Nuclear Proliferation

AuthorBertel Heurlin
Published date01 November 1967
Date01 November 1967
DOIhttp://doi.org/10.1177/001083676700200307
Subject MatterArticles
Nuclear
Proliferation
Some
Observations
on
the
Current
Literature
Bertel
Heurlin
1.
Background
During
the
past
few
years
an
increasing
number
of
analyses
have
been
published
on
the
question
whether
the
total
number
of
nuclear
powers
will
continue
to
rise.
This
development
reflects
the
increasing
public
interest
in
the
problem.
What
pro-
vides
the
background
to
this
interest?
No
doubt
the
fact
that,
with
the
extension
of
the
club
of
nuclear
powers -
to
include
France
in
1960
followed
by
China
in
1964
-
speculation
as
to
which
countries
will
next
become
members
and
when
has
come
to
play
an
important
role
in
international
politics.
This
importance
has
been
under-
lined
still
further
by
the
fact
that
most
governments
have
placed
extraordinarily
great
emphasis
upon
this
problem
in
their
official
statements.
It
has
been
emphasized
time
and
time
again
that
nuclear
prolifera-
tion
is
the
most
important
problem
in
the
world
today
in
connection
with
the
ques-
tion
of
war
or
peace.’
This
interpretation
was
particularly
pronounced
at
the
Confer-
ence
of
the
Eighteen
Nation
Committee
on
Disarmament
in
Geneva
where,
following
the
signing
of
the
partial
test-ban
treaty
in
August,
1963,
the
problem
of
non-
proliferation
has
gained
priority
over
all
other
questions.
The
present
article
will
be
devoted
chiefly
to
the
studies
and
analyses
of the
Nth
country
phenomenon
which
have
appeared
during
the
last
two
years.’
Besides
reviewing
and
categorizing
this
literature,
it
is
also
my
intention
to
characterize
on
a
broader
basis
the
analytical
treatment
of
such
a
limited
subject
within
the
field
of
international
politics.
2.
General
Characteristics
of
the
Literature
The
following
general
observations
can
be
made
about
the
literature:
in
the
first
place
- as
mentioned -
it
seems
clear
that
the
interest
in
the
proliferation
phenomenon
is
inspired
by
the
spectacular
way
in
which
the
various
governments
have
designated
the
problem
as
being
decisive
in
our
time.
In
the
next
place
it
is
characteristic
that
the
phenomenon
is
regarded
as
a
problem
which
in
one
way
or
the
other
must
be
solved.
Thus
the
more
scholarly
approach
which
sees
proliferation
as
a
phenomenon
within
the
field
of
international
politics
-
a
phenomenon
which
must
be
analysed
according
to
scientific
methods -
fades
into
the
background.
It
is
also
characteristic
that
the
greater
part
of
the
literature
dealing
with
this
subject
is
in
some
way
what
we
might
call
goal-oriented
research.
The
goal-
oriented
studies,
which
at
the
same
time
can
be
applied
studies -
ready
to
be
used
in
practical
politics -
may
have
various
professed
objectives
as
goals.
Partly,
peace
and
disarmament.
Here,
as
an
example,
one
may
cite
the
Soviet
Professor
V.
S.
Emelyanov’s
article
’Nuclear
Weapons
and
International
Security’.
He
writes
’that
a
treaty
on
the
non-proliferation
of
nuclear
weapons
is
not
an
aim
in
itself
but
a
highly
important
step
towards
general
and
complete
disarmament’.3
3
On
the
other
hand,
the
aim
may
be
the
wish
to
formulate
the
best
and
most
expedient
policy
for
the
country
for
wluch
the
scientist
is
working.
The
task
is
to
find
the
policy
which
best
safeguards
the
country’s
interests.4
This
is
the
case
with
strategic
analyses,
the
majority
of
which
are
to
be
found
in
the
United
States,
Britain,
and
France.
In
addition
these
studies
fre-
quently
put
forward
alternatives
to
the
current
policy
in
order
to
present
the
au-
thorities
with
a
series
of
possible
choices.
An
analysis
of
these
possibilities
and
their
consequences
frequently
produces
a
result
209
which
is
regarded
as
the
’correct
solution’.
