Paper on Nuclear Weapons

Introduction The role of nuclear weapons in international politics is one of deterrence and conflict. Webster’s dictionary defines a nuclear weapon as an “explosive device that derives its destructive force from nuclear reactions, either fission or a combination of fission and fusion.” The definition uses the words “destructive force” as it defines what a nuclear weapon is. These weapons are so destructive that they have only been used twice in the course of warfare, both times were during World War II when the United States sought to end the war. Within a couple of days in August of 1945 the U.S bombed the towns of Nagasaki and Hiroshima. The use of these weapons resulted in the deaths of 200,000 people in Japan and caused Japan to surrender officially ending the war. The ethical status of the use of those bombs and the role they played in getting Japan to surrender remains a subject of debate. Though nuclear weapons have not been used in warfare since World War II countries still have nuclear arsenals. These weapons remain a hot button issue in the international community and can be the source of conflict between countries. Furthermore, states have their views on nuclear weapons, whether they are a liberalist view or a realist view, and how they apply to their foreign policy. Nuclear weapons are too destructive a weapon for any state to have. The effects are devastating and in the wrong hands could cause chaos. Nuclear weapons should be destroyed and no country should have a nuclear arsenal. However, this leads to one particular question. Why do states feel they have to be nuclear armed or have nuclear superiority?
Complicating Issues States have various reasons why they feel they need to be nuclear armed, such as having these weapons as a deterrent, having nuclear superiority, and establishing or maintaining a hegemon. These reasons are some of the complicating issues that get in the way of having a nuclear weapon free world.