How to think about nuclear war
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), Vol. 74:2
- Country of Publication:
- United States
- Language:
- English
Similar Records
Nonproliferation, arms control and disarmament and extended deterrence in the new security environment
U. S. defense problem as it pertains to battlefield nuclear weapons