Neutron bomb and conventional weapons of mass destruction

Abstract

The pros and cons of developing and producing neutron bombs are reviewed in the historical context of the lethality and destructive power of both conventional and nuclear weapons. Response from the arms-control community has generally been favorable toward the neutron bomb on the grounds that it would be an increased deterrent and would reduce reliance on tactical nuclear weapons. The validity of this position is questioned and it is pointed out that countries are now buying both new tactical nuclear and new conventional weapons as the destructive gap between the two types of weapons gets smaller. A qualitative form of arms limitation could be more effective than the present step-by-step disarmament strategy. Some groundwork has been done on an international update of the laws of war as a result of public pressure and antipathy toward anti-personnel weapons. The public response points up the need to expand our traditional forms of negotiating to incorporate the concepts of both security politics and humanitarian precepts.