The Case in Favor of US Nuclear Weapons
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 20139830 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Robert G Spulak (corresponding author) |
| Year | 1997 |
| Volume | 27 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Publication date | 1997-02-13 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | The US Army War College Quarterly Parameters (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0031-1723 • E-ISSN: 0031-1723 |
| Publisher | United States Army War College Press (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.55540/0031-1723.1820 |
| OpenAlex | W2995156767 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 1 |
| References cited | 1 |
As America searches for meaningful diplomatic and military policies to protect and promote its interests in the post-Cold War world, there are essentially two poles of opinion with regard to nuclear weapons.First, there is the post-Cold War status quo, represented by the Clinton Administration's Nuclear Posture Review, conducted in 1993-94, which recommended few and minor changes from Bush Administration policies.And, second, there is an earnest attempt to delegitimize nuclear weapons by minimizing their role, their numbers, and their importance, spreading a kind of nuclear stigma.Far from actually settling the United States' long-term future nuclear policy, the Nuclear Posture Review was greeted with disappointment by those who had hoped to influence US nuclear policy in the latter direction.[1] The policies formulated under the Nuclear Posture Review were presented as a hedge against three concerns: the small but real danger that reform in Russia might fail and a new nuclear-armed government might arise, hostile to the United States; the slow pace of Russia's overall drawdown of nuclear weapons compared to that of the United States; and the security of nuclear components and materials in the nuclear nations of the former Soviet Union.[2]These concerns about an uncertain future, and about the Cold War legacy of 25,000 Russian nuclear weapons, led those engaged in the Nuclear Posture Review to recommend that the United States retain flexibility by maintaining the portions of the defense industrial base unique to nuclear weapons, ensuring sound stewardship for the nuclear stockpile, and ensuring the ability to reconstitute the nuclear forces that are drawn down
Law and economics · Nuclear weapon · Political science · Sociology · Law · Nuclear Issues and Defense
| Unique citing works | 1 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 1 |
| Citation span | 2026 - 2026 (1) |
| Citation velocity | current |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 1 |