NAME: Abraham Kuol Nyuon

STUDENT NUMBER: 1261936

WORD COUNT: 2, 998

MODULE: History of Contemporary Warfare 2: From Cold War to New World Order 1975-
1991, 7SSWM198, Term 1, 2012/13

TITLE: How did the Development of Nuclear Weapons affect International Politics between

1968 and 1991?

ASSIGNMENT TYPE: Long Essay

1
 How did the Development of Nuclear Weapons affect International Politics between 1968

and 1991?

The development of Nuclear weapons has a great impact on the international politics today

because every country wants to protect her territorial integrity and sovereignty. The concept of

territorial integrity of every state enable the politicians to look for means of keeping to power

leading to the development of the Nuclear weapons as a double edge sword for maintaining

power and in the name of protecting national interest. The development of Nuclear weapons has

enabled the key players of international politics to think about the use of force and coercion in

relation to neighbouring states and maintaining international dominance. The application of

concept of deterrence during the Cold War period between the United States and the Soviet

Union change their perception on the use of nuclear weapons in deterring the competing

superpower. This essay will investigate the effect of the development of Nuclear weapons in the

international politics between 1968 and 1991 by examining the three schools of thoughts in

international politics as a way of exploring the role played by presence of nuclear weapons in the

international system today. The three schools of thoughts are Constructivism, Liberalism and

Realism. The essay will investigate how each paradigm explains how the development of nuclear

weapons affects the international politics. These paradigms will be examined in the above order.

These paradigms of the international politics presented various positions on the role played by

nuclear weapons in influencing international politics and this essay provides the understanding of

how the development of nuclear Weapons shapes international politics between 1968 and 1991,

hence the essay will give the position of Constructivism, Liberalism and realism. The premise of

this paper holds that the development of Nuclear weapons is very relevant and vital in the

practice of international politics between 1968 and 1991 as well as today because nuclear

2
weapons have become an avenue for promoting and maintaining national interest. This essay

discusses the three paradigms because they help understanding in influence of development of

nuclear weapons in the international politics.

The first paradigm to explain the role for the development of nuclear weapons in the

international politics is constructivist paradigm of international relations. According to Weber in

his book, international Relations theory believes the theory of constructivism is based on the

national identities and interest in relation to international politics. He argues that it is vital to

investigate the role of national interest and identity which shape how nations interact in the

international system, thus, sees anarchy as something made the independent states as they

interact with each other.1 In agreement with Weber view, Jackson and Sorensen argues that,

there is nothing known as outward, detached, social veracity which is exterior to human

realization because humanity has great awareness within itself.2 In their vie, Social associations

such as transnational interaction made thus, constructivism emphasizes the role of ideas,

perception and assumption which are essential aspects of human behavior and practices that are

share among people, therefore, constructivist stress the essence of forming and expressing

relations through state sovereignty.3 The role of nuclear weapons in the international politics in

the constructive perspective was express by Gartze and Kroenig when they says that, the

development of nuclear weapons had change the regularity, effectiveness, concentration, period

and upshot of conflict as well as affecting the state’s sphere of diplomatic inspiration. They

emphasize that nuclear weapons stimulate state’s security and diplomatic inspiration on the

neighbouring state because states can benefit from the international interaction by acquiring

1
Weber, C (2001), International Relations Theory: A critical Introduction, New York: Routledge Publication, p.60
2
Jackson, R and Sorensen, G (2003), Introduction to International Relations: Theory and Approaches, New York:
Oxford University Press, P.253
3
Ibid, p.254

3
nuclear weapons.4 The critique to the above point came from Miller who claims that the

development of nuclear weapons can result into precautionary, military assault or incursion,

crisis volatility as well as accidental nuclear explosion leading to international unpredictability. 5

Likewise, Jo and Gartzke writings explore the effect for the development of Nuclear Weapons in

the international politics in relations to states that possess these weapons of Mass destruction, in

their opinion, the development of nuclear weapons had no effect in global politics because the

presence of these arsenals made the possessing state to be more or less in the regional conflict

but the state’s acquisition of weapons of mass destruction may impact the circulation of

resources.6

The constructivist’s assumption is that all human actors in the international system construct

their own world. This simple analysis was to introduce theory of constructivism to lay

foundation on how this theory supports the hypothesis on how the development of nuclear

weapons affects international politics. The constructivists stress that anarchy is a product of state

discernment which involves threat as a way of enhancing national interest. In Mercer view, the

states emphasize anarchy to promote their reputation among other states in the international

system and the state should possess and control it by developing a deterrence mechanism to

advance national interest, hence the concept of deterrence made the development of nuclear

weapons to hold a strategic position in the international politics due to the fear of nuclear

destruction by the competing state is evidence.7 According to constructivists, the development of

nuclear weapons is essential in the international politics since intimidation perception is based on

