In Defence of Arms Control
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 6344672 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Stuart Croft (University of Birmingham, corresponding author) |
| Year | 1996 |
| Volume | 44 |
| Issue | 5 |
| Pages | 888-905 |
| Publication date | 1996-12-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Political Studies (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0032-3217 • E-ISSN: 1467-9248 |
| Publisher | SAGE Publications Inc (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1111/j.1467-9248.1996.tb00340.x |
| OpenAlex | W2075060121 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 2 |
Arms control has been strongly attacked from two quarters since the end of the Cold War. Some argue that it is flawed in essence, elaborating a conservative critique developed over 25 years. Others argue that arms control was a Cold War institution, and therefore its time has passed. Both are wrong, fundamentally because arms control is defined too narrowly. A typology of arms control is proposed with five distinct forms: the traditional interpretation, focusing on strategic stability; arms control at the end of major conflicts; arms control to develop the laws of war; controls on proliferation; and arms control by international organization. Arms control has a long history, and when seen in this broader perspective, it is clear that it has a future
Arms control · Cold war · Control (management · Economics · Institution · Interpretation (philosophy · Law and economics · Management · Perspective (graphical · Political science · Politics · Sociology · Typology · Computer Science · Global Peace and Security Dynamics · International Relations and Foreign Policy · Law · Philosophy
| Unique citing works | 2 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0,07 |
| Citation span | 1997 - 2025 (29) |
| Citation velocity | recent |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 2 |