...| | | | | | | | | EconPapers Home About EconPapersWorking Papers Journal Articles Books and Chapters Software ComponentsAuthorsJEL codes New Economics PapersAdvanced Search------------------------------------------------- Top of Form Bottom of FormEconPapers FAQ Archive maintainers FAQ Cookies at EconPapersFormat for printingThe RePEc blog | | Arms Trade and Arms Races: A Strategic AnalysisMaria Garcia-Alonso and Paul Levine (p.levine@surrey.ac.uk)Chapter 29 in Handbook of Defense Economics, 2007, vol. 2, pp 941-971 from ElsevierAbstract: In this chapter we present the main characteristics and problems involved in the study of the arms trade: product definition and data, strategic aspects of the arms trade and regulation. We illustrate these aspects using the latest theoretical and empirical literature on arms trade. The papers reviewed illustrate the complexity involved in studying the arms trade. The nature of the exporters interaction in setting export controls and export policies raises the benefits of coordination in both export control and industrial policies. A failure to coordinate in one of these two policies tends to increase the incentives to deviate from an agreement to coordinate in the other policy, therefore, highlighting the importance of a unified approach to arms trade regulation. Issues such as differences in the security perceptions of exporters, the home bias and the characteristics of the competition between exporter firms...
Words: 1615 - Pages: 7
...HOW THE FIRST NUCLEAR AGE STARTED AND HOW IT ENDED Introduction Nuclear, the most powerful energy fuel on earth has been discover on 8th November 1895 by Wilhelm Röntgen when he accidently discover X-ray. According to Njolstand Olav in the Nobel prize website “The real Nuclear age started in 1939 when the President of the United States Franklin D. Roosevelt received a letter from physicist Albert Einstein and his Hungarian colleague Leo Szilard, calling to his attention the prospect that a bomb of unprecedented power could be made by tapping the forces of nuclear fission, just after the outbreak of World War II in Europe.” (Njølstad, 2003) This was a turning point in the beginning of the development of nuclear weapons in the world. After the first atomic bomb exploded in 1945, many countries in the world have been competing with each other to develop these weapons systems. The earliest countries to blow up nuclear weapons after the U.S. was the Soviet Union and followed by Britain, France and others. The existence of the nuclear weapon become the most powerful deterrence tool in the cold war between two ideologies. The collapse of the communist ideology in many communist country in the world, it is the signed of the end of cold war and the end of the first nuclear age. The First Nuclear Age Concerned with the ability of the Nazi Germany to produce the super weapon at that time, the President of the US in collaboration with Britain has ordered an ongoing research project...
Words: 1511 - Pages: 7
...To what extent did the nuclear arms race make the world a more dangerous place in the years 1949-63 The cold war brought about an arms race that increased in pace as the years went on, in this instance we speak of danger to mean having a significant impact on the lives of many people throughout the world through the use of nuclear arms. The world was endangered in many ways by the conflict between the Soviets and the US, as new technology was successfully developed not only did the number of atomic weapons increase but the warheads became more powerful and could reach their targets more effectively. It was however arguable that as a result of this new destructive power that the danger actually abated slightly due to the introduction of Mutually Assured Destruction “MAD” This meant that it became more and more unlikely that either side would actually attack the other due to the effect that it would have on themselves in the form of a counter strike. In 1945 the destructive power of the atomic bomb was showcased to the world, as well as bringing the Second World War to an end it also demonstrated the might of the US to the Soviets. It sparked a competition for each side to have the edge, feeling threatened, either force strived to outcompete the other and have the majority of atomic weapons of the highest plausible power. They wished to demonstrate their power to the world, more bombs meant an advanced economy and extensive resources. The side with more powerful weapons...