4
Gartzke, E and Kroenig, M (2009), A strategic Approach to Nuclear Proliferation, Journal of Conflict resolution,
Vol.53, No.151, p.152
5
Miller, S.E (1993), The Case Against Ukrainian Nuclear Deterrent, Foreign Affairs journal, Vol.73, No.3, pp.67-80
6
Jo, D and Gartzke, E (2007), Determinants of Nuclear Weapons Proliferation: A quantitative Model, Journal of
Conflict Resolution, Vol.51, No.1, Pp.167-194
7
Mercer, J (1996), Reputation and International Politics, New York: Cornell University Press, p.7

4
the states possessing nuclear weapons as a way of indication their might in relation to the

neighbouring states and the acquisition of these weapons by many states leads to fear for self-

destruction forcing states to seek peace resolutions to differences.

The second paradigm that explains the effect for development of nuclear weapons in the

international politics is liberalism. Rousseau and Walker stress that, liberalism as a school of

thoughts in the international politics is based on the principle of personal freedom, privacy and

proper participation in political process and equity of opportunities to every person but states is a

single player in the international system.8 In their view, these principles made the inter-state

relations to be very peaceful sometime but may enable the democratic states to start or intensify

conflict with the neighbouring aggressive state while the same democratic states may participate

in the pursuance of international trade and investment by seeking international cooperation

through their foreign policy because human being is naturally good, hence huge military

spending on the development of nuclear weapons is a corrupted concept and dangerous to the

nation-state functioning.9 In exploring the hypothesis of Liberalism, Rousseau and Walker

articulates that, it underscores democracy, interaction of economies in the free market,

development of international institution, as the major component which automatically leads to

reduction of military warfare.10 Subrahmanyam also noted that, the effect of the development of

Nuclear Weapons in the international politics emerged in 1960s when Kennedy government

empasize the doctrine of flexible response which made Germany and other European countries

felt that the presence of nuclear weapons may lead to conventional warfare, the y acquire these

8
Rousseau, D.L and Walker, C.T (2010), Liberalism in Myriam D.C and Victor, M (eds), the Routledge Handbook of
Security Studies, New York: Routledge Publication, p.21
9
Ibid, p.23-25
10
Ibid, Pp. 27-28

5
weapons as a method of deterring conventional warfare in the international system. 11 The

development of nuclear weapons is a state’s military strategy and doctrine for meeting the state’s

political means because it enables the possessing state to have a strong bargaining power in the

international politics, this make the possessing states to prevent non-nuclear states to own

nuclear weapons as a nuclear strategy. Mueller argues that the presence and acquisition of

nuclear weapons by the states is a major factor in preventing war between the United States of

America and the Soviet Union because horrible memories of World War II brought about a hug

causalities to nations at war by then, thus nuclear weapons have a significant impression on the

progression of transforming the international political configuration.12

In highlighting the effect for the development of Nuclear weapons in the international politics,

liberalism, stresses that the interdependence among the states within the international politics

will definitely reduce warfare in the international system, hence, the possession of nuclear

weapons will enable the nuclear weapons states not to wage war against each other because

nuclear weapons will make these states to fear each other and promote peace and cooperation.

Nuclear weapons become an agent of protecting the national interest through international

regimes by regulating the behaviour of these states in the international system. These hypotheses

made states to stress the model of collective security centred on alliance to promote peace by

deterring aggressiveness and endorse intervention, conflict resolution, mediation of disputes,

complying with agreement and promotion of cooperation among the nation-states.13

11
Subrahmanyam, K (2010), The Role of Nuclear Weapons in the International Politics, Strategic Analysis, Vol.34,
No.2, p.326-339
12
Mueller, J (1988), The Essential Irrelevance of Nuclear Weapons: Stability in the postwar, journal of international
security, Vol.13, No.2, Pp.55-79
13
Ibid, p.29

6
The third paradigm that investigates the effect of the development of Nuclear Weapons in the

international politics is realism. Brodie introduce the realist position on power by describing

nuclear Weapons as an absolute weapon because any warfare that is associated with nuclear

weapons will be completely destructive.14 Krepinevich echoed Brodie by stressing that the

introductions of nuclear weapons have change tactics in warfare especially the use of ballistic

missile which have made nuclear weapons a strategic equation in the international politics.15 In

the same line of argument, Jackson and Sorensen says realist states are aggressive in approach to

international politics because they believe in the anarchic environment of the international

system as there is no central power or authority to maintain international peace which make

survival an essence of international politics.16 Furthermore, Taliafero describe realism as a

situation where states help themselves in the international system for survival and this aspect of

self-help is determined by being offensive or defensive, offensive realism states that the anarchic

environment of the international system enable the states to exhibit the expansionism in approach

to the international politics while defensive realists stress the powerful the military capability, the

tougher the victory.17 Moreover, Wolhforth strengthened Taliaferio position by saying that state

have no choice in the international politics but should expands power due to anarchic situation in

which the state operate.18 Waltz, spelt out very well the essence of developing nuclear weapons

by states by saying that, the dissemination of capabilities among the states describes the structure

