Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T23:44:41.710Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Secret Success of Nonproliferation Sanctions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 September 2014

Nicholas L. Miller
Get access

Abstract

Building on the rationalist literature on sanctions, this article argues that economic and political sanctions are a successful tool of nonproliferation policy, but that selection effects have rendered this success largely hidden. Since the late 1970s—when the United States made the threat of sanctions credible through congressional legislation and began regularly employing sanctions against proliferating states—sanctions have been ineffective in halting ongoing nuclear weapons programs, but they have succeeded in deterring states from starting nuclear weapons programs in the first place and have thus contributed to a decline in the rate of nuclear pursuit. The logic of the argument is simple: rational leaders assess the risk of sanctions before initiating a nuclear weapons program, which produces a selection effect whereby states highly vulnerable to sanctions are deterred from starting nuclear weapons programs in the first place, so long as the threat is credible. Vulnerability is a function of a state's level of economic and security dependence on the United States—states with greater dependence have more to lose from US sanctions and are more likely to be sensitive to US-sponsored norms. The end result of this selection effect is that since the late 1970s, only insulated, inward-looking regimes have pursued nuclear weapons and become the target of imposed sanctions, thus rendering the observed success rate of nonproliferation sanctions low. I find support for the argument based on statistical analysis of a global sample of countries from 1950 to 2000, an original data set of US nonproliferation sanctions episodes, and qualitative analysis of the South Korean and Taiwanese nuclear weapons programs.

Type
Research Article
Information
International Organization , Volume 68 , Issue 4 , Fall 2014 , pp. 913 - 944
Copyright
Copyright © The IO Foundation 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Albright, David, and Gay, Corey. 1998. Taiwan: Nuclear Nightmare Averted. Bulletin of Atomic Scientists 54 (1):54–60.Google Scholar
Axelrod, Robert. 1986. An Evolutionary Approach to Norms. American Political Science Review 80 (4):1095–111.Google Scholar
Baldwin, David A. 1985. Economic Statecraft. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Baldwin, David A. 1999. The Sanctions Debate and the Logic of Choice. International Security 24 (3):80–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barbieri, Katherine, Keshk, Omar, and Pollins, Brian. 2009. Correlates of War Project Trade Data Set, Version 2.01. Available at <http://correlatesofwar.org>. Accessed 29 June 2012..+Accessed+29+June+2012.>Google Scholar
Barnett, Michael N., and Finnemore, Martha. 1999. The Politics, Power, and Pathologies of International Organizations. International Organization 53 (4):699–732.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bell, Mark, and Miller, Nicholas L.. Forthcoming. Questioning the Effect of Nuclear Weapons on Conflict. Journal of Conflict Resolution.Google Scholar
Berry, William D., Golder, Matt, and Milton, Daniel. 2012. Improving Tests of Theories Positing Interaction. Journal of Politics 74 (3):653–71.Google Scholar
Betts, Richard K. 1977. Paranoids, Pygmies, Pariahs, and Nonproliferation. Foreign Policy 26:157–83.Google Scholar
Bleek, Philipp C. 2010a. Why Do States Proliferate? Quantitative Analysis of the Exploration, Pursuit, and Acquisition of Nuclear Weapons. In Forecasting Nuclear Proliferation in the Twenty first Century: The Role of Theory, edited by Potter, William and Mukhatzhanova, Gaukhar, 159–92. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Bleek, Philipp C. 2010b. Does Proliferation Beget Proliferation? Why Nuclear Dominoes Rarely Fall . PhD diss. Georgetown University, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Bowen, Wyn Q. 2006. Libya and Nuclear Proliferation: Stepping Back from the Brink. New York: Routledge for the International Institute for Strategic Studies.Google Scholar