Words: 966 - Pages: 4
...Arms Control (Nuclear Disarmament) Arms control refers to any international limitation or regulation where developing, testing, producing, deploying, or even using weapons is concerned on the basis that it is inevitable for some national military establishments to continue existing. This concept points to some type of collaboration between states that are antagonistic or competitive in general when it comes to military policy, in a bid to lower the chances of war and in the event of such, to limit its damage (Jones 4). From a broader perspective, arms control is a product of historical state practices involving disarmament that has seen many successes and challenges since the 20th century. The two terms have at some point been differentiated where disarmament agreements are often deemed as direct prohibition of weapons possession and production, while arms-control agreements often start by limiting testing, deploying, or using of some types of weapons. Arms-control efforts especially between the Soviet Union (U.S.S.R.) and the U.S. during the Cold War were crucial to limitation of the nuclear arms race, and by the 20th century’s end, arms control as a term started denoting any arms-limitation or disarmament agreement (Browne, Shetty and Somerville 377). The most important are the NPT (Non-proliferation Treaty) and the CTBT (Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty). The main benefit or importance of the NPT is that of ensuring that international peace and security are enhanced. Nonproliferation...
Words: 1285 - Pages: 6
...Nuclear power is the use of nuclear reactions of radioactive elements such as uranium and plutonium to generate nuclear energy. The energy generates heat to boil water which then causes the steam turbines to rotate and generate electricity inside a nuclear power plant. The United States is the world’s largest producer of nuclear energy, accounting for 30% of the world’s nuclear generation electricity. The US currently has 100 nuclear reactors in operation, producing 800 million kilowatt hour of electricity in 2015. Since the early 1990s, the United States is currently the only superpower country in the world due to their economy, military, and political influence. The United States relies on nuclear power for over the past three-quarters of...
Words: 1936 - Pages: 8
...From the period of 1949 to 1963, the Arms race was a period were there which saw two superpowers the USA and the USSR increasing their nuclear technology developments. The arms race ultimately prevented tensions from escalating into an actual fully fledged war. On the other hand there were de-stabilising factors that put both countries on the brink of nuclear warfare and the world at risk of annihilation, such as the pressure of domestic politics, hot wars in Korea and Vietnam, and the Cuban missile crisis. Regardless of these factors the war remained a Cold war. This is because the arms race created the most important stabilising factor which was mutually assured destruction. Both superpowers realised the devastating capability of Nuclear weapons and as a result they did not use Nuclear weapons. Therefore the arms race (and fear of the consequences of an arms race) outweighed the other de-stabilising factors to a large extent from 1949 to 1963. An important reason why the arms race was a stabilising factor in the Cold war is because it led to Mutually Assured Destruction. This is based on the idea that the existence of massive nuclear arsenals prevented the conflict between the Soviet Union and the United States from devolving into outright war between the superpowers. The arms race helped to keep the war cold because both Kennedy and Khrushchev's administrations knew that due to the massive nuclear stockpiles on each side, outright war between the two sides would result in...
Words: 1214 - Pages: 5
...The nuclear arms did little to restrain the actions of the USA and the soviet union in the cold war in the years of 1949-63? On the surface, it can be argued to a partial extent that the arms race did restrain the actions of the USA and the USSR due to the fact that both leaders had mutual understanding of the impact that nuclear weapons would have on both nations, therefore, they couldn't condemn their nations to that sort of destruction.The establishment of MAD was an attempt of both nations to restrain the use of arms race. However, the fact that nuclear weapons were been produced at a rapid pace means that there was still underlying fear that one nation would use the weapon against the other which highlights that arms race did little to restrain the arm to a partial extent. On one hand, it can seem that both leaders, Khrushchev and Eisenhower felt that the prospect of nuclear war was too terrifying, thus, we can argue that nuclear weapons played as a deterrence as both nations could not condemn their nations to nuclear annihilation. For example, the USA detonated their first hydrogen bomb on the first of November 1952 on Enwetak and this created a cloud of 100 miles and 25 miles high, killing every species near it, this highlights the destructive force of a weapon. The fact that the USA did not intervene during the Hungary crisis in 1956, even though, it would have been an beneficial for them as they would have had a democratic nation in a soviet sphere of influence...
Words: 1514 - Pages: 7
...The Military Impact of the Cold War on the United Sates Kin Ruan 4/8/12 D.Cooper Green Class Every big event usually has very huge impact affecting the world we are in nowadays. These events happened decide how the world is going to be, such as the Cold War that made changes in the U.S. military. The Cold War happened between the U.S. and USSR from 1945 to 1991. During the Cold War, the two superpowers were competing with each other. They had varieties of competitions in different ways such as nuclear arms race. One of the biggest reasons for their competitions is that the U.S. and the USSR have two different political systems. As the final result we occur today, the Cold War forced the U.S. to cease their nuclear weapons and instead focus on conventional weapons. Both the United States and the Soviet Union emerged right after the World War II as the two strongest powers in the world, advanced in various aspects such as technology, military, and economy. However, their development was based on two different political systems that to some extent go against each other. These two national systems were very different. The system in the U.S. called capitalism. Capitalism has been known by profit income, private wealth, competitive markets, and inequality classes. The system emphasizes on personal ownership and individual development. The system in the USSR called communism. It...
