Skip to main content

Nuclear Weapons and Power in the 21st Century

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Power in the 21st Century

Part of the book series: Global Power Shift ((GLOBAL))

Abstract

On 16 July 1945, the nuclear age was heralded by the successful Trinity test explosion at Alamogordo, New Mexico. Robert Oppenheimer later wrote that the sheer force of this new weapon made him think of the Bhagavad Gita verse “Now I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds” (Hijiya 2000: 123–167). Villains in countless movies seek nuclear weapons for their evil schemes, and only the philosopher’s stone and other imaginary items rival them as sources and symbols of power in popular imagination. During the Cold War, their mere existence seemed to threaten the survival not only of opposing armies, but of civilization itself.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1.

    The United States, Russia, United Kingdom, France and China are recognized as nuclear powers under the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty. Israel is widely suspected of having an undeclared nuclear arsenal. South Africa abolished its nuclear weapons before the end of Apartheid. India, Pakistan and North Korea have tested nuclear devices. Ukraine, Kazakhstan and Belarus ‘inherited’ nuclear warheads from the Soviet Union but handed them over to Russia.

  2. 2.

    See, for example Castex (1945: 466).

  3. 3.

    See, for example Beaton (1966) and Wohlstetter et al. (1976).

  4. 4.

    For background see the collection of essays in Barnaby (1969).

  5. 5.

    Under article 9 of the NPT, ‘a nuclear weapon state is one which has manufactured and exploded a nuclear weapon or other nuclear explosive device prior to January 1, 1967’.

  6. 6.

    For discussion, see Gavin (2004/05: 116–117).

  7. 7.

    For discussion of the drivers of both states’ programs and their likely future trajectory, see Pollack (2007) and Fitzpatrick (2006).

  8. 8.

    See for example Alagappa (2008) and Lyon (2009).

  9. 9.

    For example, the A.Q. Khan network procured rotors for uranium centrifuges from a Malaysian company. See Albright and Hinderstein (2005).

  10. 10.

    See for example Payne (1996).

  11. 11.

    For the most prominent statement of this position, see Schultz et al. (2007).

References

  • Alagappa, M. (2008). The long shadow: Nuclear weapons and security in 21st century asia. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Albright, D., & Corey, H. (2005). Unraveling the a.Q. Khan and future proliferation Networks. The Washington Quarterly, 28(2), 111–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ayson, R. (2010). After a terrorist nuclear attack: Envisaging catalytic effects. Studies in Conflict and Terrorism, 33(7), 571–593.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barnaby, F. (1969). Preventing the spread of nuclear weapons (Pugwash monograph, Vol. 1). London: Souvenir Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beaton, L. (1966). Must the bomb spread? Middlesex: Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blair’s Trident Statement in Full BBC News Online, 4 Dec 2006. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/6207584.stm. Accessed 16 Mar 2011).

  • Braun, C. (2006). The nuclear energy market and the nonproliferation regime. The Nonproliferation Review, 13(3), 627–644.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brodie, B. (1946). Implications for military policy. In B. Brodie (Ed.), The absolute weapon. New York: Harcourt, Brace and Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brodie, B. (1959). Strategy in the missile age. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, K., et al. (2004). The nuclear tipping point: Why states reconsider their nuclear choices. Washington: Brookings Institution.

    Google Scholar 

  • Castex, A. (1945). Aperçus sur la bombe atomique, Revue de défense nationale, 1, Oct 1945.

    Google Scholar 

  • DeYoung, K. (2011). New estimates put Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal at more than 100, Washington Post, 31 Jan 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fitzpatrick, M. (2006). Assessing Iran’s nuclear programme. Survival, 48(3), 5–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fitzpatrick, M. (2007). Can Iran’s nuclear capability be kept latent? Survival, 49(1), 33–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fravel, M. T., & Medeiros, E. S. (2010). China’s Search for assured retaliation: The evolution of chinese nuclear strategy and force Structure. International Security, 35(2), 7–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freedman, L. (2003). The evolution of nuclear strategy. Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Freedman, L. (2004). Deterrence. Cambridge: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freedman, L. (2008). ‘Strategic studies and the problem of Power’, reproduced. In T. G. Mahnken & J. A. Maiolo (Eds.), Strategic studies. Routledge, Abingdon: A Reader.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaddis, J. L. (1982). Strategies of containment: A critical appraisal of postwar american national security. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gavin, F. (2004/05). Blasts from the past: Proliferation lessons from the 1960s. International Security, 29(3), 100–135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Global Nuclear Stockpiles (1945–2006). Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, July/Aug 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hijiya, J. A. (2000). The gita of J. Robert Oppenheimer. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, 144(2), 123–167.

