POLI 419 – STRATEGIC STUDIES
(Nuclear Strategy)
Poli 419
Winter 2012
Mon 18:00-20:30/Location XXX
Office Hrs: Mon 14:35-17:35
Professor J. Schofield
(julian.schofield@sympatico.ca)
Office: H-1225-65
Course Description
This course examines the place and application of nuclear weapons as an instrument of
policy, with a focus on operational military and strategic political methods.
Consequently, this is neither a historical course of warfare nor purely a course in
statecraft. The analysis will proceed through operational topics with an emphasis on
theoretical understanding of the logic of nuclear weapons in the contemporary age. Many
of the issues we will deal with are of current or historical (Cold War) interest to policy
decision-makers. The emphasis of the course, culminating in a paper, will thus be on
understanding and applying many of these theories to ongoing problems. I am interested
in developing your ability to reason critically about these issues.
The course will proceed through twenty-six lectures on the application of nuclear force.
Notes are available on moodle. The notes for a given lecture must be read in their entirety
before the student attends class. Students will be expected to complete the assigned
readings prior to class each week, and be prepared to discuss them in class.
Know that in the course of your paper research that many of the books are not at
Concordia, but they may be inter-library loaned with a delay of about three weeks, so
plan ahead. The Concordia inter-library loan website is at:
http://library.concordia.ca/flexmail/books.html
Concordia University reserves the right to alter this syllabus.
Required Text (available at Concordia’s Downtown bookstore)
Eastman’s Reader, POLI 419 2012 Winter edition
Course requirements
Nuclear Calculations Assignment (#1) 10% Due Lecture 7
(EMT, k-Factor, Lanchester, Mixed Game Calculations)
Mid-term take-home exam
15% Due Lecture 10 (handed out a week
earlier)
Civil Defense Assignment (#2)
5% Due Lecture 9
Paper Proposal
5% Due Lecture 11
Nuclear Weapons Program Assignment (#3) 5% Due Lecture 12
Naval Assignment (#4)
5% Due Lecture 17
Participation
15%
Course Paper
Final Take-Home Exam
earlier)
25% Due Lecture 22
15% Due Lecture 24 (handed out a week
The exams are all take-home (you will have one week to hand them in). Each exam will
be comprised of a list of essay questions from which you will choose two questions you
wish to answer. If you do the readings each week, the exam should present no difficulty.
There are four homework assignments, with specified due dates (penalties will be applied
to late assignments). The first requires a scientific calculator. The fourth assignment
consists of a computer game, Harpoon-97, that can be played from PC Lab C in H-925-2.
Instructions will be posted on the web and covered in class, and students are required to
get a computer account well before the assignment comes due. Students will expected to
familiarize themselves with the rules of the program required for the naval warfare
simulation assignments one week before the due date of the assignment.
You will be required to write a 15 to 20-page paper (not including footnotes and
bibliography). You must get approval for your topic by submitting a three-page proposal
by Lecture 13. The proposals may be resubmitted for reevaluation to a higher grade an
unlimited number of times before the due date of the paper. The student must schedule a
meeting with the professor regarding the proposal to get the proposal mark. The principal
case examined in the paper must not be one used or presented in class, and must be a past
historical one. One of the citation methods outlined on the library website must be used
and citations must include at least two books and two academic journals (not
newspapers). I do prefer footnotes though, and numbered pages. The paper must be
handed in on the date specified under course requirements, with the graded proposal
attached to the front of it. Late submissions will be penalized and comments will not be
provided.
Administrative Issues: Current university policy is that there is no professorial
discretion with regard to incomplete assignments – assignments not received before a
reasonable time before the required date of grade submission must proceed through
regular grade change channels. Late assignments will not receive comments. I cannot
replace one poorly done assignment with another assignment arrived through a private
arrangement with a student – I am required by the university to apply the syllabus.
Significant changes to the syllabus require unanimous consent of students and professor.
Please do not bombard the professor with twitter-like emails. For letters of
recommendation, drop the required pre-filled forms (including my name, title, etc),
stamped and addressed envelopes (including return address), your transcript, letter of
intent, and instructions. I will not do online recommendations unless they don’t require
an institutional email. You will receive a much better letter of recommendation if I know
who you are. I will only mail out letters of recommendation, and not hand them back to
students, nor will I produce letters for non-specific purposes.
Department of Political Science Statement on Plagiarism
CODE OF CONDUCT (ACADEMIC) SIMPLIFIED
IT IS NOT OK TO:

Copy from ANYWHERE without saying from where it came.