Brands, Hal, and Palkki, David. 2011. Saddam, Israel, and the Bomb: Nuclear Alarmism Justified? International Security 36 (1):133–66.Google Scholar
Braumoeller, Bear F. 2004. Hypothesis Testing and Multiplicative Interaction Terms. International Organization 58 (4):807–20.Google Scholar
Braun, Chaim, and Chyba, Christopher F.. 2004. Proliferation Rings. International Security 29 (2):5–49.Google Scholar
Bueno de Mesquita, Bruce, and Smith, Alastair. 2007. Foreign Aid and Policy Concessions. Journal of Conflict Resolution 51 (2):251–84.Google Scholar
Burr, William. 2007. The Taiwanese Nuclear Case: Lesson for Today. Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Available at <http://www.carnegieendowment.org/2007/08/09/taiwanese-nuclear-case-lessons-for-today/6cq>. Accessed 29 June 2012.Google Scholar
Campbell, Kurt M., and Einhorn, Robert J.. 2004. Avoiding the Tipping Point: Concluding Observations. In The Nuclear Tipping Point, edited by Campbell, Kurt M., Einhorn, Robert J., and Reiss, Mitchell, 317–48. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.Google Scholar
Carter, David B., and Signorino, Curtis S.. 2010. Back to the Future: Modeling Time Dependence in Binary Data. Political Analysis 18 (3):271–92.Google Scholar
Danilovic, Vesna. 2001. The Sources of Threat Credibility in Extended Deterrence. Journal of Conflict Resolution 45 (3):341–69.Google Scholar
Drezner, Daniel W. 1998. Conflict Expectations and the Paradox of Economic Coercion. International Studies Quarterly 42 (4):709–31.Google Scholar
Drezner, Daniel W. 1999. The Sanctions Paradox: Economic Statecraft and International Relations. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Drezner, Daniel W. 2003. The Hidden Hand of Economic Coercion. International Organization 57 (3):643–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, Jason D. 2003. The Best Defense: Counterproliferation and US National Security. Washington Quarterly 26 (2):115–33.Google Scholar
Englehardt, Michael J. 1996. Rewarding Nonproliferation: The South and North Korean Cases. Nonproliferation Review 3 (3):31–7.Google Scholar
Esfandiary, Dina, and Fitzpatrick, Mark. 2011. Sanctions on Iran: Defining and Enabling “Success.” Survival 53 (5):143–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fearon, James. 1994. Domestic Political Audiences and the Escalation of International Disputes. American Political Science Review 88 (3):577–92.Google Scholar
Fearon, James. 1997. Signaling Foreign Policy Interests: Tying Hands Versus Sinking Costs. Journal of Conflict Resolution 41 (1):68–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fearon, James. 2002. Selection Effects and Deterrence. International Interactions 28 (5):5–29 Google Scholar
Fehr, Ernst, and Fischbacher, Urs. 2004. Third-Party Punishment and Social Norms. Evolution and Human Behavior 25:63–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finnemore, Martha. 1996. National Interests in International Society. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Finnemore, Martha, and Sikkink, Kathryn. 1998. International Norm Dynamics and Political Change. International Organization 52 (4):887–917.Google Scholar
Frankel, Benjamin. 1993. The Brooding Shadow: Systemic Incentives and Nuclear Weapons Proliferation. Security Studies 2 (3–4):37–78.Google Scholar
Fuhrmann, Matthew. 2009. Spreading Temptation: Proliferation and Peaceful Nuclear Cooperation Agreements. International Security 34 (1):7–41.Google Scholar
Galtung, Johan. 1967. On the Effects of International Economic Sanctions: With Examples from the Case of Rhodesia. World Politics 19 (3):378–416.Google Scholar
Gartzke, Erik, and Jo, Dong-Joon. 2009. Bargaining, Nuclear Proliferation, and Interstate Disputes. Journal of Conflict Resolution 53 (2):209–33.Google Scholar
Gavin, Francis J. 2004. Blasts from the Past: Proliferation Lessons from the 1960s. International Security 29 (3):100–35.Google Scholar
Gavin, Francis J. 2009. Same As It Ever Was: Nuclear Alarmism, Proliferation, and the Cold War. International Security 34 (3):7–37.Google Scholar
