties and conventions have been held to move the world toward a reduction in arms 0 NonProliferation Treaty 1968 Biological Weapons Convention 1975 Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty 1996 Chemical Weapons Convention 1997 AntiPersonnel Mine Ban Convention 1997 0000 Deterrence o Deterrence bargaining wthreat of force to prevent a state from acting as it would normally do 0 Goal try to make another state do what you want it to do 0 Ex if the US does not want Russia to launch its nuclear missiles the US would engage in deterrent threats like sanctions invasion launching of our own missiles in order to make Russia not launch its missiles o 2 types of deterrence simple and extended 0 Simple deterrence threats that are used to prevent an attack 0 Extended deterrence threats that are used to prevent an attack on a third party I Third party can be an ally 0 Ex extended deterrence do not attack state Y our ally or else 0 2 types of deterrence timeframes general and immediate 0 General occurs over a long period of time wo a sign of an imminent attack I Gradual military buildup is an example of general deterrence 0 Immediate there is a specific target of the deterrence threats and an attack is perceived an imminent Rational Deterrence Theory gt interplay bwn defender and challenger o defender actor who responds to the aggressive behavior of another actor o challenger actor that is acting aggressively o Defender s calculations 0 Weight the benefits of successful deterrence vs costs of failed deterrence o Are my deterrence threats credible Will they make the other actor stop acting aggressively o Challenger s calculations o Is the defender s deterrence threats credible o What are the costs political social etc of backing down from my aggressive stance Extended and Nuclear Deterrence o How can extended deterrence threats be made credible o Jointmilitary exercises o Distinguish bwn allies and partners I Alliance higher credibility for use of force if needed 0 Allies are usually bound by treaties to help one another I Partnership lower credibility for use of force if needed 0 Partners do not have to aid one another 0 Distinguish bwn credibility and resolve I Credibility physical ability to carry out a threat via use of force I Resolve willingness to use force to back a threat 0 Alliance renewals gt show other actors that you are committed to your alliances How to weaken a deterrence threat How to make deterrence threats less credible o Salami tactics 0 Process of gradually rather than suddenlyallatonce carrying out actions I Makes it harder for others to draw a stop line to your actions since your actions are gradually and others do not know how far you are willing to go with your actions 0 Result deterrence threats are weakened because the state issuing the deterrence threats does not know when to actually carry them threats Compellence o quotThreat or use of force to get an opponent to reverse an action it has already taken 0 The threat or force is used as a mechanism to compel the opponent to do what you say Successful extended deterrence 0 Some things can help strengthen an extended deterrence threat ie make it more credible 0 Military capabilities gt militarily strong more able to carry out threats of force 0 History of alliance behavior gt history of acting upon alliances or abandoning alliances I If you have a history of upholding alliance obligations then your threats are made more credible because you are more likely to carry out your threats to protect the alliance Alliances gt power in groups deterrence threats made stronger Economic ties gt if economies are tied together then countries have incentive to uphold their threats to prevent an attack that would disrupt their economies o Politicalmilitary linkage gt similar politics or military structures ties countries together and makes them have more resolve to uphold their threats 0 Proximity gt the closer allies are the more likely they are to act on their threats in order to protect each other Successful deterrence 0 Some things have been shown to make deterrence more successful 0 Trade ties I Incentive to prevent economic disruptions more likely to act on det threats 0 Politicalmilitaryties I Commonalities bwn states makes them more willing to defend one another which means that they are more willing to uphold their det threats in order to protect one another 0 Strong capabilities of the defer I more strength political economic militaristic stronger deterrence threats Deterrence today o In today s world what types of deterrence mechanisms work the best 0 Conventional military forces vs nuclear forces 0 Alliances 0 Problem of terrorists and using nuclear deterrence against them 0 Terrorists are nonstate actors so issue is where to launch an attack against them I Should an attack be launched against the country they are hiding in or in the country they originated form Nuclear weapons as deterrence 0 Using nuclear weapons as a deterrence