Abstract
ABSTRACT Is it coherent to defend nuclear deterrence from an ethical and just-war point of view, given the likely devastating effects of an actual nuclear exchange? This article holds that the salutary effects of successful deterrence are so substantial that, given the state of the world today, such deterrence does abide by the proportionality criterion of the just war tradition when considered against the direct political effects of deterrence, not the military effects of detonations. This article further explores why such salutary political effects are likely to remain viable in the twenty-first century, given both technical and political developments. The article also explores some of the main arguments against nuclear deterrence derived from the Cold War and considers to what extent they are relevant today.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
