Since the end of the Sino-Vietnamese War in 1979, Northeast Asia and its comprising countries have avoided international conflict as well as any regional set has done over the past few decades. The absence of nuclear weapons among Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan, in particular, is striking, given their technological and scientific capabilities. Though each of those countries has come close at times to developing their own nuclear weapons, one factor or another contributed to the failure of those upstart programs. The United States has played a significant role in all of them. Still, other factors remain. The purpose of this thesis is to determine in detail what caused the lack of a nuclear arms race in northeast Asia, beyond the American angle, as far as could be done. Existential threats exist to each country involved in the study, theoretically and tactically. Additionally, what causes an outlier like North Korea, which has boldly moved forward with nuclear weapons development? An important work by Scott Sagan is utilized in the thesis to assist with developing some far-reaching conclusions, with great importance to other parts of the world, beyond northeast Asia. Other literature can assist with those conclusions, as well. The framework of this thesis will be to intermingle a somewhat amended version of Sagan's nuclear proliferation rationalizations with historical analyses to draft some region-specific conclusions about why northeast Asia has not had a nuclear arms race. Processes going on between countries, within countries, and among countries, militarily, culturally, and economically, play such important roles than none can be discarded. The economic power centered on the capitalist core of northeast Asia can show how nuclear weapons acquisition is no longer among the things necessary to gain international respect or even security.

This thesis conducts an analysis of the Intersessional Process (ISP) of the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention (BTWC) between 2001 and 2006. Specifically, it aims to assess the extent to which the ISP has resulted in progress towards strengthening the BTWC. The fulfilment of the research aim is derived from three discrete approaches: firstly, an assessment of problems and weaknesses faced by the Convention; secondly, an assessment of common or converging understandings around measures to respond to such problems and weaknesses; and thirdly, an assessment of what effective action has been achieved between 2001 and 2006. To achieve this, this thesis uses a framework that structures the assessment around four dimensions of the BTWC and their evolution within a changing geostrategic and scientific context. The four dimensions identified are compliance, development, institutional and research. The conclusions drawn from this thesis suggest that although the compliance dimension has made some considerable progress in the area of national legislation and biosafety and biosecurity, it remains clear that other areas of the compliance dimension remain underdeveloped and deeply divisive. The development dimension has also made progress over the course of the ISP and, significantly, achieved much greater convergence in its focus around disease surveillance and detection. However, changing dynamics in security and science have negatively affected other areas of the development dimension. In terms of the institutional dimension, there has been a modest progress with regard to the BTWC¿s institutional and procedural evolution; however, legitimate concerns remain in relation to quantity and quality of membership of the BTWC relative to other agreements. Finally, there has been some motion towards the emergence of a more coherent dimension of research; although certain advances in science research remain neglected in the BTWC forum, and the issue of biodefence has been conspicuously absent from discussion during the ISP. Based on the analysis conducted, this thesis argues that the BTWC has made cautious progress over the course of the ISP, and there is evidence of a convergence in responses and effective action in some areas. However, there is insufficient evidence to suggest there has been ¿major progress towards strengthening the Convention¿ and many issues require much greater attention.

