This book is an international history of the foundation of modern arms control, highlighting the fact that the instrument is varied, resilient, successful, and enduring. The narrative begins after the Napoleonic wars when newly arisen peace movements focused on arbitration as a path to “ending the war system.” It moves on to the international community’s embrace of “total and complete disarmament” and then to its acceptance of more limited measures by 1968, including the agreements that remain in force today. The book connects the past to the present of multiple negotiations, successful and failed, and underlines how the peace movement increasingly influenced the national policy of the major Western powers, especially the United States. It also highlights the increasing diversification of arms control players, including women and people of color as well as the countries they represented. Based on original research in multinational records and the latest scholarship, the book illustrates the reasons multilateral arms control remains a key instrument of international relations. The chapters are organized both chronologically and thematically, with the result that they cover different amounts of time in order to encompass a given issue and to capture the development of particular threads. The main narrative evolves into a decadeslong quest for a global treaty on “general and complete disarmament,” which otherwise paces the book and shapes its chapters. This book will be of much interest to students of arms control, global governance, peace studies, and International Relations.

This reader contains a sample of the best essays published in the foreign policy quarterly. The National Interest during its first four years. The period covered by this volume was a critical one for American foreign policy. It represented a recovery of confidence after the uncertainty and self-laceration of the 1960s and 1970s. But it was also a period when dramatic events in the communist world raised fundamental questions about the ending of the Cold War and about prevailing American foreign policy. The essays in this volume examine the basic and enduring questions of international politics and the national security of the United States. These and related issues are discussed in the reader by leading American policymakers, academics, and commentators. Co-published with The National Interest.

This book offers an exploration of ballistic missile proliferation in the Middle East and also delves into the geopolitical landscape to unveil a narrative of contemporary Middle Eastern history. The central focus of this book is to decipher the pivotal moments when three regional powers of the Middle East - Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Iran - embraced ballistic capabilities as a strategic response to military vulnerabilities. The authors contend that the very essence of ballistic proliferation incorporates a tactical rationale provided by military needs that varies from one state to another, and it is upon the assessment of these military needs that the decision to procure ballistic missiles is made. Offering a blend of theoretical insights and primary sources-based case studies, this book dissects the decision-making processes that spurred these states to choose ballistic missiles, despite their inefficiencies in delivering conventional payloads. The absence of an effective air force emerges as a catalyst, triggering what the authors term a ‘moment of ballistic consciousness.' Spanning three diverse regimes, the work provides a rich historical tapestry and untangles the complexities of political decisions with military implications, providing a fresh perspective on global power dynamics. This narrative sheds light on the intersection of military strategy, geopolitical realities, and the pursuit of ballistic capabilities that shapes the world's security landscape. This book will be of much interest to students of arms control, nuclear proliferation, Middle Eastern politics, and International Relations.

This book examines the interplay between sanctions and nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation. The volume aims to tackle three separate but closely intertwined issues: It aims to revisit the debate on, and deconstruct the concept of, sanctions; to provide a working theoretical framework; to differentiate between positive sanctions (or incentives or carrots) and negative sanctions; to identify the actors who may initiate sanctions (i.e. states, regional, and/or international organizations); to ascertain the legality and legitimacy of such sanctions taking place; to problematize and discuss the utility of sanctions; and so on. It aims to disentangle the concepts of nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation, particularly in light of the most recent geopolitical global shifts on nuclear powers-interplay taking place in the background of the war in Ukraine and rising tensions in Southeast Asia, and so on. Finally, it aims to conjoin the cause-and-effect cases between the application of sanctions, on the one hand, and the decision by states to pursue nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation, on the other. By doing so, the volume helps to update and stimulate the academic and policy debate on the inter-relation between sanctions and nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation. This book will be of much interest to students of nuclear non-proliferation, economic sanctions, security studies, and International Relations.

