Course Description and Goals
Full course for one semester. This course investigates the origins and effects of the spread of nuclear weapons and power at
international and domestic levels. It begins with a discussion of the morality of nuclear technology, the motives different states have
for obtaining them, and the problems with intelligence on states’ progress. It continues with asking what nuclear strategies have been
and should be used, then moves to sociological critiques of conventional understandings of nuclear weapons as well as debates over
the safety of such weapons. The latter half of the class concentrates on case studies of a variety of programs, including proliferation
networks and terrorism. Conference.
Requirements
Class Participation
Students are required to actively participate in the class; they will have the opportunity to do so both during and outside of classroom
hours. Beginning the third week of class, each student will be assigned to three days during the semester in which they will author a
short reaction memo (300-400 words) expressing an opinion about that day’s readings. These are NOT summaries;
rather, they should attempt to agree or disagree with or compare and contrast the readings. Both should be posted in
the forums on the course website by 8 PM the day before the readings are to be discussed. Students are required to
read the memos and be prepared to respond to them the next day in class. Students are encouraged to respond to the
postings online as part of their participation. If you miss a day of class for any reason whatsoever, you may make it up
by posting a summary of each of the readings to Moodle. In order to make up missed days from the first half of the
semester, these must be posted before the first day of classes after the break; from the second half, by the end of reading
period.
Readings
Readings for the course are drawn from four books and E-Readings, which can be downloaded directly from the links on the syllabus.
Students may also download every E-Reading in the syllabus from the Moodle link using Endnote, which is provided by CIS through
a site-license at Reed. Students are expected to bring a copy of the readings to class every day for reference. Readings marked
“Further” on the syllabus are other relevant articles or books; they are not required for class. Students who have a
particular interest in the topics in question are encouraged to read these pieces and to incorporate them into their
assignments. Four books are available at the bookstore; two of them are available as e-books at the library, and all
except Hymans are available from Amazon and other booksellers. Hymans will be in the bookstore in mid- to late-
February.
Course Website
Discussion and collaboration is available to you through the website; supplemental and core readings will be made available there; and
assignments will be turned in electronically using the site.
Assignments
There is one assignment for this course, a lengthy (2500-5000 word) essay analyzing anything related to nuclear politics; it is due on
Friday, April 27 at 11:59 PM.
Citation and Plagiarism
A major goal of this course is to encourage good reading, research, and citation habits. Good research requires good documentation of
sources and the ability to put one’s own analysis and thoughts into a paper rather than relying on others. When in doubt as to whether
you should cite something, always do it. Citations are required for ideas as well as facts, and are imperative even if you are not directly
quoting authors. Make sure that you provide as specific a citation as possible; if an author discusses an idea in one
section or one page, cite the specific section or page instead of the full article or book. I usually recommend that
students use in-text author-date citation with full Chicago Manual of Style citations; see their Citation Quick Guide: <http://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/tools˙citationguide.html>.
However, style is less important than the cites being present. If you use an idea or a fact without attribution, you are plagiarizing
someone else’s work. Plagiarism and cheating are violations of academic integrity and thus violations of Reed’s Honor Principle. As
specified by Reed’s academic conduct policy, such violations will result in disciplinary actions, including suspension or permanent
dismissal from the College. Plagiarism is submitting a piece of work which in part or in whole is not entirely the student’s
own work without attributing those same portions to their correct source. For examples of plagiarism and how to
avoid it, see <http://www.csub.edu/ssric-trd/howto/plagiarism.htm> For more information on Reed’s policies see: <http://www.reed.edu/academic/gbook/comm˙pol/acad˙conduct.html>.
Plagiarism often comes as the result of a student being up against a deadline without being able to meet it. If you are having trouble
meeting a deadline for whatever reason, please contact me. Because every assignment is a paper that will be handed out well in
advance, I have no problem giving extensions. It is always better to ask for more time than to plagiarize. When you ask for an
extension, you should a)explain what events are causing you to miss the deadline and b)request an amount of time proportional to the
interfering events. You may ask for an extension up to, but not exceeding, the amount of time remaining for the assignment, except for
cases of emergencies.
Accommodations
If you’d like to request academic accommodations due to a disability, please contact Learning Resources Director Rebecca Cohen,
Director of Disability Support Services, 503-517-7921, cohenr@reed.edu. If you have a letter from Student Services, please let me
know so we can discuss those accommodations.