Let someone copy your work and then submit it as their own.

Hand in the same assignment in more than one class.

Have unauthorized material in an exam, such as cheat sheets, crib notes. YOU DON’T HAVE TO
BE CAUGHT USING THEM – JUST HAVING THEM WILL GET YOU INTO TROUBLE!

Copy from someone else’s exam.

Communicate with another student during an exam by talking or using some form of signals.

Add or remove pages from an examination booklet or take the booklet out of an exam room.

Get hold of or steal exam or assignment answers or questions.

Write a test or exam for someone else or have someone write for you.

Hand in false documents such as medical notes, transcript or record.

Falsify data or research results.
BUT IF YOU DO:

The Professor will file an incident report.

You will be asked to come to an interview with the Code Administrator.

A decision will be made to uphold or dismiss the charge.

If the charge is upheld, one or more of the following sanctions will be given:

A letter of reprimand

Resubmit the assignment or redo the exam

A failing grade in the assignment, exam or course

A failing grade in the course with no right to a supplemental exam

Requirement to take up to an additional 24 credits

Community service

Suspension of up to 3 years

Expulsion from the University

A charge of academic misconduct will appear on your student record.

If you believe the charge was incorrectly upheld, you have the right to request a hearing before an
Academic Hearing Panel composed of three professors and two students. This is not an appeal but is a
complete rehearing of the case.
For the complete Code of Conduct (Academic) refer to the Undergraduate (pages 604-617) and Graduate
(pages 64-70) Calendars or go to http://secretariat.concordia.ca/policies/academic/en/codeofconductacademic.shtml
Of vital importance is good behavior in the classroom. For example, students must never
insult another person in a classroom. Please see the Code of Rights and Responsibilities.
Students not respecting these rules will be asked to leave.
Lecture Topics and Reading Assignments
Inserts:
The Basic Model (Methodology)
Lanchester Equations
The Classic Games
Mixed Game Strategy Equations
k-Factor, EMT, CEP Calculations
Civil Defense Assignment
Nuclear Weapons Program Assignment
Nuclear-Naval Warfare Assignment
Cold War Nuclear Rules
2050 Nuclear War Rules
Nuclear Arms Control Briefing Papers
Proposal Format
Paper and Proposal Outline
Lecture Topics and Reading Assignments
(1). Introduction and Review of Methodology – Jan 9
(2). History of the Technology and Doctrine of Mass Destruction – Jan 9
Critical Question: Was there deterrence theory before nuclear weapons?
Giulio Douhet, The Command of the Air (Washington, D.C.: Office of Air Force History,
1983), 58, 196-197
Joe Zentner, “The Destruction of a Basque Town,” Military History (June 1987), 11-12,
78
--, Modern Warfare (New York: Arco Publishing, 1985), 194-199, 200-205
Major Quick, “Halifax.”
(3). Weapons Effects – Jan 16
“II. The Effects of the Atomic Bombings,” in Chairman’s Office, The United States
Strategic Bombing Survey – The Effects of Atomic Bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki
(Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1946), 3-23
96th Congress, 1st Session, Economic and Social Consequences of Nuclear Attack on the
United States (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1979), 105-150