George, Alexander L., Hall, David K., and Simons, William E.. 1971. The Limits of Coercive Diplomacy. Boston: Little, Brown, and Co.Google Scholar
George, Alexander L., and Smoke, Richard. 1974. Deterrence in American Foreign Policy: Theory and Practice. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Gleditsch, Kristian Skrede. 2002. Expanded Trade and GDP Data. Journal of Conflict Resolution 46 (5):712–24.Google Scholar
Goertz, Gary, and Diehl, Paul F.. 1992. Toward a Theory of International Norms: Some Conceptual and Measurement Issues. Journal of Conflict Resolution 36 (4):634–64.Google Scholar
Hayes, Peter and Moon, Chung-In. 2011. Park Chung Hee, the CIA, and the Bomb. Global Asia 6 (3). Available at <http://nautilus.org/napsnet/napsnet-special-reports/park-chung-hee-the-cia-and-the-bomb/#axzz382s1wHAM>. Accessed 29 June 2012.Google Scholar
Heckathorn, Douglas D. 1988. Collective Sanctions and the Creation of Prisoner's Dilemma Norms. American Journal of Sociology 94 (3):535–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hersman, Rebecca K.C., and Peters, Robert. 2006. Nuclear U-Turns: Learning from South Korea and Taiwanese Rollback. Nonproliferation Review 13 (3):539–53.Google Scholar
Hovi, Jon, Huseby, Robert, and Sprinz, Detlef F.. 2005. When Do (Imposed) Economic Sanctions Work? World Politics 57 (4):479–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hufbauer, Gary Clyde, Schott, Jeffrey J., and Elliott, Kimberly Ann. 1990. Economic Sanctions Reconsidered: History and Current Policy. Washington, DC: Peterson Institute for International Economics.Google Scholar
Hufbauer, Gary Clyde, Schott, Jeffrey J., Elliott, Kimberly Ann, and Oegg, Barbara. 2008. Economic Sanctions Reconsidered. 3rd ed. Washington, DC: Peterson Institute for International Economics.Google Scholar
Hymans, Jacques E.C. 2006. The Psychology of Nuclear Proliferation: Identity, Emotions, and Foreign Policy. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hymans, Jacques E.C. 2010. When Does a State Become a “Nuclear Weapons State”? An Exercise in Measurement Validation. In Forecasting Nuclear Proliferation in the Twenty-first Century: The Role of Theory, edited by Potter, William C. and Mukhatzhanova, Gaukhar, 102–23. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Hymans, Jacques E.C. 2011. Proliferation Implications of Civil Nuclear Cooperation: Theory and a Case Study of Tito's Yugoslavia. Security Studies 20 (1):73–104.Google Scholar
Jentleson, Bruce, and Whytock, Christopher, 2005. Who “Won” Libya? The Force-Diplomacy Debate and Its Implications for Theory and Policy. International Security 30 (3):47–86.Google Scholar
Jo, Dong-Joon, and Gartzke, Erik. 2007. Determinants of Nuclear Weapons Proliferation. Journal of Conflict Resolution 51 (1):167–94.Google Scholar
Kaempfer, William H., and Lowenberg, Anton D.. 1988. The Theory of International Economic Sanctions: A Public Choice Approach. American Economic Review 78 (4):786–93.Google Scholar
Kane, Tim. 2006. Global US Troop Deployment, 1950–2005. Washington, DC: Heritage Foundation. Available at <http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2006/05/global-us-troop-deployment-1950-2005>. Accessed 29 June 2012..+Accessed+29+June+2012.>Google Scholar
King, Gary, Keohane, Robert, and Verba, Sidney. 1994. Designing Social Inquiry: Scientific Inference in Qualitative Research. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
King, Gary, Tomz, Michael, and Wittenberg, Jason. 2000. Making the Most of Statistical Analyses: Improving Interpretation and Presentation. American Journal of Political Science 44 (2):341–55.Google Scholar
King, Gary, and Zeng, Langche. 2007. When Can History Be Our Guide? The Pitfalls of Counterfactual Inference. International Studies Quarterly 51 (1):183–210.Google Scholar
Kreps, Sarah, and Fuhrmann, Matthew. 2011. Attacking the Atom: Does Bombing Nuclear Facilities Affect Proliferation? Journal of Strategic Studies 34 (2):161–87.Google Scholar
Kroenig, Matthew. 2009. Exporting the Bomb: Why States Provide Sensitive Nuclear Assistance. American Political Science Review 103 (1):113–33.Google Scholar