This book addresses a central puzzle in ontological security theory, namely the relationship between identity continuity and change, and the role anxiety plays in fostering and inhibiting change. The work argues for a more nuanced perspective on how change and threats to national identity relate, thus advancing our understanding of the role anxiety plays in shaping state choices. The case studies of Sweden and Germany show that national identity can experience highly disruptive challenges when the external security environment changes. According to extant ontological security theory, these structural challenges should lead to heightened anxiety and identity crises as national narratives become unstable and fragile. Instead, empirical evidence shows that states turn ontological anxiety into strategies of anxiety abatement, management, and ontological innovation. The evidence also reveals that states go to extraordinary lengths to maintain existing narratives, discursively maneuvring between the twin needs of biographical continuity and responsiveness to change. In their efforts to adapt and preserve identity, states embrace ontological ambiguity; they neither fully respond to change, nor do they ignore it. Rather, they strive for discursive innovation where new interpretations of how to be are balanced with new interpretations of the meaning of necessary change. In the process, ontological ambiguity becomes the new normal. These findings suggest that Sweden and Germany may not be outliers, and that being and becoming is an inherent feature of social life all state actors must engage with. This book will be of interest to students of security studies, European politics, foreign policy, and international relations.

Conflict--be it war between states, ethnic violence, civil war, or terrorist activity--endures, despite immense efforts to end it. How do states cope with conflict, minimize future threats, and reduce the risk of insecurity? Morgan outlines a spectrum of solutions states use to manage violent conflict, ranging from strategies that individual governments enact largely on their own, such as distribution of power, deterrence, or arms control, to those such as collective security and multilateralism that are more global in nature. The book progresses into tactical and practical actions, from negotiation and mediation to peace imposition. Morgan evaluates each strategy and tactic in terms of how well it addresses three levels of security--systemic, state, and societal--to show how they are interrelated and complementary to each other in important ways. Addressing insecurity at one level often elicits further insecurity at another. Morgan shows students how these various levels interact-either to a state’s advantage or to its detriment-so they can comprehensively analyze the ways that political actors manage (or incite) conflict. Useful pedagogical features help students master the material: Terms and Concepts boxes go beyond simple definitions and provide students with a concept’s evolution over time or the controversy surrounding the meaning of a certain term. Cases and Context boxes offer needed background and interesting detail about pivotal cases of conflict, both historical and contemporary in nature. Key terms are bolded throughout and compiled in a glossary. Annotated bibliographic essays at the end of each chapter point students to additional sources for further study.

Arms control, for decades at the core of the foreign policy consensus, today is among the more contentious issues in American politics. It is pilloried and considered out of mode in many conservative quarters, while being viewed as nearly sacrosanct in many liberal circles. In this new book, Michael Levi and Michael O'Hanlon argue that neither the left nor the right has a correct view of the proper utility of arms control in the age of terror. Arms control in the traditional sense--lengthy treaties to limit nuclear and other military competitions among the great powers--is no longer particularly useful. Nor should arms control be pursued as a means to the end of constraining the power of nations or of promoting global government. It is still a critical tool, though, for controlling dangerous technologies, particularly those that, in the hands of hostile states or terrorist organizations, could cause massive death and destruction. Arms control and coercive action, including military force, must be integrated into an overall strategy for preventing proliferation, now more than ever before. Arms control should be used to gain earlier warning of illicit activities inside dangerous states, allowing the international community to take coercive action in a timely way. The authors propose three new criteria to guide future arms control efforts, designed to respond to today's geopolitical realities. Arms control must focus on the dangers of catastrophic technology, not so much in the hands of major powers as of small states and terrorist groups. Their criteria lead to a natural focus on nuclear and biological technologies. Much tougher measures to prevent countries from gaining nuclear weapons technoloty while purportedly complying with the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and procedures for controlling dangerous biological technologies will be most prominent in this framework, while lower priority is giben to efforts such as bilateral nuclear accords and most t