Brodie, B 2008 , the a solute Weapo s i Mah ke , T. G a d Maiolo, J.A eds , “trategi studies: A reader,
14

New York: Routlege publication, p.183

Krepi evi h, A.F 2008 , Fro Calvary to Co puter , i Mah ke , T. G a d Maiolo, J.A eds , “trategi studies: A
15

reader, New York: Routlege publication, p.369

16
Jackson, R and Sorensen, G (2003), Introduction to International Relations: Theory and Approaches, New York:
Oxford University Press, p.68
17
Taliafero, J.W (2001), Security Seeking Under Anarchy, international security journal, Vol.25, No.3, P.128
18
Wohlforth, W.C (2010), Realism and Security studies in Myriam D.C and Victor, M (eds), the Routledge
Handbook of Security Studies, New York: Routledge Publication, p.13

7
of the international system.19 While, Mearsheimer, in his book, the tragedy of great power

politics emphasizes the notion of anarchy as a way by which states seize power or greater

capabilities for survival within the international system.20 Sagan put the point of Mearsheimer

further by stating that, states should create equilibrium against their rival states with nuclear

proficiencies by possessing nuclear weaponries to deter them from attack and this only achieved

by the states through the building of nuclear weapons.21 Moreover, Cox in his writing entitled,

Social forces, States and World Orders believed that the real situation of international politics is

determined by anarchic condition of international system due to great possession as well as

accumulation of nuclear weapons to increase their might as indicated by Cuban Missile crisis of

1962 between the Soviet Union and the United States of America, therefore, this situation best

describe how realists notion of power politics can be understood in relations to the development

of nuclear arsenal because international politics is associated with power politics shown by the

possession on nuclear weapons, thus, all sovereign states in the international system strife to

promote national security in term of military capability through the possession of powerful

nuclear weaponry.22 Waltz who is renowned scholar for international political theories says that,

it is sharing of might which differentiate powerful states from the less powerful states and the

dimension of global politics should not be understood by single player among many but

determined by most powerful nation making the political game in the international system to be

immoral or moral.23

19
Waltz, K.N (1979), Theory of International Relations, Reading: Addision Wesley Press, p.101
20
Mearsheimer, J (2003), The Tragedy of Great Power Politics, New York: Norton Publishers, p.21
21
Sagan, S (1997), Why do State Build Nuclear Weapons?: Three Models in Search of Bomb, International Security,
Vol.21, No.3, .57
22
Cox, R (1981), Social Forces, States and World Orders: Beyond international Relations Theory, Journal of
international studies, Vol.10, No.2, p.132
23
Wailtz, K (1979), Theory of International Politics, Reading: Addison-Wesley Publication Company, Pp.93-99

8
In realist view, the Cuban Missile crisis was the best way of the two competing superpowers to

test their power and might in the bipolar anarchic international system, it should be noted that the

Soviet Union placement of nuclear missile in Cuba and the United States of America countering

ability in the coercive manner to show their might were means of maximizing power, therefore,

the action of the two states explain their political influence as elaborate by Hans Morgenthau that

the state behaviour is determined by rational alternatives chosen by the states as they put the

account of relative power of the opposing state into consideration. 24 Therefore, the ability of

states to possess nuclear is principally effective and efficient resource to uphold balance of

power against the competing belligerence especially the states possessing nuclear power.25 In

reviewing the effect of the development of nuclear weapons in the international politics, realism

sees nuclear weapons as crucial weapons for states to promote their national interest by

increasing military capabilities making nuclear weapons essential guarantor in regulating

survival in the international system.

In concluding remarks, the discussion on the impact of the development of nuclear weapons in

the international politics, as discussed above, nuclear weapons become key instruments in

promoting national interest and maintaining national reputation. Liberalist and realist believe in

material gains by nation-state through self-help leading to achieving the goal of advancing

national interest in the international system while constructivist stresses that nuclear weapons are

deploy the states to control and influence the behaviour of the adversaries. It is clear in this essay

that nuclear weapons are vital in the international politics because they regulate the conduct of

political business in the international system. I agree with Kartzke and Kroenig that the

24
Morgenthau, H (1967), Politics Among Nations: the Struggle for Power and Peace, New York: Knopt, p.5
25
Waltz and Sagan, (2003), The Spread of Nuclear Weapons : A debate Renewed, New York : W.W. Norton &
Company, p.49