25-Jan: 01.2. The Bomb, Dread, + Eternity: The Atomic Cafe (film) (43 Pages)
1-Feb: 02.1. Technology: How do you make a nuclear weapon? What can they do? (144 Pages)
-
John E
Mueller (2010)
Effects. In
Mueller
Atomic
Obsession:
Nuclear
Alarmism
from
Hiroshima
to
Al-Qaeda. chapter 1,
3–15
-
John E
Mueller (2010)
Overstating
the
Effects. In
Mueller
Atomic
Obsession:
Nuclear
Alarmism
from
Hiroshima
to
Al-Qaeda. chapter 2,
17–28
-
Charles D
Ferguson (2011)
Fundamentals. In
Ferguson
Nuclear
Energy. chapter 1,
3–52
-
Dietrich
Schroeer (1984)
Chap. 2-3
in
Science,
technology,
and
the
nuclear
arms
race. New
York,
NY:
Wiley,
14–71,
ISBN
0471881414
-
Lynn
Eden (2004)
City
on
Fire. Bulletin
of
the
Atomic
Scientists. 60(1)January/February,
33–43
<http://dx.doi.org/10.2968/060001011>
Further
-
Lynn
Eden (2003)
Whole
World
on
Fire. Ithaca,
NY:
Cornell
University
Press
<http://www.loc.gov/catdir/toc/ecip045/2003012695.html>,
ISBN
0801435781
-
Lynn
Eden (2003)
Chap. 1
In
Eden
Whole
World
on
Fire
-
Lynn
Eden (2003)
Complete
Ruin. In
Eden
Whole
World
on
Fire. chapter 1,
15–36
-
Samuel
Glasstone
and
Philip J.
Dolan (1977)
Chap. 12
in
The
Effects
of
Nuclear
Weapons. United
States
Government
Printing,
541–643,
ISBN
0160020360
-
E. R.
McConnell,
G. O.
Sampson,
and
J. M.
Sharf (1956)
The
Effect
of
Nuclear
Explosions
on
Commercially
Packaged
Beverages. Food
and
Drug
Administration
Technical
report
WT-1213
<http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/nuclearcan1.html>
-
Robert
Serber (1943)
The
Los
Alamos
primer:
the
first
lectures
on
how
to
build
an
atomic
bomb. Los
Alamos
National
Laboratory
Los
Alamos
Report
LA-1
<http://www.fas.org/sgp/othergov/doe/lanl/docs1/00349710.pdf>
-
Herbert F.
York (1976)
The
GAC
Report
of
October
30,
1949. In
The
Advisors
:
Oppenheimer,
Teller,
and
the
Superbomb.
San
Francisco,
CA:
W.
H.
Freeman
<http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/1531933>,
ISBN
0716707187,
150–159
1-Feb: 02.2. Hiroshima: Why did we use the bomb? Should we have? (81 Pages)
-
Gar
Alperovitz (1995)
Hiroshima:
Historians
Reassess. Foreign
Policy.(99)Summer,
15–34
<http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1149003>,
ISSN
00157228
-
Barton J.
Bernstein (1995)
The
Atomic
Bombings
Reconsidered. Foreign
Affairs. 74(1)January/February,
135–152
<http://www.jstor.org/stable/20047025>,
ISSN
00157120
-
Hugh
Gusterson (2004)
Hiroshima,
the
Gulf
War,
and
the
Disappearing
Body. In
Gusterson
People
of
the
Bomb. chapter 4,
63–81
-
J. Samuel
Walker (2005)
Recent
Literature
on
Truman’s
Atomic
Bomb
Decision:
A
Search
for
Middle
Ground. Diplomatic
History. 29(2)April,
311–334
<http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7709.2005.00476.x>
Further
-
Barton J.
Bernstein (1991)
Eclipsed
by
Hiroshima
and
Nagasaki:
Early
Thinking
about
Tactical
Nuclear
Weapons. International
Security. 15(4)Spring,
149–173
<http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2539014>,
ISSN
01622889
-
Rufus E.