The overarching goal of this study is to conduct an investigation of regional perspectives on the impact of Israel's nuclear monopoly on nuclear decisions in the Middle East. This Dissertation addresses the question as to why regional actors have taken divergent nuclear paths relative to Israel's nuclear posture. The point of departure for this inquiry is whether the 'introduction' of Israel's nuclear weapons has ever played a pivotal role in the nuclear decisions and escalation dynamics in the Middle East. In so doing, this study addresses why Israel has maintained a nuclear monopoly in the Middle East. Within this context, the nuclear decisions are analyzed while employing three specific Independent Variables, namely: conventional balance; alliance reliance; and the perception of the utility of nuclear weapons. The analysis of the Egypt and Iran cases demonstrated layers of common and divergent responses, namely in relation to their perception of conventional, nonconventional, and nuclear deterrence. The dissertation addressed how both countries perceived and reacted to the underlying principles that underpinned Israel's nuclear posture. The main findings of this dissertation serve the logic of comparison between Egypt and Iran. These findings are addressed in terms of: a) the essence of reaction whether it applies to the nuclear posture or nuclear capabilities; b) the mere existence of a nuclear decision; c) the perception of the utility of nuclear weapons in terms of deterrence, compellence, and coercion; d) the difference between the official, semi-official and unofficial rhetoric; e) the significance of the legal reaction. / Doctor of Philosophy / This dissertation addressed two comparative reactions to Israel's nuclear posture, namely Egypt's and Iran's divergent nuclear paths. In so doing, it addressed the nuclear decisions of Egypt and Iran from 1955 to 2021. This dissertation made an effort in investigating how a tacit ally, namely the Shah, perceived Israel's nuclear posture. As analyzed, the literature tends to overlook the story of Iran's reaction under the Shah. Therefore, more research is necessary to decipher the puzzle of why allies feel alarmed or concerned by a nuclear ambition of a close regional partner. An important issue that this dissertation addressed while investigating reactions to Israel's nuclear posture was the delicate issue of decoupling Israel's posture from other established nuclear powers or nuclear aspirants. Within this context, it is central that this study underscores the impacts of the Indian, and Pakistani bombs and the impact of Iraq's nuclear ambition and to make a strong and substantiated case as to why Iran's reaction addressed Israel's posture and not Iraq or India. The same analysis applies to Egypt which witnessed the emergence of another nuclear aspirant in the 1980s, namely Iraq. In the final analysis, the main findings of this dissertation support the argument that comparative regional reactions to Israel's nuclear posture help investigate and test the main assumptions that underpinned opacity. Within this context, future researchers might further analyze the trichotomy of conventional; nonconventional, and nuclear deterrence because regional actors might employ the case of monopoly for explicit or tacit bargaining that fulfills the overarching interest of guaranteeing a robust conventional force. The underlying foundation of this research is to address how regional actors perceive and react to asymmetries in power, resolve, and stake.

yes / New non-lethal technologies (weapons and delivery systems) continue to make the news, both for their civil and military applications. Technologies which were considered to be in the realm of science fiction a few years ago, are now beginning to undergo field trials or, in some cases, are being deployed with police and soldiers on active service. As this, and our previous reports have highlighted, the development of acoustic weapons (Long Range Acoustic Device) and microwave weapons (Active Denial System) have proceeded rapidly as have advances in robotic, unmanned vehicles for the delivery of both lethal and non-lethal weapons. We repeat our concern that there is a danger of these new non-lethal technologies being `rushed¿ into service (1) without thorough testing for harmful health effects, (2) without a deeper consideration of civil and human rights, (3) without full discussion of their impact on arms control treaties and conventions, and (4) without further study of their social and cultural impact. Since many such weapons will have a rheostatic capacity along the non-lethal to lethal continuum, it is important that weapons developers and manufacturers, and those charged with the responsibility of using them, are held clearly accountable and have transparent rules of engagement. Of particular concern are a new generation of biological and chemical weapons. With respect to the health impact, NATO has a panel working on NLW human effects, the Human Factors and Medicine (HFM) Panel 073, which is due to report later this year (2004) on the Human Effects of Non-Lethal Technologies.1

Thesis (MA (Political Science. International Studies))--Stellenbosch University, 2005. / Peace operations and security co-operations are expensive. Even though there are a variety of factors that influences peace agents when they consider approving a new, expanding an existing, or closing down a peace operation or security co-operation, one of these factors is the cost factor. If we were to isolate the cost factor it would follow that a reduction in the cost of peace operations and security co-operations, are likely to contribute to peace agents being more willing to approve new, expand existing or to give existing missions more time to consolidate before closing them down. There are a variety of ways how the cost of peace operations or security co-operations can be lowered. This thesis suggests an alliance with the private sector in the form of corporate sponsorships. In short, that peace operations and security co-operations be commodified and commercialised. This would entail introducing corporate sponsorship of some of the commodities that are used in peace operations and security co-operations, followed by the corporate sponsor using their involvement in the peace operation or security co-operation to their commercial advantage. The commodification and commercialisation of peace operations and security co-operations should result in the relevant operations and co-operations benefiting in a cost-effective as well as practical effectiveness sense, whereas the private sponsor should benefit in either or both a financial (profit) or an image-making sense. The psychological theory supporting such an argument is that of social identity theory. This theory explains how positive connotations made with peacemaking in warlike conditions will motivate industries to use this opportunity to show that their products can succeed in such demanding circumstances. Accordingly, social identity theory provides us with evidence as to how the commercialisation and commodification of peace operations and security co-operations can succeed. We also support our argument by providing a case study, Operation Rachel, which serves as a successful example of an operation that was (partially) commodified and commercialised. Operation Rachel, which can be seen as either or both a peace operation and security co-operation, shows that in the case of security co-operations, these operations should be presented as peace operations during the commodification and commercialisation processes.

