David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Given the apocalyptic nature of nuclear weapons, how can states establish an international order that ensures survival while allowing the weapons to be used in controlled ways to discourage great wars, and while allowing nuclear technology to diffuse for civil purposes? How can the possession of nuclear weapons by a few states be reconciled with their renunciation by the majority of states? Which political strategies can best deliver an international nuclear order that is effective, legitimate and durable? These have been central questions in the nuclear age. This article suggests that the effort to construct such an order displayed the characteristics of an enlightenment project, with its emphasis on balance and rationality, the quest for justice and trust among states, the feasibility of instrumental regulation, and the attachment to hope and progress. With the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty at its heart, it necessarily gave precedence to diplomacy and containment over preventive war. The reasons why this conception of nuclear order was discarded by its erstwhile champion, the United States, in favor of one bearing traits of counter-enlightenment, are explored. Its alternative strategy can now be declared a failure. Avoidance of a greater disorder depends on recognition that the problem of nuclear order is more than the problem of proliferation, or of non-compliance, and on recovery whatever the difficulties of the cooperative yet pragmatic sensibility that lay behind the prior approach to order.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library||
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
John Mark Mattox (2011). The Moral Limits of a Nuclear Response to Nuclear Terrorism: A Response to Thomas E. Doyle II. Journal of Military Ethics 10 (4):309-315.
Robert E. Goodin (1985). Disarming Nuclear Apologists. Inquiry 28 (1-4):153 – 176.
Thomas E. Doyle (2011). Ethics, Nuclear Terrorism, and Counter-Terrorist Nuclear Reprisals – a Response to John Mark Mattox's 'Nuclear Terrorism: The Other Extreme of Irregular Warfare'. Journal of Military Ethics 10 (4):296-308.
Michael Allen Fox (1987). Nuclear Weapons and the Ultimate Environmental Crisis. Environmental Ethics 9 (2):159-179.
Henry Shue (ed.) (1989). Nuclear Deterrence and Moral Restraint. Cambridge University Press.
Gilles D. Hurteau (1989). Global Peace as a Professional Concern, II. Journal of Business Ethics 8 (2-3):173 - 175.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads58 ( #57,401 of 1,725,584 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #349,436 of 1,725,584 )
How can I increase my downloads?