Words: 1878 - Pages: 8
...see some improvement in terms of Geneva and the change in leadership these changes certainly did not resolve the fundamental issues during the 1950s. On one hand, fundamental issues remained unchanged due to the change in US foreign policy. As the new leader of the US in 1953, Eisenhower and Dulles (Vice president) adopted a new policy known as ‘Brinkmanship’ which was also related the ‘New Look’ and ‘Rollback’. He intended to cut conventional forces and become more dependent on nuclear weapons, which as according to Dulles made the enemy suffer more than they can possible gain. This was known as massive retaliation could be seen as dividing the superpowers further as it meant the Soviet’s needed to compete in order to defend themselves. However, these policies could be seen as helping issues such as the Tawain Straits Crisis in 1954 in which it has been argued that the presence of nuclear weapons stopped the Chinese interfering. Essentially, the introduction of nuclear weapons spurred the arms race and led to further divisions between the superpowers. After the death of Stalin in 1953, new leaders, Khrushchev and Malenkov indicated that he wanted to make changes between the fundamental issues that divided the east and west. Therefore, In 1955 a summit in Geneva was held between Eisenhower Bulganin (Soviet Foreign Minister), in order to discuss peaceful use of aztomic power, disarmament and an open skies policy. Although many spoke of the ‘spirit of Geneva’, highlighting the...
Words: 846 - Pages: 4
...create the most dangerous period in the cold war; ‘the threat of total annihilation’ so therefore it is not fair to say that peaceful coexistence was close to being reached during this period even though the attitude of the Soviet Union had changed. Although it may seem that peaceful coexistence eased cold war tensions as a friendly approach however, it is clear that the change of attitude to a peaceful approach only created further suspicion and the need for security. The threat of total annihilation and the development of a nuclear race created an increasingly tense and dangerous situation. After the development of the atom bomb and hydrogen bomb on both sides both nations begun to build up a reliance on nuclear supremacy and the threat it could provide. When Stalin died in 1953, it appeared that the relationship between the USA and the USSR would improve. With the emergence of Khrushchev as Stalin’s successor in 1956, this belief seemed to take effect however, Khrushchev was an old-school communist, with no wish to diminish the USSR’s status as a...
Words: 1227 - Pages: 5
...RACE FOR NUCLEAR ARMAMENT: THREAT TO WORLD PEACE Introduction Nuclear weapons are, simply, the most indiscriminately inhumane weapons ever invented, and the only ones capable of destroying life on this planet as we know it. There is only one other global policy issue remotely comparable in terms of its impact on planetary survivability and that is climate change: but nuclear bombs can kill us a lot faster than CO2. Harry Truman (1884-1972) was the most influential person in the race for the super bomb. As President Roosevelt’s Vice President, he knew nothing about the development of the atomic bomb. But within months of assuming the office of President of the United States on April 12, 1945, he became the first and only American leader to authorize the use of atomic weapons against an enemy target. Truman’s era only marked the beginning of the race for nuclear weapons. The development of nuclear weapons is still an issue today, decades after Truman left office. Enrico Fermi (1901-1954) succeeded in splitting the uranium atom and the Nobel Committee later awarded him the 1938 prize for physics. At Columbia University in New York, Fermi realized that if neutrons are emitted in the fissioning of uranium then the emitted neutrons might proceed to split other uranium atoms, setting in motion a chain reaction that would release enormous amounts of energy.(1) Fermi had succeeded in taking one of the first steps to making an atomic bomb. A decade later on July 16, 1945, the U.S....
