In recent years, Russia’s nuclear weapons program has been widely discussed among policymakers, think-tank analysts, and academics. Some argue that Russia pursues an increasingly assertive weapons policy and has lowered its threshold of using them in conflict. On the other end of the spectrum, there are scholars who argue that Russia’s nuclear weapons modernization is proceeding at a normal pace, and in extension, that there is little reason to be concerned about Moscow’s at times confrontational nuclear rhetoric. This thesis seeks to contribute to that debate by addressing to central questions: (1) How has Russia’s nuclear weapons policy evolved in the last two decades? (2) What explains the evolution in Russia’s nuclear weapons policy? Towards that end, the thesis first conducts a historical analysis, which provides a detailed overview of the changes and continuities that have characterized Russia’s nuclear weapons policy in the last 20 years. Building on this, the thesis then seeks to explore the underlying drivers and objectives of Russia’s nuclear weapons policy via the lenses of offensive realism, defensive realism, and constructivism. The thesis concludes that the evolution of Russia’s nuclear weapons policy is best explained by two factors: the attempt to uphold a secure- second-strike capability (defensive realism) and an attempt to defend its status as a major global power (constructivism).

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.

Master thesis deals with the concept of "rogue states" and strategies of the United States that are used towards rogue states. Concretely, attention is focused on two such labeled countries - Iran and the Democratic People's Republic of Korea. Strategies used by the United States are further observed during the presidencies of George W. Bush and Barack Obama and with regard to two typical characteristics of rogue states - effort to acquire weapons of mass destruction and the support of terrorism. Despite expectations, it appears that strategies used by the United States differ significantly and they are often influenced by historical experiences and strategic interests. Bush's and Obama's foreign policies were significantly different on the rhetorical level. However, as shown in the thesis there can be found certain continuities between the strategies towards rogue states.

This diploma thesis deals with the historical development of the Israeli nuclear program and examines motives which led either to the decision to acquire nuclear weapons or to further develop Israeli nuclear arsenal. Indentified motives are compared with the theory by Scott Sagan who proposed three 'models in search of the bomb'. Security Model sees the effect of nuclear weapons on state security as the motivation, the Domestic Politics Model considers nuclear weapons to be a tool for gaining political profit and the Norms Model emphasizes their symbolic value. My proposition is that other than abovementioned motives, or more motives from different models might be found. Such a result would pose a challenge to Sagan's theory, and could be used a basis for further research. To define independent variables, which are the motives in my case, the method of process tracing is used. I identify critical moments which led to changes in the direction of the program, and define motives on their basis. In the thesis, I further deal with the policy of strategic ambiguity, which consists in complete non-acknowledgement of Israel's nuclear status and enabled Israel to reduce negative effects of the region's nuclearization.

Nuclear weapons remains in the security discourse of the United States for over 70 years. The threat of nuclear weapons changed its content several times since then. Our study examines how the nuclear threat was socially constructed and how different actors securitized the threat and to which purpose. Our Diploma thesis uses methodological framework of discourse analysis. We examine the political and social nuclear discourse in the U.S. along two levels of analysis: governmental level and nuclear disarmament level. The diploma thesis researches multiple governmental and societal sources in order to determine how different types of nuclear threat emerged within the discourse.

The thesis "Nuclear Iran Oversecuritized? The Politics of Benjamin Netanyahu's Speeches" is concerned with the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's speeches held in front of the UN, American Congress, Jewish lobby in the US AIPAC and foreign audience by several special occasions. It is based on the assumption that language is not only a neutral communication tool, but also a political tool serving the aim of achieving political goals. The aim of the thesis is to identify the linguistic tools of categorization, legitimization and securitization which Netanyahu used in order to persuade the international audience about the imminence and existential character of the threat posed by Iranian nuclear programme, and finally to achieve its elimination or at least tough punishment for Iranian non-compliance. Moreover, the thesis provides the reader with the overall context, namely the effect of Netanyahu's speeches, the nature of Iranian nuclear programme and its consequences for the situation in the Middle East.

Energy production systems are essential for human progress. They fuel the technologies that underpin economic growth and are prerequisite for efficient food production, education and healthcare. On the flip side, they also incur substantial eco-social costs. Hence, finding and promoting sustainable means of energy production is a key topic within the Environmental Sciences. This thesis examines the sustainability of nuclear power, by comparing its social, economic and ecological impacts to those of wind and solar power. The assessment is performed using Multi-Criteria Analysis (MCA), with a Weighted Sum scoring system and a Distance-To-Target weighting scheme. The selection and the weighting of the indicators are grounded in the Planetary Boundaries framework, the Oxfam Doughnut Economics model and the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals, and the technologies are compared on 9 axes of evaluation; greenhouse gas emissions, land-take requirements, material throughput, non-recyclable wastes, toxic and radioactive wastes, negative health impacts, economic costs, intermittency and energy return on energy invested. The thesis finds nuclear power to be the most sustainable option according to all but three indicators, and in the unified analysis, it outcompetes wind and solar by a factor of 2 and 3 respectively. Also notable is that solar power does not excel in a single impact category; it has the highest greenhouse gas emissions, the largest land-take, and it is costly, intermittent and energy-inefficient. It is also a source of toxic pollution, the effects of which cannot yet be determined. Although wind is more competitive, it consumes vast amounts of physical resources, generates a lot of waste, and its land-take is at least 10 times higher than that of nuclear power. In addition to the MCA, the thesis investigates three perceived threats that are often raised in criticisms of nuclear power; the risk of nuclear fuel depletion, the risk of nuclear weapons proliferation and the risk of catastrophic nuclear accidents. The results show that many popular arguments against the technology are loosely aligned with reality, and the thesis as a whole presents a challenge to the notion that nuclear power is a dangerous and unsustainable energy source.

No description available.

Uppsatsen analyserar om huruvida kärnvapenavskräckning hotar eller skyddar rätten till liv. Genom insamlade pro- och contra-argument skapas en diskussion kring kärnvapenavskräckning där centrala argument identifieras. Argumenten analyseras sedan i en argumentationsanalys samt slutsats utifrån ett rättighetsperspektiv med fokus på rätten till liv. Rätten till liv definieras utifrån General Comment No. 36 (2018) som berör artikel 6 rätten till liv inom den internationella konventionen om de medborgliga och politiska rättigheterna. / The essay analyses whether nuclear deterrence threatens or protects the right to life. By collecting pro- and contra-arguments it has been possible to create a discussion around nuclear deterrence as well as to identify key arguments within the two groups. The central arguments are then analyzed in an argumentation analysis and conclusion from a human rights perspective with a focus on the right to life. The right to life is defined from the General Comment No. 36 (2018) on article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, on the right to life.

No description available.