Office of Technology Assessment, “Chapter IV – Three Attack Cases,” The Effects of
Nuclear War (Detroit: Book Tower, 1984), 61-106
Robert Batcher, “Consequences of an Indo-Pakistani Nuclear War,” International Studies
Review Vol.6, No.4 (December 2004), 135-162.
(4). Weapons Design – Jan 16
Donald Goldstein, Katherine Dillon, and Michael Wenger, “America Builds the Bomb,”
in Rain of Ruin (Washington, D.C.: Brassey’s, 1995), 1-15
Therese Dennis, “A Little Physics,” Jack Dennis (ed), The Nuclear Almanac (Reading:
Addison-Wesley, 1984), 448-463
Kosta Tsipis, “The Physics of Nuclear Weapons,” in Jack Dennis (ed), The Nuclear
Almanac (Reading: Addison-Wesley, 1984), 195-204
Jack Dennis (ed), The Nuclear Almanac (Reading: Addison-Wesley, 1984), 225
Kent Wisner, “Military Aspects of Enhanced Radiation Weapons,” Survival 23, No.5
(September/October 1981), 246-251
Periodic Table
(5). Delivery Systems I – Jan 23
Frederick Lanchester, “Mathematics in Warfare,” in James Newman (ed), The World of
Mathematics (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1956), 2138-2157
James F. Dunnigan, How to Make War (New York: William Morrow, 1993), 434-456
Donald MacKenzie, “Appendix A – Estimated Accuracies of American and Soviet
Strategic Ballistic Missiles,” Inventing Accuracy (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1990), 427-435
Theodore Postol, “Targeting,” in Ashton Carter, John Steinbruner, and Charles Zraket
(eds), Managing Nuclear Operations (Washington, D.C.: Brookings, 1987), 374-379
Bill Gunston, Rockets and Missiles (UK: Leisure, 1979), 10-17
--, Modern Warfare (New York: Arco Publishing, 1985), 178-182
(6). Delivery Systems II – Jan 23
O.G. Haywood, Jr., “Military Decision and Game Theory,” Journal of Operations
Research Society of America 2, no.4 (November 1954).
Pavel Podvig (ed), Russian Strategic Nuclear Forces (Cambridge: MIT Press, 2001),
124, 241, 343
Stephen Schwartz (ed), Atomic Audit (Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press,
1998), 149-150
Curtis LeMay and MacKinlay Kantor, Mission With LeMay (New York: Doubleday,
1965), 532-533
(7). Biological Impact of Nuclear Weapons and Civil Defense – Jan 30
Critical Question: How incapacitating is radiation to life and the conduct of warfare?
Herman Kahn, On Thermonuclear War (New York: Free Press, 1960), 57-74
Fred Ikle, Long-Term Worldwide Effects of Multiple Nuclear-Weapons Detonations
(Washington, D.C.: National Academy of Sciences, 1975), 14-15
--, 11 Steps to Survival (Ottawa: Planning, 1969), 1-52
Curtis Harvey, “Civil Defense Abroad in Review,” in Eugene Wigner (ed), Survival and
the Bomb (London: Indiana University Press, 1969), 148-177
Horace Kephart, Camping and Woodcraft (New York: MacMillan, 1947), 280-281, 309310, 375.
Nuclear Calculations (#1) Assignment Due
(8). Environmental Consequences of Nuclear Weapons – Jan 30.
Critical Question: Is consideration of the ecological effects of nuclear war worthwhile?
Fred Ikle, Long-Term Worldwide Effects of Multiple Nuclear-Weapons Detonations
(Washington, D.C.: National Academy of Sciences, 1975), 5-11, 90-96
Paul Ehrlich, et al., “Long-Term Biological Consequences of Nuclear War,” Science 222,
No.4630 (December 1983), 1293-1300
Starley Thompson and Stephen Schneider, “Nuclear Winter Reappraised,” Orbis 64,
No.5 (Summer 1986), 981-1005
(9). Rebuilding After a Nuclear War – Feb 6
Critical Question: Is planning for post-nuclear war reconstruction worthwhile?
Feasible?
Herman Kahn, On Thermonuclear War (New York: Free Press, 1960), 74-95
Ted Gup, “The Doosmday Blueprints,” Time Magazine Vol.140, No.6 (August 10, 1992),
26-30, 39-41
Arthur Katz and Sima Osdoby, The Social and Economic Effects of Nuclear War
(Washington, D.C.: Cato Institute, 1982), 13-20
Jack Hirshleifer, “Economic Recovery,” in Eugene Wigner (ed), Survival and the Bomb
(London: Indiana University Press, 1969), 241-260
M. Anjali Sastry, Joseph Romm, and Kosta Tsipis, “Appendix B: Excerpts from ‘Nuclear
Crash – The U.S. Economy after a Small Nuclear Attack,” 159-168
Civil Defense (#2) Assignment Due
(10). Nuclear Weapons’ Programs – Feb 6
Critical Questions: What are the key elements of designing a successful nuclear
weapon’s program?
Stephen Schwartz (ed), Atomic Audit (Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press,
1998), 35-41, 86-91
F. Gosling, The Manhattan Project (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Energy,
1999), 1-43, 58
Pavel Podvig (ed), Russian Strategic Nuclear Forces (Cambridge: MIT Press, 2001), 81
“Nuclear Materials Production Technologies and Processes,” in Thomas Cochran,
William Arkin, Robert Norris, and Milton Hoenig (eds), Nuclear Weapons Databook –
Vol.II U.S. Nuclear Warhead Production (Cambridge: Ballinger, 1987), 122-143
Gilbert King, Dirty Bomb (New York: Chamberlain, 2004), 145-161
http://www.cns-snc.ca/nuclear_info/canadareactormap.gif
Allan Krass, Peter Boskma, Boelie Elzen, and Wim Smit, Uranium Enrichment and
Nuclear Weapon Proliferation (New York: Taylor & Francis, 1983), 19, 31, 132, 188189, 228-229, 237
“Appendix H – World Enrichment Plants,” World Nuclear Industry Handbook 2006,
730-733.
Nuclear Weapons Program Methods
Major Quick, “Criticality Accident – 21 August 1945.”
Major Quick, “Japanese Atomic Bomb – 12 August 1945.”
Major Quick, “Britain’s First Nuclear Weapon – 3 October 1952.”
Major Quick, “Atomic Test – Apple II.”
Major Quick, “India’s First Nuclear Test.”
Major Quick, “Dr. Louis Slotin.”
Major Quick, “AECL Chalk River Accident.”
Major Quick, “Pakistan & The Islamic Bomb.”
Major Quick, “Nuclear Accidents - April.”
Major Quick, “Nuclear Accidents - May.”
Major Quick, “Nuclear Accidents - June.”
Major Quick, “Nuclear Accidents - July.”
Major Quick, “Nuclear Accidents - August.”
Major Quick, “Nuclear Accidents - September.”
Major Quick, “Nuclear Accidents - October.”
Major Quick, “Nuclear Accidents - November.”
Major Quick, “Nuclear Accidents - December.”
Major Quick, “Nuclear Accidents - January.”
Major Quick, “Nuclear Accidents - February.”
Major Quick, “Nuclear Accidents - March.”
Major Quick, “Nuclear Accidents - Chernobyl.”
Major Quick, “First USSR Nuclear Weapon.”
Major Quick, “Goiania Brazil.”
Major Quick, “Chalk River meltdown – 1952.”
Major Quick, “First French A-Bomb.”
Major Quick, “Vemork, Norway.”
Major Quick, “Castle Bravo Nuclear Test.”
Major Quick, “Manzano New Mexico.”
Major Quick, “Atomic Test – APPLE II.”
Major Quick, “Leipzig L-IV Atomic Pile Explosion”
Major Quick, “Japanese Atomic Bomb”
Major Quick, “First USSR Nuclear Weapon”
Major Quick, “Radiological Incident - Goiânia, Brazil.”
Major Quick, “North Korean Nuclear Test 9 October 2006.”
Major Quick, “China's Nuclear Testing 16 October 1964.”
Major Quick, “Dark day on a squash court? 2 December 1942.”
Major Quick, “Operation GUNNERSIDE Vemork, Norway - 20 February 1944.”
Major Quick, “India’s First Nuclear Test 18 May 1974.”
Major Quick, “AECL Chalk River Accident 24 May 1958.”
Major Quick, “The Islamic Bomb 28 May 1998.”
Major Quick, “North Korean Nuclear Test 9 October 2006.”
Major Quick, “South African Nuclear Facility Raid 08 November 2007.”
(11). Nuclear Weapons’ Budgeting – Feb 13.
Critical Question: Are nuclear weapons cost-effective ways of providing security?
Robert Norris, Andrew Burrows, and Richard Fieldhouse, Nuclear Weapons Databook –
Vol. V (Boulder: Westview Press, 1994), 324-353
Frank Barnaby, The Invisible Bomb (London: I.B. Tauris, 1989), 24-41
Seymour Hersh, The Samson Option (New York: Random House, 1991), 33-46
Avner Cohen, Israel and the Bomb (New York: Columbia University Press, 1998), 219242
Shimon Peres, Battling for Peace (New York: Random House, 1995), 115-124
Joseph Cirincione, Deadly Arsenals (Washington, D.C.: Carnegie Endowment for
International Peace, 2002), 38-42, 221-236
Stephen Schwartz (ed), Atomic Audit (Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press,
1998), 0-32
Mid-Term Due
(12). Nuclear Weapons’ Proliferation – Feb 13.
Critical Question: What drives proliferation, and what kind of world does it create?
Joseph Cirincione, Deadly Arsenals (Washington, D.C.: Carnegie Endowment for
International Peace, 2002), 25-34
IISS, The Military Balance (London: Oxford University Press, 2001), 19-20, 53, 75-76,
112, 135, 188
Michael Kidron and Dan Smith, The New State of War and Peace (New York:
Touchstone, 1991), 60-61
Allan Krass, Peter Boskma, Boelie Elzen, and Wim Smit, Uranium Enrichment and
Nuclear Weapon Proliferation (New York: Taylor & Francis, 1983), 46
Major Quick, “Agreement to Acquire Nuclear Weapons for the Canadian Military – 16
August.”
Major Quick, “Unterseeboat 234.”
Major Quick, “Raid on Osiraq Reactor.”
Major Quick, “IAEA.”
Major Quick, “Libya Renounces WMD.”
Major Quick, “Vemork, Norway – Feb 1943.”
http://www.cheatersrisk.com/
(13). The Evolution of Nuclear Deterrence Doctrine I – Feb 27.
Critical Question: Have nuclear weapons completely transformed war?
William Borden, There Will Be No Time (New York: Macmillan, 1946), 63-87
Viktor Suvorov, Inside the Soviet Army (London: Panther, 1982), 250-256
Bernard Brodie, “Implications for Military Policy,” in Bernard Brodie (ed), The Absolute
Weapon (New York: Harcourt Brace, 1946), 70-107
Nuclear Weapons Program (#3) Assignment Due
Paper Proposal Due
(14). The Evolution of Nuclear Deterrence Doctrine II – Feb 27
Critical Question: How do you win a nuclear war?
Thomas Schelling, Arms and Influence (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1966), pp.126
Colin Gray, “Nuclear Strategy: the Case for a Theory of Victory,” in Steven Miller (ed),
Strategy and Nuclear Deterrence (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1984), 23-56
“Memorandum for the Secretary McNamara – Subject – ‘Doctrine’ on Thermonuclear
Attack,” CM-190-61 (April 18 1961), 1-2.
(15). SIOP Design – Mar 5.
Peter Pringle and William Arkin, SIOP – The Secret U.S. Plan for Nuclear War (New
York: W.W. Norton, 1983), 101-125
Desmond Ball and Robert Toth, “Revising the SIOP,” International Security 14, No.4
(Spring 1990), 65-92
Stephen Schwartz (ed), Atomic Audit (Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press,
1998), 197-206
Stansfield Turner, Caging the Genies (Boulder: Westview Press, 1999), 7-9
Bruce Humphrey, “The Plan to Defeat the USSR,” Strategy and Tactics Special Edition
No.3, (May-June 1984) 9-13
Philip Saunders and Jing-dong Yuan, “Strategic Force Modernization,” in Paul Bolt and
Albert Willner (eds), China’s Nuclear Posture (London: Lynne Rienner, 2006), 79-118
Robert Norris and Hans Kristensen, “Global Nuclear Inventories, 1945-2010,” Bulletin of
the Atomic Scientists, July/August 2010 66/4, 77-83
Robert Norris and Hans Kristensen, “U.S. Nuclear Forces 2011,” Bulletin of the Atomic
Scientists, 2011 67/2, 67-76
Robert Norris and Hans Kristensen, “Russian Nuclear Forces 2011,” Bulletin of the
Atomic Scientists, 2011 67/3, 67-74
Robert Norris and Hans Kristensen, “Indian Nuclear Forces 2010,” Bulletin of the
Atomic Scientists, July/August 2010 66/5, 76-81
Robert Norris and Hans Kristensen, “Pakistan’s Nuclear Forces 2010,” Bulletin of the
Atomic Scientists, July/August 2011 67/4, 91-99
Robert Norris and Hans Kristensen, “Nuclear Notebook: Worldwide Deployments of
Nuclear Weapons, 2009,” Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, November/December 2009
65/6, 86-98
Robert Norris and Hans Kristensen, “Chinese Nuclear Forces 2010,” Bulletin of the
Atomic Scientists, 2010 66/6, 134-142
Robert Norris and Hans Kristensen, “French Nuclear Forces 2008,” Bulletin of the
Atomic Scientists, 2008 64/4, 52-54
Robert Norris and Hans Kristensen, “British Nuclear Forces 2005,” Bulletin of the
Atomic Scientists, 2005 61/6, 77-79
Robert Norris and Hans Kristensen, “Israeli Nuclear Forces 2002,” Bulletin of the
Atomic Scientists, 2002 58/5, 73-75
(16). Tactical Nuclear Warfare on Land – March 5.
Critical Question: How useful are tactical nuclear weapons on land?
James F. Dunnigan, How to Make War (New York: William Morrow, 1993), 407-433
David Miller, Battlefield (London: Brian Todd, 1990), 134-139
--, Modern Warfare (New York: Arco Publishing, 1985), 188-193
Stansfield Turner, Caging the Genies (Boulder: Westview Press, 1999), 89-90
Charles Horner – Oral History.
Major Quick, “Atomic Test – APPLE II 5 May 1955.”
Barry Schneider, "Combat Effectiveness in MOPP 4."
Robert Norris and Hans Kristensen, “US Tactical Nuclear Weapons in Europe, 2011,”
Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, 2011 67/1, 66-73
(17). Tactical Nuclear Weapons at Sea – March 12.
Critical Question: How useful are tactical nuclear weapons at sea?
Barry R. Posen, “Inadvertent Nuclear War? Escalation and NATO’s Northern Flank,”
International Security 7, No.2 (Fall 1982), 85-111
Donald Daniel, “The Soviet Navy and Tactical Nuclear War at Sea,” Survival 29, No.4
(July/August 1987), 318-335
James DeGoey, Harpoon Battlebook (Rocklin: Prima, 1991), 201-202, 251-252
James Bamford, Body of Secrets – Anatomy of the Ultra-Secret National Security Agency
(New York: Anchor Books, 2002), 106.
Major Quick, “Nuclear Accident – Soviet Submarine K-19 – 4 July 1961.”
Major Quick, “HMCS St.Laurent.”
Major Quick, “Operation KAMA.”
(18). Issues in Missile Defense – March 12.
Critical Question: Is missile defense worthwhile?
Edward Reiss, “The History of Strategic Defence in the USA,” The Strategic Defense
Initiative (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992), 21-36
Michael O’Hanlon, “Alternative Architectures and U.S. Politics,” in James Wirtz and Jeff
Larsen (eds), Rockets’ Red Glare (Cambridge: Westview, 2001), 111-136
