Skip to main content
U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

How to think about nuclear war

Journal Article · · Commentary; (United States)
OSTI ID:5045348

Mr. Luttwak, a professional defense consultant, observes the arguments of nuclear freeze proponents can be refuted on both strategic and moral grounds. The freeze concept is illogical, he notes, because it is political systems - not state boundaries - that separate sides and because the Warsaw Pact countries are more heavily armed than the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) countries. An important factor keeping NATO forces at a disadvantage is their defensive orientation, which keeps forces militarily diffuse and dependent on nuclear weapons and preemptive action as a deterrent. Mr. Luttwak feels the shock effect of any use of nuclear weapons would probably shorten a war rather than expand it because of the instinct for survival on both sides; further only nuclear weapons have this awesome power to deter. The proposal for universal disarmament under world government control is not a serious one, he thinks, and reflects an indifference to the possibility of a long non-nuclear war. The effect would be to trade the risk of nuclear death for the inevitability of many non-nuclear casualties. (DCK)

Research Organization:
Georgetown Univ., Washington, DC
OSTI ID:
5045348
Journal Information:
Commentary; (United States), Journal Name: Commentary; (United States) Vol. 74:2; ISSN COMNB
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English

Similar Records

JPRS report: Arms control, [April 18, 1989]
Technical Report · Tue Apr 18 00:00:00 EDT 1989 · OSTI ID:649951

NATO acquisition strategy: a way to improve readiness and sustainability
Technical Report · Thu Dec 31 23:00:00 EST 1987 · OSTI ID:7183506

NATO-Warsaw Pact
Technical Report · Wed Nov 30 23:00:00 EST 1988 · OSTI ID:6325941