Advertisement

The Post-9/11 Era: Is Arms Control Still Relevant?

  • Gamal M. Selim
Chapter
Part of the SpringerBriefs in Environment, Security, Development and Peace book series (BRIEFSSECUR, volume 4)

Abstract

Following the 9/11 attacks, a major change occurred in Western, particularly American security policies at the global and regional levels, including policy in the area of arms control. In the United States, the George W. Bush administration declared a war on terrorism that targeted both terrorist organizations and so-called ‘rogue states’. The administration argued that it could not afford to wait until such organizations or states acquired WMDs and used them first against US interests. Accordingly, the United States had to be prepared to strike first against aspiring possessors of WMD, especially rogue states seeking nuclear weapons. This brought the war on terrorism into a war of counter-proliferation in which the United States and a number of its European allies would target non-state terrorist organizations and rogue states suspected of developing WMDs (Record 2004).

Keywords

Nuclear Weapon Military Force Bush Administration Vital Interest National Security Strategy 
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.

References

  1. Bolton, J. (2003). Syria’s weapons of mass destruction and missile development program. A Testimony before the House International Relations Committee, Washington DC. Retrieved September 13, 2003, from http://merln.ndu.edu/archivepdf/syria/State/24135.pdf.
  2. Dokos, T. P. (2008). Countering the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction: NATO and EU options in the Mediterranean and the Middle East. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  3. Garden, T. (2003). Iraq: The military campaign. International Affairs, 79, 4.Google Scholar
  4. Hersh, S. (2006, April 17). The Iran plans: Would President Bush go to war to stop Tehran from getting the bomb? The New Yorker (Annals of National Security).Google Scholar
  5. Ismael, T. Y., & Fuller, M. (2007). The disintegration of Iraq: The manufacturing and politicization of sectarianism. International Journal of Contemporary Iraqi Studies, 2, 3.Google Scholar
  6. Khurana, G. (2004, April–June). Proliferation security initiative: An assessment. Strategic Analysis, 28, 2.Google Scholar
  7. Litwak, R. (2007). Regime change: U.S. strategy through the prism of 9/11. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Newman, A. (2004). Arms control, proliferation and terrorism: The Bush Administration’s Post-September 11 Security Strategy. The Journal of Strategic Studies, 27, 1 (March).Google Scholar
  9. Norris, R. S., & Kristensen, H. M. (2006, September/October). U.S. nuclear threats: Then and now. Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, 62, 5.Google Scholar
  10. Record, J. (2004, July 8). Nuclear deterrence, preventive war, and counter proliferation. Policy Analysis, 519.Google Scholar
  11. Schmitt, G. (2001). Memorandum to opinion leaders. Project for a New American Century, 13 December.Google Scholar
  12. Spector, L., & Cohen, A. (2008, July/August). Israel’s airstrike on syria’s reactor: Implications for the nonproliferation regime. Arms Control Today.Google Scholar
  13. UNHCR. (2008). Iraq: Latest return survey shows few intending to go home soon. Briefing Note, 29 April.Google Scholar
  14. Yost, D. S. (2006). France’s new nuclear doctrine. International Affairs, 82, 4.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Political SciencePort Said UniversityPort SaidEgypt

Personalised recommendations