mechanism has its positives and negatives o Positives I Prevention of 1st strike 0 Prevents a country from striking first bc retaliation for strike means that they will also be nuked I Destruction costs of an attack are high 0 Nuclear weapons give you more bang for your buck I No large conventional force needed 0 Nuclear weapons allow a state to save resources since nuclear weapons require fewer resources then trying to assemble a large conventional fleet to fight a war 0 Negatives I Rationality of nuclear weapon use o If one state uses a nuclear weapons then other states will use their nuclear weapons and the world ends up in a nuclear war I Nuclear weapons can be used to start wars I Nuclear weapons have the potential to wipe out an enemy s conventional forces 0 Makes war seem more winnable and may sway people toward using nuclear weapons for a fast win Nuclear vs Conventional warfare 0 Small number of nuclear weapons can do the same job as a large number of conventional fighters 0 Nuclear weapons can ensure a more certain outcome than can conventional warfare 0 Prospect of defeating your enemy is much higher if you use nuclear weapons Nuclear weapons in combat 0 Nuclear weapons were used in Hiroshima and Nagasaki 0 Seeing the results of those bombs served as a deterrence against future use of nuclear weapons I To avoid the huge loss of life and property destruction do not use nukes Nuclear weapons and stability 0 Does nuclear weapons deterrence increase or decrease the stability of a region in conflict 0 Criteria for stable nuclear deterrence o Relatively equal capabilities among the actors in conflict 0 Second strike capability I Second strike capability ability to strike against after first launching a nuclear weapons I An actor wants to be able to keep fighting rather than face being nuked by the enemy after it launches its nuclear weapon 0 Avoid mutually assured destruction 0 Avoid accidents that could lead to the launching of a nuclear weapon 0 Make sure that regimes are stable I Instability lead to hotheaded decisions where a leader may launch a nuclear weapon out of anger rather than thinking about all the future consequences of thelaunch India and Pakistan conflict India and Pakistan both have nuclear weapons Is both of them having nuclear weapons good or bad 0 Does possession of nuclear weapons make them more likely to go to war and nuking each other 0 Do the nuclear weapons serve to deter them from going to war and nuking each other 0 Argument that India and Pakistan are not fine if they have nuclear weapons 0 Arms race could tip the balance in favor of war 0 Both sides have bad military organization 0 Both sides haven t agreed to denial of possibility of use of nuclear weapons 0 Argument that India and Pakistan are fine if they have nuclear weapons Pakistan feels the need to have nuclear weapons because its neighbors do India feels the need to have nuclear weapons because its neighbors do International rules help keep major wars from breaking out Proximity of India and Pakistan to each other makes use of nuclear weapons less likely I If one was to use a nuclear weapon it would feel the effects of its own weapon because the postexplosion affects would reach it 0 O O O Nuclear arms control and reduction 0 What to consider when talking about nuclear arms control and reduction 0 State motivation I Protection is the main motivation behind why states have nuclear weapons 0 Reducing nuclear arms quantities makes states feel unsafe and thus more reluctant to reduce their arsenal 0 Nuclear weapon free zones I Part of the 1968 NonProliferation Treaty 0 3 No s regarding nuclear weapons I No loose nukes I No new nukes gt avoid uraniumplutonium enrichment I No new nuclear weapon states Missile Defense 0 Missile defense is the main problem that comes out of nonproliferation talks 0 Theoretical debate about missile defense 0 Missile defense systems can have both positive and negative utility 0 Positive utility I Prevents future proliferation by nonnuclear states I Allows the US and its allies to protect others from nuclear attacks I Limits the destruction brought by failed deterrence I Allows for the formation of coalitions against nuclear aggression I SavesHves 0 Negative utility I Systems are complicated I MD systems are more expensive than offensive nukes I MD systems reduce a state s ability to pursue arms control I MD systems undermine nuclear deterrence 0 Factors to consider when discussing missile defense 0 Can proliferation of nuclear weapons be stopped 0 Look at the strategic considerations of those wo WMD o Assumptions of missile defense 0 MD systems can be built if and when they are needed 0 MD systems can work reasonably well efficient
Are you sure you want to buy this material for
You're already Subscribed!
Looks like you've already subscribed to StudySoup, you won't need to purchase another subscription to get this material. To access this material simply click 'View Full Document'