One of the key features of the 2002 United States National Security Strategy was an abrupt shift from the traditional U.S. approach to proliferation threats that prioritized deterrence and promotion of nondiscriminatory nonproliferation norms, to an approach called counterproliferation that emphasized military preemption and direct challenges to adversarial state identity. This thesis asks the question, what caused counterproliferation to largely replace deterrence and nonproliferation as the central national security policies of the U.S. concerning unconventional weapons? The thesis argues that to understand this policy change requires not merely an appreciation of changes in the post-Cold War international security environment, but also an examination of how culturally shaped threat conceptions among American policymakers interacted with capabilities development and policy institutionalization within the U.S. military. As no current theory adequately addresses those dynamics, complimentary strategic culture and organizational theory models are presented as the framework for analysis. This thesis will contend that policy shift from NP to CP resulted from the merging of strategic cultural efforts aimed at legitimizing conceptions of proliferation threats as originating from state identity, with a military organizational drive to avoid uncertainty through the development of counterproliferation capabilities. Together these strategic cultural and organizational responses to shifting proliferation threats altered the menu of choice for policymakers by institutionalizing and legitimizing a policy response that directly challenged existing nonproliferation norms and practices. This thesis relies on a detailed case study of the evolution of counterproliferation policy from 1993 to 2002, with particular focus on the analysis of public discourse, declassified policy planning and Department of Defense documents, and participant interviews.

La notion d'« armes de destruction massive » (ADM) est insaisissable : au lieu d'avoir pour but de mieux définir un type d'arme, elle agit à l'inverse, en créant une confusion entre l'arme et les conséquences de son emploi. Cette nature inconsistante se poursuit au niveau juridique. En effet, bien que l'expression fasse très tôt son entrée au sein des Nations unies, aucun traité ni organe officiel n'a, jusqu'alors, réussi à en donner une définition probante. À défaut de définition incontestable, et en l'absence d'un critère vérifiable d'identification de ce qu'est une « arme de destruction massive », cette notion s'est avérée préjudiciable. L'écart entre la réalité de la menace existante en matière d'« armes de destruction massive » et la façon dont elle fut perçue, puis gérée par la communauté internationale, c'est-à-dire à la fois par les États de façon individuelle et par les organisations internationales et les traités de façon collective, a conduit à de multiples dérives. Par conséquent, s'agissant là d'une notion plus politique que juridique, il apparaît nécessaire qu'elle soit précisée ou abandonnée / The term « weapons of mass destruction » (WMD) is ambiguous: instead of aiming to clearly define a certain type of weapon, it does the opposite by creating confusion between the weapon itself and the consequences of its use. This confusion is also reflected at in the legal definition. Indeed, even though the term has been used by the United Nations from an early stage, no treaty or official entity has succeeded in providing a clear definition to this day. The lack of a clear definition, and the absence of defined criteria to determine what constitutes a « weapon of mass destruction », has turned out to be damaging. The dichotomy between the existing threat from « weapons of mass destruction » and the way it is perceived and handled by the international community, including individual states, international organisations, as well as collective treaties, has resulted in several instances of inappropriate use. As a consequence, the term has become a political rather than legal notion. A clearer legal definition is needed, or otherwise the term should be abandoned

