No description available.

This thesis takes the initial steps to find what it calls a ‘posture of peace’, a counterpart to what Hobbes refers to as a posture of war (Hobbes 1651/2004: 79)1. A posture of war representsdefensive initiatives that can be interpreted by others as a certain preparation for conflict, and its base definition is used as a template to formulate an initial version of a posture of peace2.While keeping this concept as an overarching theme throughout the thesis explores the concepts of nuclear posture and a credible minimum deterrence (CMD) through the examples of India and Pakistan. While the thesis discusses four different nuclear postures, there really are only two categories, namely the pro-nuclear and anti-nuclear posture. The main examples of pronuclear posture used here is the case of India and Pakistan, two geographical neighbouring Nuclear Weapon States (NWS) who have been experiencing ongoing frictions and conflicts since (and prior to) becoming nuclear powers. On the other side Kazakhstan serves as an example of an anti-nuclear posture and in regards to the nuclear debate a possible empirical example of a posture of peace. In addition to these postures there is also the concept of NonOffensive Defence (NOD), which is more exemplified in the Kazakhstan’s approach to their nuclear situation as well as their more contemporary initiative in collaboration with several other neighbouring states to form the Central Asia Nuclear Weapons Free Zone (CANWFZ). The thesis concludes that while NOD finds little support in pro-nuclear posturing, there is ample space for it over on the ani-nuclear posture side of the spectrum which in addition aligns more with the present interpretation of a posture of peace. Moreover, the CANWFZ initiative appears to be as close a perfect example of a NOD in the present case and as close as this stage of the research will come to observing a posture of peace.

The present diploma thesis aims to compare the approach of the Bush and Obama administrations towards the role of nuclear weapons in the United States security strategy. The author focuses at the Nuclear Posture Review (NPR) reports from 2001 and 2010, employing a detailed comparative analysis of their respective content as well as their implications. The analysis concentrates at broader conceptual issues as well as very concrete steps related to specific elements of the United States strategic arsenal. The author of the thesis argues that the current political discourse which attributes a nearly revolutionary character to the approach of the Obama administration to the United States nuclear policy does not fully match the actual dimension of change between the NPR of 2001 and 2010. In fact, the evolution of the United States nuclear strategy maintains its own dynamics in many aspects. Additionally, the present diploma thesis also tries to analyze both documents within the context of the evolution of the United States nuclear strategy since the 1990s which allows the author to identify the shifts as well as the patterns of continuity in the US nuclear policy in the post-Cold War period.