    Google Scholar 

  • Iklé, F. C. (1997). The next lenin. The National Interest, 47, 9–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jervis, R. (1989). The meaning of the nuclear revolution: Statecraft and the prospect of armageddon. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krause, J. (2007). Enlightenment and nuclear order. International Affairs, 83(2), 483–499.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lavoy, P. (2011) Predicting nuclear proliferation: A declassified documentary record. Strategic Insights, 3(1), 2004. http://www.ccc.nps.navy.mil/si/2004/jan/lavoyJan04.asp. Accessed 16 Mar 2011.

  • Leslie, R. (2008). The good faith assumption: Different paradigmatic approaches to nonproliferation issues. Nonproliferation Review, 15(3), 479–497.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lyon, R. (2009). A delicate issue: Asia’s nuclear future. Canberra: Australian Strategic Policy Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Masse, T. (2010). Nuclear terrorism redux: Conventionalists, skeptics, and the margin of safety. Orbis, 54(2), 302–319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moodie, M. (1995). Beyond proliferation: The challenge of technology diffusion. The Washington Quarterly, 18(2), 181–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nitkin, M. B. (2011). North Korea’s nuclear weapons: Technical issues Congressional Research Service Report, 20 Jan 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  • Payne, K. B. (1996). Deterrence in the second nuclear Age. Lexington: The University Press of Kentucky.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pollack, J. (2007). North Korea’s nuclear weapons program to 2015: Three scenarios. Asia Policy, 3, 105–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sagan, S. (2009). The case for No first Use. Survival, 51(3), 163–182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sagan, S., & Waltz, K. (1995). The spread of nuclear weapons: A debate. New York: W.W. Norton & Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schelling, T., & Halperin, M. (1961). Strategy and arms control. New York: Twentieth Century Fund.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schultz, G., William, P., Henry, K., Sam, N. (2007). A world free of nuclear weapons. The Wall Street Journal, 4 Jan 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  • Snyder, G. (1961). Deterrence and defense: Toward a theory of national security. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Squassoni, S. (2008). Nuclear renaissance: Is it coming? Should it?. Carnegie Endowment for International Peace Policy Brief, 69, Oct 2008.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tertrais, B. (2010). Perspectives on Extended Deterrence. Recherches & documents 03/2010, Fondation pour la Recherche Stratégique, Paris, 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thayer, B. (1995). Nuclear weapons as a faustian bargain. Security Studies, 5(1), 149–163.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van de Velde, J. R. (2010). The impossible challenge of deterring “nuclear terrorism” by Al Qaeda’. Studies in Conflict and Terrorism, 33(8), 682–699.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walker, W. (2007). Nuclear enlightenment and counter-enlightenment. International Affairs, 83(3), 436.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wohlstetter, A. (1959). The delicate balance of terror. Foreign Affairs, 37(2), 231–244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wohlstetter, A., et al. (1976). Moving toward life in a nuclear armed crowd. Los Angeles: Pan Heuristics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yoshihara, T., & Holmes, J. R. (2009). Thinking about the unthinkable: Tokyo’s nuclear option. Naval War College Review, 62(3), 59–78.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yost, D. S. (2009). Assurance and US extended deterrence in NATO. International Affairs, 85(4), 755–780.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stephan Frühling .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Frühling, S., O’Neil, A. (2012). Nuclear Weapons and Power in the 21st Century. In: Fels, E., Kremer, JF., Kronenberg, K. (eds) Power in the 21st Century. Global Power Shift. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-25082-8_5

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics