The purpose of this thesis is to explain why states obtain nuclear weapons and the role various actors and interests play in the making of states´ nuclear policies. The main questions are as follows: (1) What big theories exist concerning states obtaining nuclear weapon and nuclear armament in International Relations and what relevance do they have of the post cold-war period?, (2) What is the meaning of the perspective of the Military-Industrial Complex (MIC)?, and (3)Are there empirical studies which supports the existence of a MIC in the United States? The focus lies on actors and driving forces that are internal to states and it is also important to investigate if the theories have relevance for the post 9/11-era. The study uses the method of qualitative literature-study with some quantitative segments. It is claimed that states might be interested in justifying their behaviour in a morally appealing way and that real reasons may be hidden. There are many reasons for states to obtain and keep nuclear weapons and related technology (which includes many of the most lucrative elements of the arms industry´s sales). Among this reasons are that arms and related technology may be used to influence other states and nuclear weapons-construction and modernisation might be used to protect the state from external threats, stop unwanted interference from other actors, secure job and gain recognition and prestige in world politics. For security reasons states might hold onto their own nuclear weapons and try to hinder other actors from getting access to them. The internal actors and driving forces we look at are bureaucratic, economical and political, and the MIC-perspective. The military can be said to have interests in as much resources and capabilities as possible, which includes advanced weaponary such as nuclear weapons and related technologies, at its disposal because of the goal to defend the state from all possible threats and for officers career reasons. Much of its influence is said to come from its expert knowledge and position and it is said to be especially influential in matters of foreign policy, military spending and foreign policy. The major economical actors mentioned are big corporations involved in military spending and these have interests in maximizing profits. Nuclear weapons making and maintenance and the related areas of missile defense and delivering methods for nuclear weapons seem to be areas with high changes of being profitable for the involved major companies. The actors wield influence for example through lobbying and campaign contributions. An economic driving force claim is that state spending is necessary for stimulating the economy and defense spending is easily justified in other ways. Political actors and driving forces concerns politicians interest in promoting the interests of supporting groups, there are indications that the weapon industry is such a group. Research have shown various results about the extent politicians tend to further the interests of supporting groups. The MIC-perspective talks about groups with interest in high levels of military spending. Most researchers seem to agree that the complex exists but there are different opinions about what actors belongs to it and its power on various issues. There is some mention of the core of the complex consisting of such internal actors as mentioned above. MIC-related empirical research has been conducted and this author finds that the MIC is a relevant analytical tool for the post cold war – and 9/11 era.

Desde o fim da Guerra Fria, os Estados Unidos promoveram a noção da existência de \"Rogue States\", denominando-os \"novos inimigos\". No entanto, o termo confere muitas controvérsias em torno de sua definição, principalmente dos critérios que conferem o rótulo a tais atores. A irracionalidade na tomada de decisões e a busca pela aquisição de armas nucleares se apresentam como características fundamentais. Através da análise dos discursos americanos sobre rogue states, e sob a perspectiva construtivista, podemos depreender que o discurso foi utilizado como forma de corroborar as ações norte-americanas em relação a estes países, ao mesmo tempo em que moldavam as próprias estratégias americanas, uma vez que os atos de fala conferem uma ação em si. As ações tomadas diante de uma situação são definidas a partir da percepção deste fato e do significado que o ator dará a ele. Assim, o apontamento de certos países como sendo Rogue States pelos Estados Unidos serviu para distinguir entre os países do Sistema Internacional \"aqueles que deveriam ser combatidos\". Alguns críticos do termo afirmam que o critério de racionalidade aplicado a estados como Coreia do Norte e Irã é muito mais rigoroso que aquele aplicado aos demais estados, mesmo a USSR durante a Guerra Fria. O presente trabalho pretende avaliar o surgimento do termo rogue state e sua utilização pelo governo norte-americano como política oficial. Através de dois artigos, busca-se entender a construção do conceito de rogue state, levando-se em consideração as teorias construtivistas, principalmente dos teóricos da chamada virada linguística. Uma vez que o debate da irracionalidade está diretamente ligado a busca pela obtenção de armas nucleares - critério-chave para o apontamento como rogue-, pretende-se também avaliar as suposições para tal classificação através da investigação dos programas nucleares dos dois países na atualidade que estão no centro do debate nuclear- Irã e Coreia do Norte. / Since the end of the Cold War, the United States promoted the notion of the existence of \"Rogue States\", designating them as \"new enemies\". However, the term presents many controversies surrounding its definition, especially about the criteria that confer the label to such actors. The irrationality in decision-making and the pursuit of nuclear weapons are presented as the core characteristics of the concept. Through the analysis of American discourses on rogue states, and under the constructivist perspective, one can infer that the speech was used as a way of corroborating the U.S. actions towards these countries, while that shaped the American strategies themselves, once the speech acts are an action itself. Actions taken towards a situation are defined according to the perceptions and meaning the actor will give to it. Thus, the indication of certain countries as Rogue States by the United States served to distinguish among the countries of International System \"those who should be fought\". Some critics of the term argue that the criterion of rationality applied to states like North Korea and Iran is much more rigorous than the one applied to other states, even the USSR during the Cold War. This work intends to evaluate the emergence of the term rogue state and its use by the U.S. government as an official policy. Through two articles, we seek to understand the construction of the rogue state concept, taking into account the constructivist theories, especially the theory of so-called linguistic turn. Since the discussion of irrationality is directly linked to the search for acquiring nuclear weapons - key characteristic of a rogue-, it also intends to evaluate the assumptions for such classification by investigating the nuclear programs of both countries currently at the center of the nuclear debate -Iran and North Korea.

