The Three Fears: Why the Nuclear Status Quo Is Hear to Stay

• In Event: Poster Session: International Security II

Abstract

Since 1945 and the first use of nuclear weapons, some astounding things have transpired. First, nuclear weapons have not been used in war since 1945. Second, relatively few states have developed nuclear weapons. And third, the first two have occurred without global nuclear disarmament. Few, if any, would have predicted this outcome at the dawn of the nuclear age, where One World or None was a well-known perspective. Winston Churchill, however, may have been closer to the mark when he said in 1955: “Safety will be the sturdy child of terror, and survival the twin brother of annihilation.”

Nuclear weapons have generated fear since 1945. They were described as “Frankenstein” in the days immediately after the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Countless essays, short stories, movies and books have described the horrors of nuclear war and its predicted aftermath. MAD, which epitomized the Cold War, captured the fear at the heart of nuclear deterrence. Thus it is not surprising that a paper on nuclear weapons is centered on fear, especially the fear of nuclear war. But two other fears have worked with the fear of nuclear war to produce the world as it is today: fear of disarmament and fear of proliferation.

Whereas most treatments of nuclear weapons issues highlight their dangers and analyze the many ways that the nuclear taboo may be broken, intentionally or unintentionally, our approach is different. These three fears – of nuclear war, disarmament, and proliferation – combine to create what we call the nuclear status quo. This status quo includes no nuclear war, little to no disarmament, and little proliferation. We argue that this status quo is much more likely to endure than most would at first think. In fact, this status quo should last until at least 2045, if not beyond, allowing us to celebrate 100 years without nuclear weapons being used in an act of war.

How is it that these three fears create the nuclear status quo? The fear of nuclear war helps constrain states from using nuclear weapons in war. The fear of disarmament, despite lofty promises, keeps most states from moving towards true disarmament because they fear other states will not follow suit. Finally, the fear of proliferation leads the nuclear-armed states to go to great lengths to keep proliferation at bay. What is important to recognize is that none of these fears by themselves would keep the nuclear status quo from changing. If states only feared nuclear war, we should see more disarmament. If states only feared proliferation, disarmament should, again, increase in order to encourage other states not to develop nuclear weapons. If states only feared disarmament, proliferation should increase, as non-nuclear weapons states would have greater reason to develop them. What this means is that it is only these three fears operating together that leads to the maintenance of the status quo. Each of these fears strengthen parts of the status quo, while undermining other parts. But, in the end, they create a balance that keeps the status quo as the most likely outcome.

This paper will proceed as follows. First, we will address how and why the early predictions about nuclear weapons have wound up to be so wrong. Second, we will discuss why states have the three fears. Finally, we will conclude by showing how the three fears interact with one another to create an enduring nuclear status quo,

Authors

• Charles J. Fagan, Western Carolina University

• Niall G. Michelsen, Western Carolina University