Lacy, Dean, and Niou, Emerson M.S.. 2004. Economic Sanctions and Issue Linkage: The Role of Preferences, Information, and Threats. Journal of Politics 66 (1):25–42.Google Scholar
Lektzian, David J., and Sprecher, Christopher M.. 2007. Sanctions, Signals, and Militarized Conflict. American Journal of Political Science 51 (2):415–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lellouche, Pierre. 1979. International Nuclear Politics. Foreign Affairs 58 (2):336–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levite, Ariel E. 2002. Never Say Never Again: Nuclear Reversal Revisited. International Security 27 (3):59–88.Google Scholar
Lindsay, James M. 1986. Trade Sanctions as Policy Instruments: A Re-examination. International Studies Quarterly 30 (2):153–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maloney, Suzanne. 2010. Sanctioning Iran: If Only It Were So Simple. Washington Quarterly 33 (1):131–47.Google Scholar
Martinez, J. Michael. 2002. The Carter Administration and the Evolution of American Nuclear Nonproliferation Policy, 1977–1981. Journal of Policy History 14 (3):261–92.Google Scholar
Meyer, Stephen M. 1984. The Dynamics of Nuclear Proliferation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Miller, Nicholas L. 2014. Nuclear Dominoes: A Self-Defeating Prophecy? Security Studies 23 (1):33–73.Google Scholar
Mitchell, Derek. 2004. Taiwan's Hsin Chu Project: Deterrence, Abandonment, and Honor. In The Nuclear Tipping Point, edited by Campbell, Kurt M., Einhorn, Robert J., and Reiss, Mitchell, 293–316. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.Google Scholar
Montgomery, Alexander. 2005. Ringing in Proliferation: How to Dismantle an Atomic Bomb Network. International Security 30 (2):153–187.Google Scholar
Morgan, T. Clifton, and Schwebach, Valerie L.. 1997. Fools Suffer Gladly: The Use of Economic Sanctions in International Crises. International Studies Quarterly 41 (1):27–50.Google Scholar
Morgan, T. Clifton, Krustev, Valentin, and Bapat, Navin A.. 2009. Threat and Implementation of Sanctions (TIES) Codebook, Version 3.5. Available at <http://www.unc.edu/~bapat/TIES.htm>. Accessed 24 November 2012..+Accessed+24+November+2012.>Google Scholar
Mueller, John. 2010. Atomic Obsession: Nuclear Alarmism from Hiroshima to al-Qaeda. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Müller, Harald, and Schmidt, Andreas. 2010. The Little Known Story of De-Proliferation: Why States Give up Nuclear Weapons Activities. In Forecasting Nuclear Proliferation in the Twenty-first Century: The Role of Theory, edited by Potter, William C. and Mukhatzhanova, Gaukhar, 124–58. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nadelmann, Ethan A. 1990. Global Prohibition Regimes: The Evolution of Norms in International Society. International Organization 44 (4):479–526.Google Scholar
Narang, Vipin. 2013. What Does It Take to Deter? Regional Power Nuclear Postures and International Conflict. Journal of Conflict Resolution 57 (3):478–508.Google Scholar
Niksch, Larry. 2006. North Korea's Nuclear Weapons Program. Congressional Research Service. Available at <http://fpc.state.gov/documents/organization/74904.pdf>. Accessed 29 June 2012.. Accessed 29 June 2012.' href=https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Niksch,+Larry.+2006.+North+Korea's+Nuclear+Weapons+Program.+Congressional+Research+Service.+Available+at+.+Accessed+29+June+2012.>Google Scholar
Nye, Joseph S. 1978. Nonproliferation: A Long-Term Strategy. Foreign Affairs 56 (3):601–23.Google Scholar
Nye, Joseph S. 1981. Maintaining a Nonproliferation Regime. International Organization 35 (1):15–38.Google Scholar
Pape, Robert. 1997. Why Economic Sanctions Do Not Work. International Security 22 (2):90–136.Google Scholar
Paul, T.V. 2000. Power Versus Prudence: Why Nations Forgo Nuclear Weapons. Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press.Google Scholar
Perkovich, George. 1999. India's Nuclear Bomb: The Impact on Global Proliferation. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Peterson, Timothy M. 2013. Sending a Message: The Reputation Effect of US Sanction Threat Behavior. International Studies Quarterly 57 (4): 675–82.Google Scholar
Pollack, Jonathan, and Reiss, Mitchell. 2004. South Korea: The Tyranny of Geography and the Vexations of History. In The Nuclear Tipping Point, edited by Campbell, Kurt M., Einhorn, Robert J., and Reiss, Mitchell, 254–92. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.Google Scholar
Powell, Robert. 1990. Nuclear Deterrence Theory: The Search for Credibility. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Press, Daryl. 2005. Calculating Credibility: How Leaders Evaluate Military Threats. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Reardon, Robert J. 2010. Nuclear Bargaining: Using Carrots and Sticks in Nuclear Counter-Proliferation. PhD diss. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Reiss, Mitchell. 1988. Without the Bomb: The Politics of Nuclear Nonproliferation. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Reiss, Mitchell. 1995. Bridled Ambition: Why Countries Constrain Their Nuclear Capabilities. Washington, DC: Woodrow Wilson Center Press.Google Scholar
Richelson, Jeffrey. 2007. Spying on the Bomb: American Nuclear Intelligence from Nazi Germany to Iran and North Korea. New York: Norton.Google Scholar
Sagan, Scott D. 1996. Why Do States Build Nuclear Weapons? Three Models in Search of a Bomb. International Security 21 (3):54–86.Google Scholar
Sagan, Scott D. 2011. The Causes of Nuclear Weapons Proliferation. Annual Review of Political Science 14:225–44.Google Scholar
Schelling, Thomas. 1966. Arms and Influence. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Siler, Michael J. 1998. US Nuclear Nonproliferation Policy in the Northeast Asian Region During the Cold War: The Case of South Korea. East Asia: An International Quarterly 41 (1):41–86.Google Scholar
Singh, Sonali, and Way, Christopher. 2004. The Correlates of Nuclear Proliferation: A Quantitative Test. Journal of Conflict Resolution 48:859–85.Google Scholar
Slantchev, Branislav L. 2011. Military Threats: The Costs of Coercion and the Price of Peace. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Solingen, Etel. 2007. Nuclear Logics: Contrasting Paths in East Asia and the Middle East. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Solingen, Etel, ed. 2012a. Sanctions, Statecraft, and Nuclear Proliferation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Solingen, Etel. 2012b. Introduction: The Domestic Distributional Effects of Sanctions and Positive Inducements. In Sanctions, Statecraft, and Nuclear Proliferation, edited by Solingen, Etel, 3–28. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
St. John, Ronald B. 2004. “Libya Is Not Iraq”: Preemptive Strikes, WMD, and Diplomacy. Middle East Journal 58 (3):386–402.Google Scholar
Strulak, Tadeusz. 1993. The Nuclear Suppliers Group. Nonproliferation Review 1 (1):2–10.Google Scholar
Tannenwald, Nina. 2005. Stigmatizing the Bomb: Origins of the Nuclear Taboo. International Security 29 (4):5–49.Google Scholar
Thayer, Bradley A. 1995. The Causes of Nuclear Proliferation and the Utility of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Regime. Security Studies 4 (3):463–519.Google Scholar
Thyagaraj, Manohar, and Thomas, Raju. 2006. The US-Indian Nuclear Agreement: Balancing Energy Needs and Nonproliferation Goals. Orbis 50 (2):355–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
US Central Intelligence Agency. 1972. Special National Intelligence Estimate 43-1-72, “Taipei's Capabilities and Intentions Regarding Nuclear Weapons Development,” 16 November 1972, Secret. In The National Security Archive. Electronic Briefing Book 221, The US and Taiwan's Nuclear Program, 1976–1980, edited by William Burr. Available at <http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/nukevault/ebb221/index.htm>. Accessed 29 June 2012.. Accessed 29 June 2012.' href=https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=US+Central+Intelligence+Agency.+1972.+Special+National+Intelligence+Estimate+43-1-72,+“Taipei's+Capabilities+and+Intentions+Regarding+Nuclear+Weapons+Development,”+16+November+1972,+Secret.+In+The+National+Security+Archive.+Electronic+Briefing+Book+221,+The+US+and+Taiwan's+Nuclear+Program,+1976–1980,+edited+by+William+Burr.+Available+at+.+Accessed+29+June+2012.>Google Scholar
US Central Intelligence Agency. 1978. South Korea: Nuclear Developments and Strategic Decisionmaking. Available at <http://nautilus.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/CIA_ROK_Nuclear_DecisionMaking.pdf>. Accessed 29 June 2012..+Accessed+29+June+2012.>Google Scholar
US Department of State. 1965. Report by the Committee on Nuclear Proliferation. In Foreign Relations of the US, 1964–1968. Vol. 11, Arms Control and Disarmament, edited by Evans Gerakas, David Patterson, and Carolyn Yee. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office. Available at <http://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1964-68v11/d64>. Accessed 29 June 2012..+Accessed+29+June+2012.>Google Scholar
US Department of State. 1973a. Roger Sullivan to Assistant Secretary of State for Far East and Pacific Affairs Arthur W. Hummel, Jr., “Nuclear Study Group Visit to Taiwan,” 29 October 1973, Secret. In The National Security Archive. Electronic Briefing Book 221, The US and Taiwan's Nuclear Program, 1976–1980, edited by William Burr. Available at <http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/nukevault/ebb221/index.htm>. Accessed 29 June 2012.. Accessed 29 June 2012.' href=https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=US+Department+of+State.+1973a.+Roger+Sullivan+to+Assistant+Secretary+of+State+for+Far+East+and+Pacific+Affairs+Arthur+W.+Hummel,+Jr.,+“Nuclear+Study+Group+Visit+to+Taiwan,”+29+October+1973,+Secret.+In+The+National+Security+Archive.+Electronic+Briefing+Book+221,+The+US+and+Taiwan's+Nuclear+Program,+1976–1980,+edited+by+William+Burr.+Available+at+.+Accessed+29+June+2012.>Google Scholar
US Department of State. 1973b. US Embassy Taiwan Cable 7051 to State Department, “Fonmin Reaffirms ROC Decision to Refrain From Acquiring Nuclear Reprocessing Plant,” 23 November 1973. In The National Security Archive. Electronic Briefing Book 221, The US and Taiwan's Nuclear Program, 1976–1980, edited by William Burr. Available at <http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/nukevault/ebb221/index.htm>. Accessed 29 June 2012.. Accessed 29 June 2012.' href=https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=US+Department+of+State.+1973b.+US+Embassy+Taiwan+Cable+7051+to+State+Department,+“Fonmin+Reaffirms+ROC+Decision+to+Refrain+From+Acquiring+Nuclear+Reprocessing+Plant,”+23+November+1973.+In+The+National+Security+Archive.+Electronic+Briefing+Book+221,+The+US+and+Taiwan's+Nuclear+Program,+1976–1980,+edited+by+William+Burr.+Available+at+.+Accessed+29+June+2012.>Google Scholar
US Department of State. 1976a. State Department Cable 91733 to Embassy Taiwan, “ROC's Nuclear Intentions,” 4 September 1976, Secret Exdis. In The National Security Archive. Electronic Briefing Book 221, The US and Taiwan's Nuclear Program, 1976–1980, edited by William Burr. Available at <http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/nukevault/ebb221/index.htm>. Accessed 29 June 2012.. Accessed 29 June 2012.' href=https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=US+Department+of+State.+1976a.+State+Department+Cable+91733+to+Embassy+Taiwan,+“ROC's+Nuclear+Intentions,”+4+September+1976,+Secret+Exdis.+In+The+National+Security+Archive.+Electronic+Briefing+Book+221,+The+US+and+Taiwan's+Nuclear+Program,+1976–1980,+edited+by+William+Burr.+Available+at+.+Accessed+29+June+2012.>Google Scholar
US Department of State. 1976b. US Embassy Taiwan Cable 8654 to State Department, “US Nuclear Team Visit,” 30 December 1976, Secret Exdis. In The National Security Archive. Electronic Briefing Book 221, The US and Taiwan's Nuclear Program, 1976–1980, edited by William Burr. Available at <http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/nukevault/ebb221/index.htm>. Accessed 29 June 2012.. Accessed 29 June 2012.' href=https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=US+Department+of+State.+1976b.+US+Embassy+Taiwan+Cable+8654+to+State+Department,+“US+Nuclear+Team+Visit,”+30+December+1976,+Secret+Exdis.+In+The+National+Security+Archive.+Electronic+Briefing+Book+221,+The+US+and+Taiwan's+Nuclear+Program,+1976–1980,+edited+by+William+Burr.+Available+at+.+Accessed+29+June+2012.>Google Scholar