1993年1月13日在法國巴黎簽署之「禁止化學武器公約」（The Chemical Weapons Convention，CWC），不但規定銷毀現存所有類別的化學武器，並且在嚴格的國際管制下，採取嚴密之查核措施，以完全銷毀研製化學武器相關設備；對於用以製造成化學武器之原料及其前驅物質的貿易也有訂定詳細規約，期能終極達成全面消滅化學武器之目標。2003年5月30日，美國布希總統宣佈成立「防擴散安全倡議」（Proliferation Security Initiative，PSI），其目的亦在更有效的防止大規模毀滅性武器(Weapon of Mass Destruction，WMD)之擴散並避免落入邪惡軸心國家或恐怖份子之手。 化學武器也被稱為「窮國的原子彈」，因其發展簡易、製造費用較為低廉，故國際間化學武器的擴散對國際和平與安全之威脅已遠超核子武器或生物武器；我國雖躋身全球前11名化工國，但因中共的阻撓，迄今仍然無法成為「禁止化學武器公約」的締約國，但不能據此理由，自外於國際社會對此問題之關注與掌握，本論文即以「禁止化學武器公約」為研究重點，期提供未來觀察相關發展之參考。 / “The Chemical Weapons Convention”（CWC） signature in Paris on January 13, 1993 required all the existing chemical weapons be demolished and a strict inspection measure be taken under the strict international supervision and control to completely destroy all the related facilities and equipment used to make chemical weapons; It also stipulates in detail on the trade of raw materials used to make chemical weapons so that the ultimate goal of total annihilation of chemical weapons can be reached. On May 30, 2003, President George Bush Jr. announced the establishment of “Proliferation Security Initiative”(PSI) with an aim to further effectively prevent from the proliferation of “Weapons of Mass Destruction ”(WMD) and minimize the chance to let them fall in the hands of the evil axis countries or international terrorists. Chemical weapons are also dubbed as“the nuclear bomb of the poor nations”because they are easy to develop and the cost of producing them are relatively low. Therefore, the proliferation of chemical weapons in the world has posed a far more severe threat than that of nuclear or biological weapons. Although our country has been in the top 11 chemical engineering countries in the world, we are still not able to be one of the signatories of “the Chemical Weapons Convention” as a result of the political interference from China. However despite this adverse situation, we should not use this as an excuse to exclude ourselves from the concerns and control of the international community on this issue. Therefore, this paper focuses mainly on “The Chemical Weapons Convention”, hoping to provide a significant reference for future observation and the development of the related issues.

A questão das armas nucleares continua a figurar como um ponto central das Relações Internacionais Os esforços e ações concretas para o desarmamento, a não-proliferação e o controle das armas nucleares continuam sendo temas que geram tensões recorrentes entre os Estados. No entanto, no Brasil, são poucas as análises de caráter acadêmico acerca destes temas e, no que tange ao posicionamento corrente e prospectivo do Estado brasileiro no Regime de Não-Proliferação de Armas Nucleares, os estudos e análises são ainda mais escassos, ou incipientes. Tendo como objeto de estudo o Tratado sobre a Não-Proliferação de Armas Nucleares (TNP), o Regime dele decorrente e o processo de inserção do Estado brasileiro nesse Regime, a dissertação está estruturada em três eixos: o primeiro contempla o papel das armas nucleares na percepção de segurança dos Estados; o segundo abrange o TNP e o Regime dele decorrente; o terceiro analisa o processo de inserção do Estado brasileiro no Regime em pauta. Assim, em síntese, a pesquisa efetuada contemplou os motivos que levam os Estados à decisão de desenvolver armas nucleares; a gênese do TNP e a evolução da percepção do significado desse Tratado por parte dos Estados; bem como o processo e o grau de inserção do Brasil no Regime de Não-Proliferação de Armas Nucleares. A pesquisa efetuada buscou colocar o presente objeto de estudo no debate mais amplo das Relações Internacionais, tomando como base as abordagens consagradas da disciplina na questão do gerenciamento da segurança dos Estados, isto é, as duas abordagens que constituem o mainstream da disciplina, a perspectiva teórica liberal (e suas variantes neoliberais) e o pensamento realista (e neo-realista). Dessa forma, as conclusões obtidas valeram-se de lentes teóricas distintas, porém necessárias para a compreensão das partes específicas de um conjunto complexo e das conexões causais entre essas partes. / The issue of nuclear weapons continues to appear as a focal point of International Relations. The efforts and concrete actions on disarmament, non-proliferation, and nuclear arms control are still issues that generate recurring tensions between States. However, in Brazil, there is little analysis of an academic nature about these issues and, with respect to current and prospective position of the Brazilian State in the Nuclear Weapons Non-Proliferation Regime, studies and analysis are even more scarce, or incipient. The present dissertation has as its object of study to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), the Regime arisen from NPT, and the Brazilian State insertion process in this Regime. Therefore our research work is structured in three areas: the first one is about the role of nuclear weapons in States security perception, the second is about NPT and its Regime, the third runs over the insertion of the Brazilian state in this regime. So, in summary, the research performed included the reasons that make a State to develop nuclear weapons, the NPT genesis and evolution of the perception of the meaning of that Treaty by the States, and the process and the degree of insertion of Brazil in the Nuclear Weapons Non-Proliferation Regime. The inquiry sought to place this object of study in the broader debate on Foreign Relations, based on the approaches of the discipline devoted to the question of managing the security of States, id est, the two approaches that constitute the mainstream of the discipline: the perspective theoretical liberal (and neoliberal variants) and realistic thinking (and neo-realist). Thus, we have used different theoretical lenses, which we think necessary for understanding the specific parts and causal connections between these parts of a complex issue.

