No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 17 May 2022
We are grateful to Kjølv Egeland, Thomas Fraise, and Hebatalla Taha for their commentary on the four editions of The Evolution of Nuclear Strategy. In addition to their critique of the book, their review was intended to offer ‘a looking glass into the broader field of nuclear security studies’. Our reply to their review therefore touches both upon their critique, as well as the more general theme of writing about the history of nuclear strategy. Although we disagree with many of their criticisms, and in some instances believe our work was misrepresented, the reviewers have nevertheless made points that deserve serious consideration by ourselves as well as other scholars working in the field. In this reply, we not only defend our work, but also use this as an opportunity to discuss how to approach the past of nuclear strategy, which in turn can allow us to better appreciate the present and future. In the first half of our reply we discuss the reviewers’ more general criticisms of our approach. In the second half we deal with some specific criticisms.
1 Kjølv Egeland, Thomas Fraise, and Hebatalla Taha, ‘Casting the atomic canon: (R)evolving nuclear strategy’, European Journal of International Security (2021), pp. 1–18.
2 Numerous translated Iraqi records dealing with Saddam Hussein and nuclear weapons can be found at the Conflict Records Research Center: {https://conflictrecords.wordpress.com/}.
3 For a recent analysis, see William Hartung, ‘Inside the ICBM Lobby: Special Interests or the National Interest?’, Center for International Policy, Washington DC (March 2021).
4 Bruce-Briggs, B., Supergenius: The Mega-Worlds of Herman Kahn (New York, NY: North American Policy Press, 2000)Google Scholar.
5 Paul Rubinson, ‘Pugwash Literature Review’, Urban Institute (April 2019), available at: {https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/2019/06/27/pugwash_literature_review.pdf}.
6 A study is currently in preparation dealing with the influence of foundation funding on the development of the field of strategic studies. Jeffrey H. Michaels and Matthew Ford, ‘Grand Strategy or Grant Strategy: Foundations, Strategic Studies and the American Academy’ (forthcoming).
7 Bryan Bender, ‘“A big blow”: Washington's arms controllers brace for loss of their biggest backer’, Politico (19 July 2021).
8 Tannenwald, Nina, The Nuclear Taboo: The United States and the Non-Use of Nuclear Weapons Since 1945 (New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, 2008)Google Scholar.
9 See, for instance, Robock, Alan and Toon, Owen B., ‘Self-assured destruction: The climate impacts of nuclear war’, Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, 68:5 (2012), pp. 66–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Toon, Owen B., Robock, Alan, Mills, Michael, and Xia, Lili, ‘Asia treads the nuclear path, unaware that self-assured destruction would result from nuclear war’, The Journal of Asian Studies, 76:2 (2017), pp. 437–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
10 Heather A. Conley, Vladimir Orlov, Gen. Evgeny Buzhinsky, Cyrus Newlin, Sergey Semenov, and Roksana Gabidullina, ‘The Future of U.S.-Russian Arms Control: Principles of Engagement and New Approaches’, Center for Strategic and International Studies (March 2021), available at: {https://www.csis.org/analysis/future-us-russian-arms-control-principles-engagement-and-new-approaches}.
11 Jeffrey Lewis, ‘China is radically expanding its nuclear missile silos’, Foreign Policy (30 June 2021).
12 As Marx notes in The German Ideology, ‘The ideas of the ruling class are in every epoch the ruling ideas, i.e. the class which is the ruling material force of society, is at the same time its ruling intellectual force.’ See: {https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1845/german-ideology/ch01b.htm}.