U.S. Nuclear Forces and Japanese/Western Pacific Security

  • Shinichi Ogawa
Part of the Issues in International Security book series (IIS)


Domestic difficulties have finally compelled the former USSR to abandon its long-standing confrontational policy toward the United States, specifically, and the West, generally, thereby redirecting Russian foreign policy to one that is more conciliatory and cooperative than the policies of past years. This historic change, which has emerged in degrees over the last four to five years, has had multifaceted effects on international politics—the conclusion in December 1987 of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty; the fall of the Communist regimes in Eastern Europe and the unification of Germany; the signing of the Conventional Forces in Europe (CFE) Treaty in November 1990, which aims at stabilizing the conventional force balance in Europe; an unprecedented degree of American-Soviet cooperation within the framework of the United Nations during the Middle East crisis brought about by Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait; and the signing of the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) in July 1991, the framework of which has largely been negotiated on American terms.


Nuclear Weapon Armed Conflict Nuclear Force North Atlantic Treaty Organization Nuclear Deterrence 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes and References

  1. 1.
    U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, United States Military Posture for FY 1983 (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1982), p. 27.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    After President George Bush’s announcement of unilateral withdrawal of tactical nuclear weapons deployed overseas, announced on September 27, 1991, the U.S. Department of Defense released the list of nuclear-capable weapons deployed in South Korea. See The Asahi Shimbun, Morning Edition, September 30, 1991. Also see Iwao Ishikawa, “Beigun no Ajia Taiheiyou Senriyaku (U.S. Forces Asia Pacific Strategy)” in The Asahi Shimbun, Morning Edition, November 26, 1991.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    After confirming the presence of U.S. nuclear weapons in the Republic of Korea, Schlesinger declared the possibility of first nuclear use on the Korean peninsula at a press interview in Washington, D.C., in June 1975. See The Yomiuri Shimbun, Evening Edition, June 21, 1975, or The Asahi Shimbun, Evening Edition, June 21, 1975.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Modern SLCMs were deployed first in 1983. See International Institute for Strategic Studies, The Military Balance 1986–1987 (London: International Institute for Strategic Studies, 1986), p. 200. But the nuclear-capable SLCM was first deployed in the Western Pacific in June 1984. Refer to James P. Rubin, “U.S. and Soviet SLCM Programs,” in Arms Control Today (April 1986), p. 4Google Scholar
  5. 4a.
    Peter Mayes, Lyuba Zarsky, and Waiden Bello, American Lake: Nuclear Peril in the Pacific (Middlesex: Penguin Books, 1987), p. 256.Google Scholar
  6. 5.
    Arms Control Association, “A New Era of Reciprocal Arms Reductions: Texts of President Bush’s Nuclear Initiative and Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev’s Response,” in Arms Control Today (October 1991), pp. 3–4.Google Scholar
  7. 6.
    Ibid., p. 6.Google Scholar
  8. 7.
    U.S. Defense Department, A Strategic Framework for the Asian Pacific Rim: Looking Toward the 21st Century (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1990), p. 5.Google Scholar
  9. 8.
    Arms Control Association, “A New Era of Reciprocal Arms Reductions,” p. 4.Google Scholar
  10. 9.
  11. 10.
    Ibid., p. 6.Google Scholar
  12. 11.
    Linton F. Brooks and Franklin C. Miller, “Nuclear Weapons at Sea,” Proceedings U.S. Naval Institute (August 1988), p. 43.Google Scholar
  13. 12.
    International Institute for Strategic Studies, The Military Balance 1991–1992 (London: Brassey’s, 1991), p. 228.Google Scholar
  14. 13.
    Ishikawa, “Beigun no Ajia Taiheiyou Senriyaku (U.S. Forces Asia Pacific Strategy).”Google Scholar
  15. 14.
    Robert Jervis, The Meaning of the Nuclear Revolution: Statecraft and the Prospect of Armageddon (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1989), pp. 19–23.Google Scholar
  16. 15.
    Discussed and quoted in Christoph Bertram, “Strategic Defense and the Western Alliance,” Daedalus (Summer 1985), p. 294.Google Scholar
  17. 16.
    See, for instance, Newsweek, January 7, 1991.Google Scholar
  18. 17.
    Japan, Genshiryoku linkai (Atomic Energy Commission), ed., Genshiryoku Hakusho (White Paper on Atomic Energy) (Tokyo: Ministry of Finance Printing Bureau, 1989), p. 39.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • Shinichi Ogawa
    • 1
  1. 1.National Institute for Defense StudiesTokyoJapan

Personalised recommendations