Dangers of Nuclear Proliferation Throughout the twentieth century, countries have developed nuclear weapons technology, one of the most lethal technologies ever created. The first country to develop this technology was The United States, and it was used for the first time at Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Japan in World War II. The devastation caused by the two nuclear bombs was so catastrophic that it led to an immediate end of the six year war. Since then, the technology has proliferated to other countries, and today, nine countries in total possess nuclear weapons. Recently, third world countries such as Iran and North Korea have developed, or are in the process of developing, nuclear technology and weapons. However, concern about this recent
…show more content…
If one were to decide whether proliferation should occur simply from this information, the only rational choice would be to oppose the negative consequences. However, preventing proliferation undermines the powers of other nations. The prohibition of procurement or development of nuclear weapons for some countries, and the acceptance of stockpiling of nuclear arsenal for other countries cannot be justified. Furthermore, democratic nations such as the United States guarantee equality and liberty to their citizens, but hypocritically prevent other nations from developing nuclear arsenal that they themselves enjoy. In addition to reaping economic advantages and increased influence in international politics, these countries, through the development of nuclear weapons, will also gain a sense of security that they will be able to retaliate if attacked. Therefore, proponents of proliferation advocate that robbing countries of these advantages proliferation has to offer is simply …show more content…
According to this theory, nations possessing nuclear weapons will not attack other nations because of the potential of an outbreak of nuclear war. In effect, the fear of nuclear war, its chthonic, devastating consequences, and its resultant widespread civilian casualties act as deterrents to the commencement of a major war in the modern age. “Nuclear weapons have helped maintain peace between the great powers and have not led their few other possessors into military adventures”(Waltz). While this simple theory may have been successful in the past 60 years, the precarious way it rests on the ever-growing precipitous cliff of nuclear war cannot be overlooked. A major flaw of the deterrence theory is the the assumption that leaders of countries will act in a rational manner- considering the consequences of their actions on their citizens and citizens of other countries. Jennifer Bradley states that “As simple as deterrence is to define, its actual practice is far more complicated, having many potential pitfalls for failure, essentially because it is a psychological function in the mind of the
If one were to decide whether proliferation should occur simply from this information, the only rational choice would be to oppose the negative consequences. However, preventing proliferation undermines the powers of other nations. The prohibition of procurement or development of nuclear weapons for some countries, and the acceptance of stockpiling of nuclear arsenal for other countries cannot be justified. Furthermore, democratic nations such as the United States guarantee equality and liberty to their citizens, but hypocritically prevent other nations from developing nuclear arsenal that they themselves enjoy. In addition to reaping economic advantages and increased influence in international politics, these countries, through the development of nuclear weapons, will also gain a sense of security that they will be able to retaliate if attacked. Therefore, proponents of proliferation advocate that robbing countries of these advantages proliferation has to offer is simply …show more content…
According to this theory, nations possessing nuclear weapons will not attack other nations because of the potential of an outbreak of nuclear war. In effect, the fear of nuclear war, its chthonic, devastating consequences, and its resultant widespread civilian casualties act as deterrents to the commencement of a major war in the modern age. “Nuclear weapons have helped maintain peace between the great powers and have not led their few other possessors into military adventures”(Waltz). While this simple theory may have been successful in the past 60 years, the precarious way it rests on the ever-growing precipitous cliff of nuclear war cannot be overlooked. A major flaw of the deterrence theory is the the assumption that leaders of countries will act in a rational manner- considering the consequences of their actions on their citizens and citizens of other countries. Jennifer Bradley states that “As simple as deterrence is to define, its actual practice is far more complicated, having many potential pitfalls for failure, essentially because it is a psychological function in the mind of the