Prohibition of nuclear weapons: a critical analysis of the relevance of international law and the failure of the Baruch Plan
This study develops a better historical understanding of the prohibitions in international law restraining the use of nuclear weapons and the reasons for the failure of the first and only effort at nuclear disarmament, the Baruch Plan. Such an inquiry may be useful in formulating new proposals to deal with the problem of nuclear weapons. While the doctrine of deterrence has been the subject of extensive study over the years, there has been a scarcity of detailed examinations of the legal implications of the use of nuclear weapons. In recent years, as public confidence in the continued viability of nuclear deterrence as the primary means to avert nuclear war has eroded, the normative discussion of the legal status of nuclear weapons under international law has assumed a new level of importance, not only for critics of existing nuclear weapons policies, but also for policy-makers. Initially, the author considers whether the laws of war, the traditional legal restraints on the conduct of war, are relevant in making an assessment of the legal status of nuclear weapons. Since the United States, the only nation to use nuclear weapons in warfare, contends that the use of nuclear weapons is lawful, the author investigates that claim as a prelude to a more extensive inquiry into the opinions of legal scholars on the legal status of nuclear weapons under international law.
- Research Organization:
- Pennsylvania Univ., Philadelphia (USA)
- OSTI ID:
- 5087087
- Resource Relation:
- Other Information: Thesis (Ph. D.)
- Country of Publication:
- United States
- Language:
- English
Similar Records
Nonproliferation, arms control and disarmament and extended deterrence in the new security environment
Nuclear weapons are illegal threats