Arms Control Without Nuclear Weapons?

Abstract

If one argues for further nuclear reductions and nuclear disarmament, then one needs to be responsible and also think seriously about conventional arms control, since it is upon conventional imbalances that any remaining system of deterrence would increasingly rely.¹ Especially because, in many instances, these have remained partially hidden in the current nuclear age.² Article VI of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) obliges states, including the USA, to work toward general and complete disarmament of conventional weaponry. Which raises important questions: to what extent should the nuclear weapons states focus on reducing their arsenals as a precondition for conventional disarmament? We have tended to think that it would first be a good idea to reduce nuclear weapons before reducing conventional forces. However, nuclear weapons are but one component of the overall military balance between states. Countries like Pakistan, for instance, have developed their nuclear arsenals not only because of advances in nuclear weaponry by their rivals, but also because of perceived conventional imbalances.³