A theory of nuclear disarmament: Cases, analogies, and the role of the non-proliferation regime

Abstract

What might prompt a nuclear-armed state to give up its arsenal? Nuclear disarmament has provided a nominally shared goal for virtually all the world's states for decades, yet surprisingly little effort has been devoted to systematically theorizing its drivers. This article aims to begin filling this void. I proceed in three steps. First, I discuss the conceptual, material, and ideational features of renunciation to arrive at a rudimentary understanding of what, fundamentally, nuclear disarmament as a political process involves. Second, I scope out the empirical evidence on which a general theory of nuclear renunciation might be based. Third, synthesizing the dominant explanations for the cases discussed in the second part, I outline a basic account of nuclear relinquishment and discuss the compatibility of this account with common assumptions about disarmament practice. I conclude that the best evidence available suggests that adversarial politics and stigmatization are necessary conditions for renunciation. KEYWORDS Nuclear disarmament; theory; case studies; analogies; norms; adversarial politics Nuclear disarmament is one of the United Nations' oldest aspirations. The goal of abolition commands large popular support across continents (Baron et al., 2020;Egeland & Pelopidas, 2021; International Committee of the Red Cross, 2020; Kafura, 2020), and has for half a century constituted a legally binding obligation under the near universally approved Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). Yet we know relatively little about the drivers of nuclear relinquishment, and there is no consensus about how the elimination of nuclear arms might be accomplished in practice. In one scholar's estimation, "[t]he political dynamics of nuclear disarmament are under-studied and under-theorised" (Burford, 2016, p. 1). In the words of another: "There is no theory of nuclear disarmament"

Not by NPT alone: The future of the global nuclear order

“…Ritchie (2019) describes the global nuclear order as "hegemonic" and Egeland (2021) depicts it as an "ideology" in service of preserving the status quo. Several of the articles in this special issue mirror these more critical perspectives as well as Tannenwald's interest in moving more quickly on disarmament; hence, they similarly focus on the NPT as an obstacle to the goal of getting rid of nuclear weapons (Egeland, 2022;Hanson, 2022;Noda, 2022;Pretorius & Sauer, 2022).…”

TNP o TPAN

“…Es poco probable, además, que los procesos de abolición tengan éxito en ausencia de una profunda estigmatización y cuestionamiento del objeto en cuestión (Egeland, 2022). Plataformas civiles o foros internacionales adquieren un rol importante en aumentar el rechazo a la posesión de las armas nucleares y en presionar a los gobiernos.…”