A
further
factor
determining
the
nature
of
such
studies
is
the
consideration
given
to
the
preservation
of
the
interests
of
those
institutions
financing
them.
The
problems
arising
from
such
a
procedure
have
been
excellently
described
by
Kenneth
Younger
in
his
article
on
proliferation.
He
writes
that
’the
non-
specialist
venturing
into
the
field
of
nuclear
strategy
becomes
aware
of
the
immense
amount
of
double-talk
in
which
govern-
ments
have
indulged,
so
that
what
appears
at
first
sight
to
be
a
serious
and
objective
analysis,
often
turns
out
to
be
little
more
than
a
piece
of
special
pleading,
closely
related
to
the
current
state
of
nuclear
advance
in
the
country
concerned
...’5
This
could
be
related
to
the
fact
that
the
aim
of
the
studies
may
be
to
furnish
direct
support
and
argumentation
for the
current
policy
of
the
country
in
question.
Such
studies
are
often
undertaken
by
Govern-
ment
institutions,
or
by
institutions
closely
connected
with
the
Administration.
They
can
be
submitted
by
responsible
politicians
and
administrators,
with
a
view
to
pleading
for the
official
policy
in
the
guise
of
impar-
tial
scientific
analysis.
The
expert
in
inter-
national
politics
will
therefore
also
tend
to
regard
studies
of
this
nature
as
elabora-
tions
of
or
background
material
for
actual
government
statements.6
6
In
contrast
with
goal-oriented
research,
there
is
the
type
of
research
which
makes
use
of
the
scientific
analysis
of
international
politics,
with
the
phenomenon
of
the
in-
creasing
number
of
nuclear
powers
as
a
function
of
the
existing
system
in
inter-
national
politics
as
its
starting-point.
No
interests
are
involved
other
than
the
re-
searcher’s
desire
to
carry
out
as
clearly
and
disinterestedly
as
possible
a
scientific
analy-
sis
of
the
inter-relationships
between
states
in
regard
to
the
proliferation
problem.
Many
of
the
studies
are
in
accord
with
this
intention
in
several
respects,
but
nor-
mally
it
does
not
determine
the
general
character
of
the
entire
study.~
7
The
method
employed
is
also
character-
istic.
An
obvious
approach
to
the
prolifera-
tion
phenomenon
is
an
examination
of
how
proliferation
has
taken
place
up
to
now
and
its
effects
upon
the
international
system.
Many
authors
concentrate
upon
prognosis,8
i.e.
what
futher
developments
are
likely
to
take
place
in
years
to
come?
Which
countries
will
acquire
nuclear
weapons -
and
why -
and
can
this
devel-
opment
be
halted?
A
study
which
ends
in
a
prognosis
must
be
presumed
to
be
of
special
value
to
the
authorites.
But
the
risk
is
that,
in
making
prognoses
and
indicating
possible
solutions
and
suggestions
for
po-
litical
action,
the
political
scientist
acting
as
an
adviser
for
the
statesman
weakens
the
possibility
of
establishing
international
politics
as
a
scientific
discipline.
Finally
it
is
characteristic
of
the
majority
of
the
studies
that,
with
an
eye
to
the
possibility
of
hindering
further
prolifera-
tion,
they
concentrate
in
particular
on
the
possibility
of
what
is
called
an
anti-prolifera-
tiorr
strategy,
which
may
rcsillt in
non-prolif-
eration
agreements,
or
in
guarantees
on
the
part
of
the
nuclear
powers
to
the
non-
nuclear
powers.
With
these
introductory
remarks
the
general
features
of
the
literature
have
been
indicated.
3.
What
Is
a
Nuclear
Power?
After
this
summary
outline,
a
series
of
questions
regarding
the
proliferation
phe-
nomenon
will
be
posed.
These
questions
will
be
viewed
partly
in
relation
to
the
periodical
and
pamphlet
literature
that
has
been
published
of
late,
and
partly
in
relation
to
major
studies
of
the
problem.
The
question
of
what
constitutes
a
nu-
clear
power
is
naturally
all-important
for
a
political
analysis.
The
formal
definition,
a
country
which
has
exploded
a
nuclear
device
independently,
is
the
most
general
one.
The
question
of
what
constitutes
a
poteittial
nuclear
power,
i.e.
a
country
which

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT