Advertisement

The Garrison States

  • Pierre Lellouche

Abstract

The study of the proliferation incentives and disincentives of those internationally isolated countries known as the ‘garrison’ or ‘pariah’ states opens a new but difficult avenue in non-proliferation research. The approach is new in so far as it runs counter to the ‘classic’ trends of strategic thinking about the spread of nuclear weapons. While nuclear proliferation has traditionally been envisaged either as a purely national problem which needs to be solved on a case-by-case basis or as a global phenomenon requiring a global solution, the garrison states approach develops a ‘group theory of proliferation’.1 The aim will be to identify a group of states that share a similar set of politico-military characteristics, which in turn may be the crucial links to the nuclear option.

Keywords

Nuclear Weapon Nuclear Programme Nuclear Proliferation International Herald Tribune International Isolation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes and References

  1. 1.
    George Quester, The Politics of Nuclear Proliferation (Baltimore: the Johns Hopkins University Press, (1973)Google Scholar
  2. Stanley Hoffman, ‘Nuclear Proliferation and World Politics’ in A. Buchan (ed.), A World of Nuclear Powers? (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall, 1966)Google Scholar
  3. Richard Falk, ‘A World Order Problem’, International Security vol. 1, No. 3 Winter 1977 pp. 79–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 2.
    Among many other non-proliferation studies, see: Ford Mitre Report of the Nuclear Energy Study Group, Nuclear Power, Issues and Choices (Cambridge, Mass.: Ballinger, 1977)Google Scholar
  5. US Congress, Nuclear Proliferation Factbook (Washington, DC: GPO, September 1977)Google Scholar
  6. Harold A. Feiveson and Theodore B. Taylor, ‘Alternative Strategies for International Control of Nuclear Power’ in Ted Greenwood, Harold A. Feiveson and Theodore B. Taylor (eds), Nuclear Proliferation, Motivations, Capabilities and Strategies for Control (New York: McGraw Hill, 1977)Google Scholar
  7. Abram Chayes and W. Bennet Lewis (eds), International Arrangements for Nuclear Fuel Reprocessing (Cambridge, Mass.: Ballinger, 1977)Google Scholar
  8. Steven J. Baker, ‘Commercial Nuclear Power and Nuclear Proliferation’, Peace Studies Program Occasional Paper, no. 5 (Cornell University, May 1975)Google Scholar
  9. Abraham A. Ribicoff, ‘A Market Sharing Approach to the World Nuclear Sales Problem’, Foreign Affairs (July 1976) pp. 763–87.Google Scholar
  10. 3.
    Robert E. Harkavy, ‘The Pariah State Syndrome,’ Orbis vol. 21, no. 23 (Fall 1977) pp. 623–49Google Scholar
  11. George H. Quester, ‘What’s New on Nuclear Non-Proliferation’ (Aspen Colorado: Aspen Institute for Humanistic Studies, 1975)Google Scholar
  12. Yehezkel Dror, Crazy States (Lexington, Mass: DC Heath-Lexington Books, 1971)Google Scholar
  13. Richard K. Betts, ‘Paranoids, Pygmies, Pariahs, and Non-proliferation’, Foreign Policy, no. 26 (Spring 1977) pp. 157–83.Google Scholar
  14. 16.
    Edgar M. Bottom, The Balance of Terror (Boston, Mass.: Beacon Press, 1971) pp. 1–6Google Scholar
  15. Louis J. Halle, The Cold War as History (New York: Harper and Row, 1967) p. 170.Google Scholar
  16. 17.
    On US nuclear threats to the PRC: Alice Hsieh, Communist China’s Strategy in the Nuclear Era (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1962) pp. 1–18Google Scholar
  17. Morton H. Halperin and Dwight H. Perkins, Communist China and Arms Control (Harvard: East Asian Research Centre, 1965) pp. 50–1Google Scholar
  18. Alexander L. George and Richard Smoke, Deterrence in American Foreign Policy, Theory and Practice (New York: Columbia University Press, 1974) p. 59Google Scholar
  19. Winberg Chai (ed.), The Foreign Relations of the People’s Republic of China (New York: Capricorn Books, 1972) pp. 56–87.Google Scholar
  20. 27.
    Richard Burt, ‘US Neutral on West Europe’s Arms to Peking’, New York Times, 8 November 1978Google Scholar
  21. Richard Burt, ‘Arms for China — In the Open’, editorial, Los Angeles Times 13 November 1978Google Scholar
  22. Richard Burt, ‘Britain Tells Hua It is Willing to Sell Harrier Jets’, Washington Post, 2 November 1979.Google Scholar
  23. 32.
    Alan Dowty, ‘The Role of Great Power Guarantees in International Peace Agreements’, Jerusalem Papers on Peace Problems the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, no. 3, (1974) p. 17Google Scholar
  24. W. Norman Brown, The United States and India, Pakistan, Bangladesh (Cambridge Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1972) p. 400.Google Scholar
  25. 36.
    Frank T. J. Bray and Michael L. Moodie, ‘Nuclear Politics in India’, Survival, vol. xx, no. 3 (May/June 1977) pp. 115–16.Google Scholar
  26. Lewis A. Dunn, ‘India, Pakistan, Iran…. A Nuclear Proliferation Chain?’, (Croton-onHudson, NY: Hudson Institute, 1976) pp. 13–14.Google Scholar
  27. Fuad Jabber, ‘Israel and Nuclear Weapons’ (London: Chatto and Windus, 1971)Google Scholar
  28. Robert J. Pranger and Dale R. Tahtinen, ‘Nuclear Threat in the Middle East’, American Enterprise Institute Foreign Affairs Study, Washington, no. 23 (1975).Google Scholar
  29. David Burnham, ‘74 Report Concluded that Israelis had A-Bombs’, International Herald Tribune 28–9, January 1977.)Google Scholar
  30. 52.
    W. Seth Carus, ‘The Military Balance of Power in the. Middle East’, Current History, vol. 74, no. 433 (1978) p. 30Google Scholar
  31. Andrew Pierre, ‘Beyond the “Plane Package”: Arms and Politics in the Middle East’, International Security vol. 3, no. 1, (Summer 1978) pp. 157–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 55.
    See Michla Pomerance, ‘American Guarantees to Israel and the Law of American Foreign Relations’, Jerusalem Papers on Peace Problems no. 9, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem (December 1974) pp. 8–18.Google Scholar
  33. R. Tahtinen, National Security Challenges to Saudi Arabia (Washington DC: American Enterprise Institute, 1978).Google Scholar
  34. 63.
    P. LeClair and P. Thibau, ‘Cette Bombe qui nous menace’, Demain L’Afrique, no. 2 (October 1977)Google Scholar
  35. Edward Bustin, ‘South Africa’s Foreign Policy Alternatives and Deterrence Needs’ in Onkar Marwah and Ann Schulz (eds), Nuclear Proliferation and the Near Nuclear Countries (Cambridge, Mass.: Ballinger, 1975) pp. 221–3.)Google Scholar
  36. 64.
    African National Congress, ‘Conspiracy to Arm Apartheid Continues’, Bonn 1977Google Scholar
  37. J. R. Colley, ‘South Africa’s Nuclear Programme’, The South African Mechanical Engineer, vol. 25 (August 1975) pp. 203–24Google Scholar
  38. Barbara Rogers and Zdenek Cervenka, The Nuclear Axis (New York: Times Books, 1978).Google Scholar
  39. 66.
    See Frank Barnaby, ‘Africa and Nuclear Energy’, Africa, no. 69 (May 1977) pp. 92–3.Google Scholar
  40. 70.
    See David M. Rosenbaum, ‘Nuclear Terror’, International Security vol. 1, no. 3 (Winter 1977) pp. 140–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 71.
    See Pierre Lellouche, ‘The Nuclear Test Cases before the ICJ’, Harvard International Law Journal (Summer 1975) pp. 614–37.Google Scholar
  42. 89.
    Lewis A. Dunn, ‘Nuclear Gray Marketeering’, International Security vol. 1, no. 3 (Winter 1977) pp. 107–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© William H. Kincade and Christoph Bertram 1982

Authors and Affiliations

  • Pierre Lellouche

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations