Comment Paper
Zhao Jing I35035
Essay questions:
1.
What are the implications of invention of nuclear weapons for international security? Do nuclear weapons have pacifying effects, as Waltz argues?
After the World War II, nuclear weapons started to play a critical role of protecting sovereignty and national security and balancing against any rival states that develop nuclear weapons. Because of the enormous destructive power of nuclear weapons, nuclear threat from rival states became a source of insecurity among states, thus every state has to initiate its own nuclear weapons program under the status quo of security dilemma. Since then, nuclear weapons proliferation became an important feature of present era. Powerful states successively developed their nuclear weapons to act as a counterweight to rival states; at the same time, weak states also attempted actively to join the balance alliance with a nuclear power. It is important to recognize from the start that the nuclear proliferation problem will be a critical problem in international security for the foreseeable future.
Thus the birth of nuclear weapons and the arrival of the nuclear age, on one side, it means large-scale development and utilization of nuclear energy, on the other side, it’s also regarded as the strongest military power to constraint the behaviors of rivals and safeguard state security under an international circumstance of continuing mistrust and uncertainty. As many specialists commented, the utilization of nuclear energy can benefit all mankind and destroy everything of our civilization at the same time. For

the global and international security, the invention of nuclear weapons is a double-edged sword.
As we all know, the world is composed of states, there is no central authority can control all the states. According to neo-realist theory, states exist in an anarchical international system and must therefore rely on self-help to protect their sovereignty and national security, (The seminal text of neorealism remains Kenneth N. Waltz,
Theory of International Politics (New York: Random House, 1979). During process of seeking self-protection, the world reached a status of balance of power between states, which maintained the current peace of this era. But with this kind of balance of power under the nuclear weapons proliferation, the international security has become more than just a national security issue, it has related to the destruction of human beings.
Aware of this serious problem, many countries began to call for the prohibition of nuclear weapons proliferation. As for me, I support the theory of realists and believe that the influence of invention of nuclear weapons for international security is negative, but also the temporary pacifying effects of nuclear weapons can’t be denied, it helps to maintain the current balance of power between states.
As in today, the concept of security had been contested for a long time, from the limits of parochial national security to include a range of other considerations. It covers a variety of interconnected issues in the world that have an impact on survival.
To answer the essay question, I would like to illustrate my personal view from the opinions of realists, which remained the best approach to thinking about international security currently.

Debates about security have traditionally focused on the role of the state in international relations. States have been regarded by far the most powerful actors in the international system. In this system, states have no higher authority to regulate the relations with each other, which means they would seek to achieve their own security at the expense of other states in the self-help world, as they all regard security as their priority obligation. In a certain period of time, the world may achieve peace when the power balanced between states, but the constantly warfare and conflicts among states also explained that the status of BOP can be broken, which coincide to the views of realists, permanent peace is unlikely to be achieved. As long as old BOP status is broken, war becomes unavoidable and new BOP will be formed during the war.
Maybe oppositions would claim that a traditional realist theory focusing on security threats of all cases of proliferation and nuclear restraint is inappropriate due to the feature of era is different from the past and powerful institutions are growing stronger and stronger to play an important role in the international affairs. But fundamentally, states are still the main actors in international relations and almost all states are self-interest maximizers who are endlessly striving to protect their own interests and prevent others from gaining more (relative gain).
The temporary pacifying effects of nuclear weapons mainly reflected in the development of nuclear deterrence theory. Nuclear weapons is an inevitable product of the development of science and technology, as a double-edged sword to international security, we need to acknowledge the function it plays to restrict the behaviors among states to a large extent, but there has to be a trade-off between the

pros and cons of this issue. The destructive power of nuclear weapons far exceeds the functions it brings to the international security, the nuclear weapons proliferation raise the danger to a level that no state can afford the consequence, once nuclear war happened. For the sake of long-term development of international security, I would like to believe that the implications of invention of nuclear weapons are the most dangerous menace for both international security and mankind.
As realists claimed the natural state of international relation is war, and from the modern wars we can see that as least in a short time states will continue to value their own interests and security and they can scarify others’ interests and the harmony of some areas when necessary. The standpoint of realists may seem to be pessimistic, but it has a reason to be remained the best approach to thinking about international security currently. I think the main reason maybe the security dilemma which puts states into a seemingly peaceful world where turbulent and revolutionary undercurrents still exist.
The continuing violence in the Middle East and the Iraq War and the war in Afghanistan illustrated that we continue to live in a world of mistrust and constant security competition. Besides, the problem of cheating and relative gains continues to make cooperation between states difficult to achieve and even more difficult to sustain. But with the times past by development and requirement, we should agree that no matter whether inter-state violence would gradually become a thing of the past and new cosmopolitan values would bring greater cooperation between individuals and human collectivities of various kinds or not. At least, in present era, the common development calls for states to work together to maintain the

peaceful in status quo. And for the perpetual development of global society, we are looking forward for some special institutions continue to play a more important role in international affairs.
In conclusion, currently, faced with nuclear issues of some states and areas and other threats from terrorism, especially the North Korea nuclear issue is directly related to the common interests of several states, the unsafe factors still exist. As there is no absolute safety, nuclear weapons still remain the best represent of a state’s military power. From the United States rejected to approve the Comprehensive
Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CNTBT) to withdraw from the Anti-Ballistic Missile treaty, we can see that nuclear power is still an important approach that powerful states are unwilling to give up.
Under the threat of unsafe factors, superpowers will continue research and development on nuclear weapons, complete prohibition of nuclear weapons’ development is difficult to achieve and still a big challenge to the current international security. But this doesn’t mean there is no way to achieve for a peaceful international society, Opportunities to develop greater international and global security will always exist. With the depth development of international relations, especially the relations between superpowers, the international security situation will change as well, under the promotion of globalization, the best approach to restraint the passive effects of nuclear weapons can be figured out. Trade off between the mass destruction and common security will remain as the big problem for mankind to deal with for a long term.