Kirjailijakuva
10 teosta 276 jäsentä 4 arvostelua 1 Favorited

Tietoja tekijästä

Sisältää nimet: Scott Sagan, Scott Douglas Sagan

Tekijän teokset

Merkitty avainsanalla

Yleistieto

Jäseniä

Kirja-arvosteluja

This important book clearly and succinctly lays out the opposing views on whether nuclear proliferation makes the world more or less peaceful.
 
Merkitty asiattomaksi
Hania18 | 2 muuta kirja-arvostelua | Sep 13, 2022 |
This is an important book and a great teaching tool for undergraduate classes.

Sagan and Waltz present two opposing views on nuclear weapons. Waltz suggests that the slow spread of nuclear weapons is better than either the rapid spread of nuclear weapons or no spread. Nuclear weapons, he suggests, help stabilize conflicts by creating clarity between conflicting states (each understands the end result of a nuclear attack) and make states risk adverse. Waltz’s analysis, however, is based on rational-actor model that may not hold true in real life. Even Waltz recognizes that reality often bellies what would be considered the rational course of action. The US and the Soviets continued to create nuclear weapons even though, as Waltz argues, a basic survivable deterrent should have been good enough for deterrence. Even for revolutionary powers, Waltz suggests that deterrence holds true—but only as long as the basic rationality of the leaders (even the sub-actors within the system) hold true. Waltz’s contention that nuclear weapons are not credible for extended deterrence of limited interests also seems flawed. How can states be positive what interests are vital and non-vital?

Many of Waltz's arguments are predictable. I found the arguments of Sagan much more counter-intuitive. For some reason, I thought that a constructivist or liberal approach would be the natural counterpoint for Waltz. But Sagan's analysis is grounded in bureaucratic politics and organizational behavior approaches. Approaches that are in some ways as rationalist or more rationalist than Waltz's.

Sagan’s examination of organization theory exposes many of the problems in Walts’s rational-actor model. As Sagan demonstrates three conditions must be met for deterrence to be stable (1) there cannot be a preventive war while one country clearly has the advantage (2) states must develop a second strike capability and (3) and the nuclear force must not be prone to accidental use.

Sagan then looks at how the “bounded rationality” of parochial organizations often limits organizations’ ability to accomplish these three tasks. Some highlights from his analysis are: one, his examination of how the cult of the offensive often gives military organizations an incentive for preventive war; two, the parochial needs of the different military services sometimes limits their ability to build a survivable second-strike capability; and three, the complexity of organizations often lead to issues of unauthorized usage. What is interesting and compelling about Sagan’s policy conclusion is that he suggests that non-proliferation arguments need to be addressed to the various composite actors of the state. Sagan’s final conclusions suggest that, the US should help states become more “rational” in their management of nuclear weapons, but also, that the US and Russia have quite a way to go before they are rational.

The India/ Pakistan conflict demonstrates both Sagan and Waltz’s claims: India and Pakistan have yet to come to a stage of perfect deterrence; both are still vulnerable to counterforce strikes; Pakistan supposedly lost control of its arsenal for a limited time in the Kargil incident; Pakistan still has weak civilian control of its arsenal; and yet, nuclear weapons seem to have tempered the conflict somewhat.

Certainly, there are more perspectives on nuclear conflict than these two. And certainly looks at constructivism, liberalism, and critical approaches would broaden the perspectives of young readers. Still, this thin volume is a great read for undergrads, grad students, and casual readers alike.
… (lisätietoja)
1 ääni
Merkitty asiattomaksi
DanielClausen | 2 muuta kirja-arvostelua | Jun 9, 2015 |
In The Limits of Safety, Scott D. Sagan uses organizational theory to explain why a nuclear arsenal can never be completely free of accidents. He also describes many instances in which accidents have already occurred with nuclear weapons or that have occurred during tense strategic stand-offs between nuclear-armed states. As Sagan points out, it has really been nothing more than luck that such accidents that have occurred have not resulted in a catastrophic disaster.

Sagan's basic premise is that as systems get more complex, they get more difficult for human beings to effectively manage. The United States' nuclear weapons arsenal is one of the most complex systems in the world. Because of its complexity there are many supposedly fail-safe measures that are built into the system to prevent an accident from occurring, which only makes the system even more complex. As complexity rises so does the possibility of unintended consequences occurring as parts of the system interact in ways that the designers simply could not foresee.

Furthermore, some research in organizational theory strongly indicates that even if it were possible to design a "fail-safe" system, the need to have humans interacting with that system means that you can never eradicate all accidents and errors from occurring. Sagan more than adequately points out what the consequences of these revelations are for the maintenance of such a large nuclear arsenal as the United States and Russia currently have.
… (lisätietoja)
 
Merkitty asiattomaksi
Bretzky1 | May 29, 2011 |
The Spread of Nuclear Weapons features two of the leading scholars on international security, Scott D. Sagan and Kenneth N. Waltz, debating the question of whether nuclear weapons proliferation would be bad for the world. Sagan takes the view that it would be bad while Waltz takes the position that it would not necessarily be bad and might even be a net positive for international security.

The book begins with Waltz and Sagan laying out their arguments and presenting the scholarly and historical evidence that supports them. They then go into a debate regarding how the proliferation of nuclear weapons to South Asia has affected the Indo-Pakistani conflict. The book then ends with Waltz and Sagan responding directly to the other's arguments.

The Spread of Nuclear Weapons is an excellent book for anyone looking to find a primer on the arguments for and against attempting to halt nuclear weapons proliferation. While there is a lot of theory in the book, it is of a type that is easy to follow even for people who are not trained in international and national security issues. The only thing really missing is a cost-benefit analysis. But that oversight does little to detract from the overall quality.
… (lisätietoja)
 
Merkitty asiattomaksi
Bretzky1 | 2 muuta kirja-arvostelua | May 27, 2011 |

Listat

Palkinnot

You May Also Like

Associated Authors

Tilastot

Teokset
10
Jäseniä
276
Suosituimmuussija
#84,078
Arvio (tähdet)
3.9
Kirja-arvosteluja
4
ISBN:t
17
Kuinka monen suosikki
1

Taulukot ja kaaviot