The Ethics Of War And Nuclear Deterrence

As nuclear weapons become ever more sophisticated, so the deterrence debate becomes increasingly complex. The ‘Ban the Bomb’ slogans of the 1950s had been replaced by cries for ‘nuclear-free zones’, and talk of ‘megatonnage’ and ‘fallout’ had given way to talk of ‘tactical’ nuclear weapons and ‘limited strike capability’. Originally published in 1982, this book considers the ethical issues raised by nuclear policies and by the debate between proponents of the multilateralist/unilateralist approaches to disarmament and arms control at the time. It is not, like so many books on the subject, an ideological statement: there are essays by defence strategists which put the case for deterrence and essays by academics and churchmen which strenuously oppose it. The book also includes an essay on attempts to mitigate the appalling brutality of the many ‘conventional’ wars since 1945. At a time when the rhetoric and misinformation produced on both sides of the debate continued to obscure many vital issues, this book was welcome, sensible and necessary.

As nuclear weapons become ever more sophisticated, so the deterrence debate becomes increasingly complex. The ‘Ban the Bomb’ slogans of the 1950s had been replaced by cries for ‘nuclear-free zones’, and talk of ‘megatonnage’ and ‘fallout’ had given way to talk of ‘tactical’ nuclear weapons and ‘limited strike capability’. Originally published in 1982, this book considers the ethical issues raised by nuclear policies and by the debate between proponents of the multilateralist/unilateralist approaches to disarmament and arms control at the time. It is not, like so many books on the subject, an ideological statement: there are essays by defence strategists which put the case for deterrence and essays by academics and churchmen which strenuously oppose it. The book also includes an essay on attempts to mitigate the appalling brutality of the many ‘conventional’ wars since 1945. At a time when the rhetoric and misinformation produced on both sides of the debate continued to obscure many vital issues, this book was welcome, sensible and necessary.

Originally published in 1985, this book surveys how NATO policy sought to come to terms with the revolution in thinking about war which was brought about by the advent of nuclear weapons. It also examines the logic of deterrence. The book assesses the ethical issues involved, using as a framework the tradition of the idea of the Just War. A detailed modern version of the theory is elaborated and defended from an ethical viewpoint that gives due weight both to the mental states of the agent and to the consequences of his agency. The principle of non-combatant immunity is also examined for its clear relevance to the debate. Further considerations involve the effectiveness of deterrence and its morality, and the question whether deterrence can be effective even if its use is prohibited. The book also discusses the implications of various possible changes in NATO policy.

This 1993 book is the first post-Cold War assessment of nuclear deterrence, -providing a comprehensive normative understanding of nuclear deterrence policy.

Nuclear deterrence requires objective ethical analysis. In providing it, the authors face realities - the Soviet threat, possible nuclear holocaust, strategic imperatives - but they also unmask moral evasions - deterrence cannot be bluff, pure counterforce, the lesser (or greater) evil, or a step towards disarmament. They conclude that the deterrent is unjustifiable and examine the new question of conscience that this raises for everyone.

The threat to the survival of humankind posed by nuclear weapons has been a frightening and essential focus of public debate for the last four decades and must continue to be so if we are to avoid destroying ourselves and the natural world around us. One unfortunate result of preoccupation with the nuclear threat, however, has been a new kind of "respectability" accorded to conventional war. In this radical and cogent argument for pacifism, Robert Holmes asserts that all war--not just nuclear war--has become morally impermissible in the modern world. Addressing a wide audience of informed and concerned readers, he raises dramatic questions about the concepts of "political realism" and nuclear deterrence, makes a number of persuasive suggestions for nonviolent alternatives to war, and presents a rich panorama of thinking about war from St. Augustine to Reinhold Niebuhr and Herman Kahn. Holmes's positions are compellingly presented and will provoke discussion both among convinced pacifists and among those whom he calls "militarists." "Militarists," we realize after reading this book, include the majority of us who live a friendly and peaceful personal life while supporting a system which, if Holmes is correct, guarantees war and risks eventual human extinction. Originally published in 1989. The Princeton Legacy Library uses the latest print-on-demand technology to again make available previously out-of-print books from the distinguished backlist of Princeton University Press. These editions preserve the original texts of these important books while presenting them in durable paperback and hardcover editions. The goal of the Princeton Legacy Library is to vastly increase access to the rich scholarly heritage found in the thousands of books published by Princeton University Press since its founding in 1905.

Seminar paper from the year 2022 in the subject Philosophy - Practical (Ethics, Aesthetics, Culture, Nature, Right, ...), , course: Diploma, language: English, abstract: This term paper aims to conduct an in-depth ethical analysis of nuclear warfare, exploring the moral dilemmas and consequences associated with the use of nuclear weapons. The paper begins by providing a comprehensive overview of the historical context and development of nuclear weapons, highlighting their immense destructive power and potential for catastrophic consequences. Drawing upon various ethical frameworks, including consequentialism, deontology, and just war theory, this study examines the ethical considerations surrounding nuclear warfare. It delves into the moral implications of targeting civilian populations, the principle of proportionality in armed conflict, and the concept of deterrence as a means to prevent war. Additionally, it explores the notion of responsibility in relation to nuclear weapons possession and disarmament efforts. Furthermore, this paper critically evaluates arguments both for and against nuclear deterrence as an ethically justifiable strategy. It analyzes the potential benefits of deterrence in preventing large-scale conflicts while also addressing concerns regarding its effectiveness, credibility, and potential for accidental or unauthorized use. Moreover, this research investigates alternative perspectives on nuclear disarmament efforts and explores ethical considerations associated with non-proliferation treaties. It examines the role of international organizations such as the United Nations in promoting disarmament initiatives and fostering global cooperation. Finally, this study assesses contemporary challenges posed by emerging technologies such as cyber warfare and autonomous weapons systems within the context of nuclear ethics. It highlights potential ethical dilemmas arising from these advancements and emphasizes the need for ongoing ethical analysis to address these evolving threats. By examining these complex ethical issues surrounding nuclear warfare through various lenses, this term paper aims to contribute to a deeper understanding of the moral dimensions involved. Ultimately, it seeks to foster critical thinking about nuclear weapons policymaking while encouraging dialogue on global security challenges within an ethical framework.