A questão das armas nucleares continua a figurar como um ponto central das Relações Internacionais Os esforços e ações concretas para o desarmamento, a não-proliferação e o controle das armas nucleares continuam sendo temas que geram tensões recorrentes entre os Estados. No entanto, no Brasil, são poucas as análises de caráter acadêmico acerca destes temas e, no que tange ao posicionamento corrente e prospectivo do Estado brasileiro no Regime de Não-Proliferação de Armas Nucleares, os estudos e análises são ainda mais escassos, ou incipientes. Tendo como objeto de estudo o Tratado sobre a Não-Proliferação de Armas Nucleares (TNP), o Regime dele decorrente e o processo de inserção do Estado brasileiro nesse Regime, a dissertação está estruturada em três eixos: o primeiro contempla o papel das armas nucleares na percepção de segurança dos Estados; o segundo abrange o TNP e o Regime dele decorrente; o terceiro analisa o processo de inserção do Estado brasileiro no Regime em pauta. Assim, em síntese, a pesquisa efetuada contemplou os motivos que levam os Estados à decisão de desenvolver armas nucleares; a gênese do TNP e a evolução da percepção do significado desse Tratado por parte dos Estados; bem como o processo e o grau de inserção do Brasil no Regime de Não-Proliferação de Armas Nucleares. A pesquisa efetuada buscou colocar o presente objeto de estudo no debate mais amplo das Relações Internacionais, tomando como base as abordagens consagradas da disciplina na questão do gerenciamento da segurança dos Estados, isto é, as duas abordagens que constituem o mainstream da disciplina, a perspectiva teórica liberal (e suas variantes neoliberais) e o pensamento realista (e neo-realista). Dessa forma, as conclusões obtidas valeram-se de lentes teóricas distintas, porém necessárias para a compreensão das partes específicas de um conjunto complexo e das conexões causais entre essas partes. / The issue of nuclear weapons continues to appear as a focal point of International Relations. The efforts and concrete actions on disarmament, non-proliferation, and nuclear arms control are still issues that generate recurring tensions between States. However, in Brazil, there is little analysis of an academic nature about these issues and, with respect to current and prospective position of the Brazilian State in the Nuclear Weapons Non-Proliferation Regime, studies and analysis are even more scarce, or incipient. The present dissertation has as its object of study to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), the Regime arisen from NPT, and the Brazilian State insertion process in this Regime. Therefore our research work is structured in three areas: the first one is about the role of nuclear weapons in States security perception, the second is about NPT and its Regime, the third runs over the insertion of the Brazilian state in this regime. So, in summary, the research performed included the reasons that make a State to develop nuclear weapons, the NPT genesis and evolution of the perception of the meaning of that Treaty by the States, and the process and the degree of insertion of Brazil in the Nuclear Weapons Non-Proliferation Regime. The inquiry sought to place this object of study in the broader debate on Foreign Relations, based on the approaches of the discipline devoted to the question of managing the security of States, id est, the two approaches that constitute the mainstream of the discipline: the perspective theoretical liberal (and neoliberal variants) and realistic thinking (and neo-realist). Thus, we have used different theoretical lenses, which we think necessary for understanding the specific parts and causal connections between these parts of a complex issue.