9
development of nuclear weapons is a task of states with better economic system.26 The analysis

provided about could enable us to ask ourselves if the presence of nuclear weapons had brought

international peace during the period of Cold war. As it is elaborated by scholars of international

political theories that nuclear power brings instability and decrease the possibility of

conventional warfare especially during Cold War between the United States of America and the

Soviet Union possess mutual incursion vengeance capability which disregard the leeway of the

nuclear conquest for each of them. The advocates of nuclear peace argued that, if nuclear

weapons are limited, there should be stability in the international system while the censors

contends nuclear weapons increases the possibility of inter-state dispute and the possibility of

nuclear materials being possessed by non-state actors who may incurs a great damage on

sovereign states. The about arguments were advance by Kenneth Waltz who is a neorealist and

Sagan Scott who is a proponent of organizational in the international politics, Waltz proposes

that the states position of Nuclear Weapons will deter coercions and reserve international peace

as well as stability in the international system but Sagan believes that the acquisition of nuclear

weapons will bring about insecurity in the international system because new nuclear states lack

organizational controls over their possessed nuclear arsenals which creates a high jeopardy of

fortuitous nuclear warfare. Having the three schools of thoughts in the international politics in

relations to the effect for the development of nuclear weapons in the international politics, am

convinced beyond reasonable doubt that nuclear weapons have played a key role in the

international politics between the United States of America and the Soviet Union between 1968

and 1991 when cold war ended because nuclear weapons have shaped the lives of politicians

during the cold war period by making the superpowers to maintain status quo as argued by

26
Gartzke, E and Kroenig, M (2009), A strategic Approach to Nuclear Proliferation, Journal of Conflict resolution,
Vol.53, No.151, p.159

10
Kenneth Waltz and other scholars presented in this essay. The realist paradigm of international

politics best describes the effect of the development of nuclear weapons in the international

politics.

11
 Bibliography

Brodie, B (2008), the absolute Weapons in Mahnken, T. G and Maiolo, J.A (eds), Strategic

studies: A reader, New York: Routlege publication

Cox, R (1981), Social Forces, States and World Orders: Beyond international Relations Theory,

Journal of international studies, Vol.10, No.2, p.132

Gartzke, E and Kroenig, M (2009), A strategic Approach to Nuclear Proliferation, Journal of

Conflict resolution, Vol.53, No.151, pp.151-160

Gartzke, E and Kroenig, M (2009), A strategic Approach to Nuclear Proliferation, Journal of

Conflict resolution, Vol.53, No.151, p.159

Jackson, R and Sorensen, G (2003), Introduction to International Relations: Theory and

Approaches, New York: Oxford University Press

Jo, D and Gartzke, E (2007), Determinants of Nuclear Weapons Proliferation: A quantitative

Model, Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol.51, No.1, pp.167-194

Krepinevich, A.F (2008), From Calvary to Computer, in Mahnken, T. G and Maiolo, J.A (eds),

Strategic studies: A reader, New York: Routlege publication

Mearsheimer, J (2003), The Tragedy of Great Power Politics, New York: Norton Publisher

Mercer, J (1996), Reputation and International Politics, New York: Cornell University Press

Miller, S.E (1993), The Case against Ukrainian Nuclear Deterrent, Foreign Affairs journal,

Vol.73, No.3, pp.67-80

Morgenthau, H (1967), Politics among Nations: the Struggle for Power and Peace, New York:

Knopt publication

Mueller, J (1988), The Essential Irrelevance of Nuclear Weapons: Stability in the postwar,

journal of international security, Vol.13, No.2, Pp.55-79

12
Rousseau, D.L and Walker, C.T (2010), Liberalism in Myriam D.C and Victor, M (eds), the

Routledge Handbook of Security Studies, New York: Routledge Publication,

Sagan, S (1997), Why do State Build Nuclear Weapons?: Three Models in Search of Bomb,

International Security, Vol.21, No.3, pp.54-86

Subrahmanyam, K (2010), The Role of Nuclear Weapons in the International Politics, Strategic

Analysis, Vol.34, No.2, p.326-339

Taliafero, J.W (2001), Security Seeking under Anarchy, international security journal, Vol.25,

No.3, pp.120-140

Waltz, K.N (1979), Theory of International Relations, Reading: Addision Wesley Press

Waltz and Sagan, (2003), The Spread of Nuclear Weapons: A debate Renewed, New York:

W.W. Norton & Company

Weber, C (2001), International Relations Theory: A critical Introduction, New York: Routledge

Publication

Wohlforth, W.C (2010), Realism and Security studies in Myriam D.C and Victor, M (eds), the

Routledge Handbook of Security Studies, New York: Routledge Publication

13