Proliferation Threat And Response

Offers access to the 1997 "Proliferation: Threat and Response" report from the United States Department of Defense. Details nuclear, biological, chemical, and other weapon proliferation in Asian, Middle Eastern, and former Soviet areas. Provides access to related news releases and a press briefing transcript. Links to related sites.

In every decade of the nuclear era, one or two states have developed nuclear weapons despite the international community's opposition to proliferation. In the coming years, the breakdown of security arrangements, especially in the Middle East and Northeast Asia, could drive additional countries to seek their own nuclear, biological, or chemical (NBC) weapons and missiles. This likely would produce greater instability, more insecure states, and further proliferation. Are there steps concerned countries can take to anticipate, prevent, or dissuade the next generation of proliferators? Are there countries that might reassess their decision to forgo a nuclear arsenal? This volume brings together top international security experts to examine the issues affecting a dozen or so countries' nuclear weapons policies over the next decade. In Part I, National Decisions in Perspective, the work describes the domestic political consideration and international pressures that shape national nuclear policies of several key states. In Part II, Fostering Nonproliferation, the contributors discuss the factors that shape the future motivations and capabilities of various states to acquire nuclear weapons, and assess what the world community can do to counter this process. The future utility of bilateral and multilateral security assurances, treaty-based nonproliferation regimes, and other policy instruments are covered thoroughly.

Contemporary fears of rogue state nuclear proliferation and nuclear terrorism pose unique challenges for the global community. This book offers a unique approach by examining why states that have the military capability to severely damage a proliferating state's nuclear program instead choose to pursue coercive diplomacy. The author argues cognitive psychological influences, including the trauma derived from national tragedies like the September 11th attacks and the Holocaust, and a history of armed conflict increase the threat perceptions of foreign policy decision-makers when confronting a state perceived to be challenging the existing power structure by pursuing a nuclear weapon. The powerful state's degree of perceived threat, combined with its national security policies, military power projection capabilities, and public support then influence whether it will take no action, use coercive diplomacy/sanctions, or employ military force to address the weaker state's nuclear ambitions. Brian K. Chappell, PhD served twenty-eight years in the United States Air Force and is a veteran of the Afghanistan War. He is a career Nuclear and Missile Operations Officer and has served as a Middle East policy senior advisor to the Under Secretary of the Air Force for International Affairs, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy.