Nuclear Threat 4 th  World War will never happen Presented by: Bharat Jhalani July 2008
Introduction <ul><li>Nuclear peace  is a theory of International Relations (IR) which argues that under some circumstances...
How it is possible?   <ul><li>A nuclear peace results when the costs of war are unacceptably high for both sides. In a two...
Sounds a valid argument! <ul><li>Nuclear weapons may also lessen a state's reliance on allies for security, thus preventin...
Favorable Examples <ul><li>Nuclear weapons are said to have induced stability during the Cold War, when both the U.S. and ...
War of Words <ul><li>Kenneth Waltz, the founder of neorealist theory in international relations argues that  &quot;more ma...
Criticism <ul><li>Decision-makers are not always rational and hasty decision making might set off a nuclear war. </li></ul...
THANK YOU
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Nuclear Threat

746 views

Published on

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
746
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
12
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
28
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Nuclear Threat

  1. 1. Nuclear Threat 4 th World War will never happen Presented by: Bharat Jhalani July 2008
  2. 2. Introduction <ul><li>Nuclear peace is a theory of International Relations (IR) which argues that under some circumstances nuclear weapons can induce stability and decrease the chances of crisis escalation. </li></ul><ul><li>Proponents of the nuclear peace argue that controlled nuclear proliferation may be beneficial for inducing stability. </li></ul>
  3. 3. How it is possible? <ul><li>A nuclear peace results when the costs of war are unacceptably high for both sides. In a two-sided conflict where both sides have mutual second-strike capability, defense becomes impossible. Thus, it is the very prospect of fighting the war rather than the possibility of losing it that induces restraint </li></ul>
  4. 4. Sounds a valid argument! <ul><li>Nuclear weapons may also lessen a state's reliance on allies for security, thus preventing allies from dragging each other into wars (a phenomenon known as chain ganging , frequently said to be a major cause of World War I). </li></ul>
  5. 5. Favorable Examples <ul><li>Nuclear weapons are said to have induced stability during the Cold War, when both the U.S. and the U.S.S.R. possessed mutual second-strike retaliation capability, eliminating the possibility of nuclear victory for either side . </li></ul><ul><li>Nuclear weapons are again said to be the driving force of peace talks between India and Pakistan, since both the nations possess nukes and the war, if ever happen, will result in both the countries nuking each other. </li></ul>
  6. 6. War of Words <ul><li>Kenneth Waltz, the founder of neorealist theory in international relations argues that &quot;more may be better,&quot; contending that new nuclear states will use their acquired nuclear capabilities to deter threats and preserve peace. </li></ul><ul><li>Scott Sagan, a leading proponent of organizational theories in international politics argues that &quot;more will be worse&quot;, since new nuclear states often lack adequate organizational controls over their new weapons, which makes for a high risk of either deliberate of accidental nuclear war, or nuclear theft by terrorists. </li></ul>
  7. 7. Criticism <ul><li>Decision-makers are not always rational and hasty decision making might set off a nuclear war. </li></ul><ul><li>There can still be the possibility of the loss of mutual second-strike capability. This can come about from the gain of decisive first strike capability or the creation of a nuclear missile shield. </li></ul><ul><li>Terrorist may use nuclear weapons against any one of the N-8. </li></ul>
  8. 8. THANK YOU

×