“Annex D: Consultation and Authorization for the Operational Use of Nuclear
Weapons,” in John Clearwater, U.S. Nuclear Weapons in Canada (Toronto: DunDurn,
1999), 243-253
Pavel Podvig (ed), Russian Strategic Nuclear Forces (Cambridge: MIT Press, 2001),
412-420
Major Quick, “NORAD Alert.”
Wilton Park, Missile Defence, Deterrence and Arms Control (Geneva: UNIDIR, 2002),
5-16.
Naval (#4) Assignment Due
(19). Command and Control – March 19.
Critical Question: How will nuclear war be fought?
Pavel Podvig (ed), Russian Strategic Nuclear Forces (Cambridge: MIT Press, 2001), 3366, 430-431
Stephen Schwartz (ed), Atomic Audit (Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press,
1998), 210-214, 222
Loch Johnson, Secret Agencies (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1996), Fig.7.1
Bruce Blair - Keeping Presidents in the Nuclear Dark
Major Quick, “First Official Broken Arrow - 13 February 1950.
Major Quick, “Broken Arrow – Fairfield-Suisun Air Force Base – 5 August 1950.”
Major Quick, “Broken Arrow – RAF Lakenheath – 27 July 1956.”
Major Quick, “SNAP-9A – 26 April 1964.”
Major Quick, “Broken Arrow – Titan II Missile Explosion – 19 September 1980.”
Major Quick, “Broken Arrow – Manzano, New Mexico - 11 April 1950.”
Major Quick, “The Bomb that Fell ion Canada – 10 November 1950.”
Major Quick, “Broken Arrow – RAF Lakenheath
Major Quick, “Broken Arrow – Fairfield-Suisun Air Force Base 5 August 1950
Major Quick, “Broken Arrow - Titan II Missile Explosion 19 September 1980”
Major Quick, “NORAD Alert 09 November 1979”
(20). Nuclear Disputes and the Stability-Instability Paradox – March 19.
Critical Question: Do nuclear weapons cause war or peace?
Richard Betts, “Soviet-Chinese Border Clashes, 1969,” Nuclear Blackmail and Nuclear
Balance (Washington, D.C.: Brookings, 1987), 79-81, 109-129
Curtis LeMay and MacKinlay Kantor, Mission With LeMay (New York: Doubleday,
1965), 481-482
Major Quick, “Khrushchev Proposes Cuban Missile Deployment.”
(21). Nuclear Crisis Simulation #1 – March 26.
(22). Nuclear Simulation #1: Cold War – March 26.
William Daugherty, Barbara Levi, and Frank von Hippel, “The Consequences of
‘Limited’ Nuclear Attacks on the United States,” International Security 10, No.4 (Spring
1986), 3-45
Barbara Levi, Frank von Hippel, and William Daugherty, “Civilian Casualties from
‘Limited’ Nuclear Attacks on the USSR,” International Security 12, No.3 (Winter
1987/1988), 168-189
John Hackett, The Third World War – August 1985 (Canada: Thomas Nelson & Sons,
1979), 367-390
John Hackett, The Untold Story - The Third World War (New York: Bantam Books,
1983), 388-396
(23). Nuclear Simulation #2: Multipolarity 2050 – Asia Scenario – April 2.
(24). Nuclear Crisis Simulation #2 – April 2.
Course Paper Due
(25). Nuclear Arms Control Summit – April 3.
Critical Question: Is nuclear disarmament a realistic option?
World Game Institute, “What the World Wants,” 1999.
Wind, “The International Court of Justice Ruling in a Nut Shell.”
Abolition 2000 Statement, “People Worldwide Want Nuclear Abolition,” 1995.
Major Quick, “Hague Convention of 1899.”
Major Quick, “International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).”
Nuclear Disarmament Websites
Michael Kidron and Dan Smith, The New State of War and Peace (New York:
Touchstone, 1991), 40-41
(26). Normative and Future Aspects of Nuclear Weapons – April 3.
Final Take-Home Exam Due