Desde o fim da Guerra Fria, os Estados Unidos promoveram a noção da existência de \"Rogue States\", denominando-os \"novos inimigos\". No entanto, o termo confere muitas controvérsias em torno de sua definição, principalmente dos critérios que conferem o rótulo a tais atores. A irracionalidade na tomada de decisões e a busca pela aquisição de armas nucleares se apresentam como características fundamentais. Através da análise dos discursos americanos sobre rogue states, e sob a perspectiva construtivista, podemos depreender que o discurso foi utilizado como forma de corroborar as ações norte-americanas em relação a estes países, ao mesmo tempo em que moldavam as próprias estratégias americanas, uma vez que os atos de fala conferem uma ação em si. As ações tomadas diante de uma situação são definidas a partir da percepção deste fato e do significado que o ator dará a ele. Assim, o apontamento de certos países como sendo Rogue States pelos Estados Unidos serviu para distinguir entre os países do Sistema Internacional \"aqueles que deveriam ser combatidos\". Alguns críticos do termo afirmam que o critério de racionalidade aplicado a estados como Coreia do Norte e Irã é muito mais rigoroso que aquele aplicado aos demais estados, mesmo a USSR durante a Guerra Fria. O presente trabalho pretende avaliar o surgimento do termo rogue state e sua utilização pelo governo norte-americano como política oficial. Através de dois artigos, busca-se entender a construção do conceito de rogue state, levando-se em consideração as teorias construtivistas, principalmente dos teóricos da chamada virada linguística. Uma vez que o debate da irracionalidade está diretamente ligado a busca pela obtenção de armas nucleares - critério-chave para o apontamento como rogue-, pretende-se também avaliar as suposições para tal classificação através da investigação dos programas nucleares dos dois países na atualidade que estão no centro do debate nuclear- Irã e Coreia do Norte. / Since the end of the Cold War, the United States promoted the notion of the existence of \"Rogue States\", designating them as \"new enemies\". However, the term presents many controversies surrounding its definition, especially about the criteria that confer the label to such actors. The irrationality in decision-making and the pursuit of nuclear weapons are presented as the core characteristics of the concept. Through the analysis of American discourses on rogue states, and under the constructivist perspective, one can infer that the speech was used as a way of corroborating the U.S. actions towards these countries, while that shaped the American strategies themselves, once the speech acts are an action itself. Actions taken towards a situation are defined according to the perceptions and meaning the actor will give to it. Thus, the indication of certain countries as Rogue States by the United States served to distinguish among the countries of International System \"those who should be fought\". Some critics of the term argue that the criterion of rationality applied to states like North Korea and Iran is much more rigorous than the one applied to other states, even the USSR during the Cold War. This work intends to evaluate the emergence of the term rogue state and its use by the U.S. government as an official policy. Through two articles, we seek to understand the construction of the rogue state concept, taking into account the constructivist theories, especially the theory of so-called linguistic turn. Since the discussion of irrationality is directly linked to the search for acquiring nuclear weapons - key characteristic of a rogue-, it also intends to evaluate the assumptions for such classification by investigating the nuclear programs of both countries currently at the center of the nuclear debate -Iran and North Korea.

No description available.

This thesis is an attempt to understand the role of nuclear weapons in Britain's defence and foreign policies. It works from the assumption that decisions in relation to nuclear weapons, can only be understood in the context of a broader overview of the British state's policies since the 1940's. In turn Britain's nuclear policies have made a decisive impact on defence policy as a whole and have had an important effect on international developments. It is hoped that this thesis will contribute to a better-understanding of the causes and effects of the nuclear weapons policies adopted by the UK since the 19401s. The thesis will focus on the politics and political economy of nuclear weapons and British defence policy. This central concern has required that a number of other important aspects of the subject have been given only peripheral consideration. The thesis does not attempt to provide a detailed technological history of Britain's nuclear force. Nor is it intended to provide particular new insights on the nuclear decisionmaking process. Rather it seeks to explore the underlying factors which have shaped both the technology and the perceptions of decision-makers. There is no shortage of historical accounts of Britain's nuclear force. The unique contribution which it is hoped that this thesis makes, however, does not lie so much in its subject matter as in the way that this subject matter is approached. In my view that approach is sufficiently different from those of previous works in this area as to be both original and of some interest to other scholars in this field.

Honors Project--Smith College, Northampton, Mass., 2009. / Includes bibliographical references (p. 111-119).

The scope of the thesis is to study India's nuclear behavior and the international responses in the period following India's nuclear weapons tests in 1998 leading up to the waiver for India by the nuclear suppliers group in 2008. The thesis explores this process of nuclear reconciliation in the context of a quest for international nuclear legitimacy. Nuclear legitimation is understood as a two-sided process and the explanation assumes two sides to the story: the Indian side and the audience side. Grounding the conceptualization within a theoretical framework of constructivism, the thesis explores the legitimation strategies employed by the Indian government to assuage international apprehensions about its possession of nuclear weapons. Additionally, the thesis analyzes how and why selected states in the international audience received and responded to India's strategies. In doing so, the thesis acknowledges but goes beyond an apparent power and interest explanation underlined by geo-political/security considerations and economic/trade interests - to include an analysis of shared norms and beliefs that constituted a basis for legitimacy judgments, circumscribed the interaction between India and other states, induced certain responses on the audience side and made possible certain claims on the Indian side. The principal argument is that normative evaluations and ideational factors served as important resources on both sides and also played an important role in determining the timing as well as the nature of nuclear reconciliation with India. By allowing a strategic employment of different arguments that appealed to the different states in the targeted audience, a legitimation process reduced the political, economic and diplomatic costs for the Indian government. Similarly, it enabled other states in the audience to support (as the P3: France, Russia and United Kingdom did), not come in the way (as the game-changers: Australia, Canada, Germany and Japan did) or not block India-specific waiver (as the white knights: Ireland, Austria, Norway, New Zealand, Sweden and Switzerland did) - and to justify their responses, cost-effectively.

The target of my thesis was to map the knowledge of the secondary school pupils of the issue of acquaintance of inhabitants with the recommended ways of the behaviour in case of the occurrence of extraordinary events (with the special accent on the events associated with the possibility of the terrorist misuse of B-agens and imported highly dangerous infection).

This research project explores how we can apply Emerging Design Landscapes such as Critical Design and Collective Creativity, in combination with traditional fields of visual communication to address societal challenges in cooperation with society. In particular, this paper aims to question the visual representation of nuclear warfare, and how we could utilize Peircean Semiotics to better understand set representation. The design outcome is a critical board game that at its core aims to create a discussion around the visual representation of nuclear warfare today and act as a learning platform that would help its user better understand the practice of semiosis.

Made available in DSpace on 2014-06-11T19:26:20Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 0 Previous issue date: 2011-10-07Bitstream added on 2014-06-13T20:15:11Z : No. of bitstreams: 1 oliveira_ls_me_fran.pdf: 533392 bytes, checksum: de5775245fe1b878e2785f67ae7a8d8f (MD5) / Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq) / Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP) / Neste trabalho, analisa-se o processo da adesão do Brasil ao Tratado de Não-Proliferação de Armas Nucleares (TNP) a partir de uma abordagem em três níveis analíticos (individual, doméstico e internacional) sobre a trajetória da questão nuclear brasileira nos anos 1990, enfocando os governos de Fernando Collor de Mello (1990-92) e Fernando Henrique Cardoso (1995-98). A principal questão do estudo é desvelar as razões pelas quais houve a subscrição brasileira do TNP. Em busca de respostas para a problemática, o desenvolvimento da análise, contudo, leva a perspectiva a extrapolar os fatos referentes unicamente à questão nuclear para, então, compreender a relação existente entre a assinatura do TNP pelo País, assim como de outros acordos prevendo o compromisso nacional com a não-proliferação de armas nucleares, das outras ADM e dos vetores (mísseis balísticos), com o projeto de país pensado pelas novas lideranças políticas brasileiras, o projeto de “potência pacífica”, que previa a renúncia do País ao fortalecimento dos seus atributos de ordem estratégico-militar e estabelecia o recurso ao softpower como a ferramenta para a inserção internacional brasileira nos anos 1990 / This work analyses the process of Brazilian adherence on the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) under the approaching in three main analytical levels (individual, subregional, international) on the path of Brazilian nuclear question in the 1990s, focusing on Fernando Collor de Mello (1990-92) and Fernando Henrique Cardoso’s government (1995-98). The main goal is to reveal the reasons by which there was the signature on NPT. Searching answers for that, the analysis, although, leads the perspective to see beyond the nuclear question to comprehend the relation between Brazilian signature on NPT, as others agreements defining Brazilian commitment on the non-proliferation principle, including all of WMD and ballistic missile, with the national project thought by new political leaderships, called “peaceful power”, which established Brazilian renouncement on the development of is strategic attributes and the election of soft-power as the mean to Brazilian international insertion in the 1990’s