The Creation and Stockpiling of Nuclear Weapons as a Military Deterrence Strategy - Essay Example

It is agreeable that nuclear technology has produced significant extensions in the destructive power of weapons in modern times, as well as in the methods for their delivery to targets and improvements regarding accuracy, range, and speed of modern weapons (Paul et al, 2009). The issue of nuclear weapons has occupied central position in the debate on international peace and security and there has been increasing urge within the international community for nuclear disarmament. Paul, et al (2009) explain that most countries, including the UN Security Council’s five permanent members have repeatedly committed themselves in law and word to pursuit of nuclear disarmament in good faith in a bid to eliminate nuclear weapons completely.

This has been informed by the belief that international peace and security in the long run would be promoted in the absence of nuclear weapons (Geller, 1990). . It is on the basis of these two arguments on whether nuclear weapons should be created and stockpiled as military deterrent or should be eliminated that it is critical to examine the ethical issue and problems that the issue presents. Berry et al (2010) observe that there has been a great deal of claims for nuclear deterrence. Most experts and International Relations experts, as well as interested public claims for nuclear deterrence include: stabilizing crises, protect friends of states that possess the, acts as the ultimate national survival insurance, allows states to affect political events from afar, offsets imbalances caused by conventional force, deters attacks, and keeps the world safe.

The proponents of nuclear weapons assert that their claims for nuclear deterrence are informed by two different levels of legitimization of the same. The first level is the maximalists’ level of legitimization where nuclear weapons are seen as a infallible shield which is firmly defensive. The second level is that which nuclear weapons are viewed as helpful in the anticipation of surprises and is claimed to act as an “insurance” against the unforeseeable (Paul et al, 2009). These proponents also recognize and understand that nuclear deterrence has some limits of validity.

They recognize that to a greater extent nuclear weapons deter aggression at lower levels and that at a very higher level of aggression, nuclear may be used. Besides, they recognize that the success of nuclear deterrence requires a care probabilistic analysis because certainty of such success is not tenable (Berry et al, 2010). The nuclear weapons proponents support their assertion of nuclear deterrence by citing the “sixty-five years of safety”. They argue that nuclear weapons have helped to