US Department of State. 1976c. Memorandum of Conversation, New York, October 6, 1976, 10:30–11:28 am. In Foreign Relations of the US., 1969–1976. Vol. E-8, Documents on South Asia, edited by Paul Hibbeln and Peter Kraemer. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office. Available at <http://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1969-76ve08/d236>. Accessed 29 June 2012..+Accessed+29+June+2012.>Google Scholar
US Department of State. 1976d. US Embassy Cable 6272 to State Department, “ROC's Nuclear Intentions: Conversation with Premier Chiang Ching-kuo,” 15 September 1976, Secret Nodis. In The National Security Archive. Electronic Briefing Book 221, The US and Taiwan's Nuclear Program, 1976–1980, edited by William Burr. Available at <http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/nukevault/ebb221/index.htm>. Accessed 29 June 2012.. Accessed 29 June 2012.' href=https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=US+Department+of+State.+1976d.+US+Embassy+Cable+6272+to+State+Department,+“ROC's+Nuclear+Intentions:+Conversation+with+Premier+Chiang+Ching-kuo,”+15+September+1976,+Secret+Nodis.+In+The+National+Security+Archive.+Electronic+Briefing+Book+221,+The+US+and+Taiwan's+Nuclear+Program,+1976–1980,+edited+by+William+Burr.+Available+at+.+Accessed+29+June+2012.>Google Scholar
US Department of State. 1977a. US Embassy Taiwan Cable 332, “US Nuclear Team Visit to ROC—Calls,” 19 January 1977, Confidential. In The National Security Archive. Electronic Briefing Book 221, The US and Taiwan's Nuclear Program, 1976–1980, edited by William Burr. Available at <http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/nukevault/ebb221/index.htm>. Accessed 29 June 2012.. Accessed 29 June 2012.' href=https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=US+Department+of+State.+1977a.+US+Embassy+Taiwan+Cable+332,+“US+Nuclear+Team+Visit+to+ROC—Calls,”+19+January+1977,+Confidential.+In+The+National+Security+Archive.+Electronic+Briefing+Book+221,+The+US+and+Taiwan's+Nuclear+Program,+1976–1980,+edited+by+William+Burr.+Available+at+.+Accessed+29+June+2012.>Google Scholar
US Department of State. 1977b. State Department Cable 67316 to Embassy Taiwan, “Nuclear Representation to the ROC,” 26 March 1977, Secret Nodis. In The National Security Archive. Electronic Briefing Book 221, The US and Taiwan's Nuclear Program, 1976–1980, edited by William Burr. Available at. <http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/nukevault/ebb221/index.htm> Accessed 29 June 2012. Accessed 29 June 2012.' href=https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=US+Department+of+State.+1977b.+State+Department+Cable+67316+to+Embassy+Taiwan,+“Nuclear+Representation+to+the+ROC,”+26+March+1977,+Secret+Nodis.+In+The+National+Security+Archive.+Electronic+Briefing+Book+221,+The+US+and+Taiwan's+Nuclear+Program,+1976–1980,+edited+by+William+Burr.+Available+at.++Accessed+29+June+2012.>Google Scholar
US Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 2011. Nuclear Regulatory Legislation. NUREG-0980, Vol. 3, No. 9. Available at <http://pbadupws.nrc.gov/docs/ML1108/ML110880746.pdf>. Accessed 29 June 2012..+Accessed+29+June+2012.>Google Scholar
Van Evera, Stephen. 1997. Guide to Methods for Students of Political Science. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Way, Christopher. 2011. Nuclear Proliferation Dates. Available at <http://falcon.arts.cornell.edu/crw12/>. Accessed 2 July 2012..+Accessed+2+July+2012.>Google Scholar
Way, Christopher. 2012. Nuclear Proliferation Dates. Available at <http://falcon.arts.cornell.edu/crw12/workinprogress.htm>. Accessed 8 November 2013..+Accessed+8+November+2013.>Google Scholar
Whang, Taehee. 2011. Playing to the Home Crowd? Symbolic Use of Economic Sanctions in the US. International Studies Quarterly 55 (3):787–801.Google Scholar
Yager, Joseph. 1985. South Korea. In Non-Proliferation: The Why and the Wherefore, edited by Goldblat, Jozef, 197–206. London: Taylor and Francis.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Miller Supplementary Material

Appendix

Download Miller Supplementary Material(File)
File 168.1 KB