Words: 917 - Pages: 4
...PRESENTATION DESCRIPTION | |Nuclear has been the biggest fear in the world when it is used as |Nuclear Threat Nuclear weapon and its physical damage | |weapon and it has insurmountable negative effects on societies in |Nuclear weapon deterioration of health – what kinds of radiation are | |terms of its physical destruction and deterioration on human health. |emitted in a nuclear explosion and what effect do they have on human | |Not a thesis statement but a statement of fact. |beings? | |Try: Why is it best for nuclear attack victims to be right at Ground |http://www.bbc.co.uk/schools/gcsebitesize/science/ocr_gateway_pre_2011| |Zero? |/living_future/4_nuclear_radiation1.shtml | |Working Thesis Statement: Countries may use the nuclear weapons in |Oral Presentation Thesis Statement (must be based on PART of the | |future because of the possibility of religious war and the other |research project): The time between 1946 and 2012, no atomic bomb had| |reasons. |been used even as an overt thread threat in any warpolitical crisis, | |I will argue that there is a strong possibility that nuclear weapons |the reasons … (I will find by researching.) ...
Words: 4481 - Pages: 18
...Khrushchev policy of 'Peaceful Co-existence'. Dwight Eisenhower's presidency played a role in the perception of confrontation. Eisenhower’s approach to foreign policy and the Soviet Union differed to that of Truman, who had been president before him. Eisenhower was believed to be more hard-line than Truman, being highly critical of Truman’s foreign policy as he did not take a strong enough stance against communism. Eisenhower’s ‘New Look’ policy suggested that the communists were pursuing expansionist policies and outlined the idea of ‘massive retaliation’, which threatened nuclear force in retaliation to any extent of attack, also outlined by his foreign secretary Dulles. To start, Eisenhower’s approach to foreign policy did not seem to provide a conciliatory approach to the USSR. It also introduced the policy of brinkmanship, one which would not bring about a peaceful coexistence as it focused on the use of nuclear weapons and therefore, confrontation. During Eisenhower's time in office, espionage became a huge weapon towards the opposite nation. Confrontation became more covert than overt, mainly as a result of the Korean War which...
Words: 1636 - Pages: 7
...A. and the Soviet Union are vying with each other in testing and producing nuclear weapons. China too has recently entered the race. These facts, together with the mounting rivalry and tension between the two Power Blocs, give rise to the fear that the world is perilously on the brink of a nuclear war. The horrors of a nuclear war are unimaginable. We may have some idea of them by recalling the havoc caused by the dropping of the atom bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki towards the end of the Second World War. Not only were the two cities wiped out of existence but the atmosphere for miles around was polluted and people there fell victims to strange diseases. The destruction of entire cities and sudden deaths of millions of civilians caused by nuclear weapons are shocking enough. But what is more shocking, though it is not adequately realised by laymen, is the disastrous effect of the use of such weapons on the survivors and their unborn children. The radioactive fallout spreads for miles around and causes untold harm to millions of innocent people. The radiation produced by the splitting of the atom causes mysterious diseases and leads to the birth of defective children. In fact, the fall-out from the nuclear tests and explosions in Siberia and the Pacific has already caused a lot of harm, though the Great Powers carrying out these experiments may not admit it. It is known, for example, that nuclear test made some years ago on the distant Marshall Islands affected the health...
Words: 592 - Pages: 3
...Are Alternative Energy Sources The Answer? Jose Ortiz SCI 207 Bradley Wells April 16, 2012 Since the existence of mankind we have depended on this earth for food, shelter, and water. These are the basic necessities that are required for survival. With one of the necessities taken out of the equation mankind existence would become extinct. Worldwide humans have left an ecological footprint on earth that has made it difficult to sustain itself. Mankind has entered in a race against time trying to find alternatives to alleviate some the demands we have this earth and one that comes to mind is alternative energy resources. With oil at an all time high researchers have been searching for alternatives energy sources. The question is: are alternative energy sources the answer to ending human dependence on oil? Although oil has a negative impact on our environment, oil is here to stay as many countries rely on it financially. Investing time and money in alternate energy source has potential rewards for the consumer and ultimately the sustainability of our planet. The possibility of being able to replace a fossil fuel such as oil would be a turn of the century. Fossil fuels are non-renewable in which it cannot be replace or replaced a very slow rate. Once it is used it is all gone (Turk & Bensel, 2011). At the rate of oil being used it is unable to replace itself in the natural process. Not only is there so much oil that can be used, but eliminating oil would have positive...
Words: 1878 - Pages: 8
