All,
I have been thinking a great deal recently about the concept of deterrence. In various forums that I participate I get a chance to listen to senior people from a variety of backgrounds discuss deterrence, and it always strikes me that for the most part we are so bound to what we know to work, that we cannot seem to grasp either how, or why it is not working now.
I believe this observation made in regard to President Obama's approach to nuclear deterrence sheds some light on this quandry:
“There are four different categories of nuclear deterrence that need to be addressed to make nuclear disarmament more feasible.
i)*** Deterrence between “old” nuclear powers and the recognition that a NPT entails both horizontal as well as vertical coordination;
ii)** Deterrence between “old” and “new” nuclear powers;
iii)* Deterrence between nuclear and non nuclear states;
iv)* Finally, deterrence of other non-state actors.”
In a discussion organized by ELIAMEP on “The Obama administration, deterrence and disarmament”, on Thursday, 9 July 2009, Dr. T.V. Paul, Professor of International Relations at McGill University, Montreal, Canada (Link added: http://www.eliamep.gr/en/transatlant...d-disarmament/ )
So the question is, how has deterrence changed as new actors, empowered in new ways, come onto the scene? Not only in how we deter these new actors, but how by their very presence we must recalulate how we deter the old ones.
Bookmarks