Miles,
Jr. (1985)
Hiroshima:
The
Strange
Myth
of
Half
a
Million
American
Lives
Saved. International
Security. 10(2)Autumn,
121–140
<http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2538830>,
ISSN
01622889
8-Feb: 03.1. Nuclear Power: What are the Benefits? (56 Pages)
-
Charles D
Ferguson (2011)
Energy
Security
and
Costs
of
Building
Power
Plants. In
Ferguson
Nuclear
Energy. chapter 2,
53–85
-
Charles D
Ferguson (2011)
Climate
Change. In
Ferguson
Nuclear
Energy. chapter 3,
86–102
-
Charles D
Ferguson (2011)
Sustainable
Energy. In
Ferguson
Nuclear
Energy. chapter 8,
203–208
8-Feb: 03.2. Nuclear Power: What are the Risks? (207 Pages)
-
Charles D
Ferguson (2011)
Safety. In
Ferguson
Nuclear
Energy. chapter 5,
137–172
-
Charles D
Ferguson (2011)
Physical
Security. In
Ferguson
Nuclear
Energy. chapter 6,
173–188
-
Charles D
Ferguson (2011)
Radioactive
Waste
Management. In
Ferguson
Nuclear
Energy. chapter 7,
189–202
-
Paul R.
Schulman (1993)
The
Negotiated
Order
of
Organizational
Reliability. Administration
&
Society. 25(3)November ,
353–372
<http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/009539979302500305>
-
George W.
Hinman et al. (1993)
Perceptions
of
Nuclear
and
Other
Risks
in
Japan
and
the
United
States. Risk
Analysis. 13(4)August,
449–455
<http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1993.tb00745.x>
-
John F.
Ahearne et al. (1997)
Special
Issue:
Radioactive
Waste. Physics
Today. 50(6)June,
22–62
<http://www.physicstoday.org/resource/1/PHTOAD/v50/i6?ver=pdfcov>
-
Charles
Perrow (1999)
Chap. 1-2
in
Normal
Accidents:
Living
with
High-Risk
Technologies. New
York,
NY:
Basic
Books,
15–61,
ISBN
046505143X
-
M. V.
Ramana (2011)
Beyond
Our
Imagination:
Fukushima
and
the
Problem
of
Assessing
Risk. April
19
Bulletin
of
the
Atomic
Scientists
website
<http://thebulletin.org/web-edition/features/beyond-our-imagination-fukushima-and-the-problem-of-assessing-risk>
-
Frank N.
von Hippel (2011)
The
Radiological
and
Psychological
Consequences
of
the
Fukushima
Daiichi
Accident. Bulletin
of
the
Atomic
Scientists. 67(5)September ,
27
–36
<http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0096340211421588>
-
Allison
Macfarlane (2011)
It’s
2050:
Do
You
Know
where
Your
Nuclear
Waste
is?
Bulletin
of
the
Atomic
Scientists. 67(4)July ,
30–36
<http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0096340211413357>
-
Charles
Perrow (2011)
Fukushima
and
the
Inevitability
of
Accidents. December
1
Bulletin
of
the
Atomic
Scientists
website
<http://thebulletin.org/web-edition/features/fukushima-and-the-inevitability-of-accidents>
Further
15-Feb: 04.1. Motives: Why do states seek the bomb? (93 Pages)
-
John E
Mueller (2010)
Proliferation:
Slow
and
Substantially
Inconsequential. In
Mueller
Atomic
Obsession:
Nuclear
Alarmism
from
Hiroshima
to
Al-Qaeda. chapter 7,
89–102
-
John E
Mueller (2010)
The
Limited
Appeal
and
Value
of
Nuclear
Weapons. In
Mueller
Atomic
Obsession:
Nuclear
Alarmism
from
Hiroshima
to
Al-Qaeda. chapter 8,
103–114
-
Ariel E.
Levite (2002/2003)
Never
Say
Never
Again:
Nuclear
Reversal
Revisited. International
Security. 27(3)Winter,
59–88
<http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/01622880260553633>
-
Itty
Abraham (2006)
The
Ambivalence
of
Nuclear
Histories. Osiris. 21(1)February,
49–65
<http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/507135>
-
Scott D.
Sagan (2011)
The
Causes
of
Nuclear
Weapons
Proliferation. Annual
Review
of
Political
Science. 14(1),
225–244
<http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-052209-131042>,
ISSN
1094–2939
Further
-
Jacques
E. C.
Hymans (2006)
Theories
of
Nuclear
Proliferation:
The
State
of
the
Field. Nonproliferation
Review. 13(3)November,
455–465
<http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10736700601071397>
-
Tanya
Ogilvie-White (1996)
Is
There
a
Theory
of
Nuclear
Proliferation?
An
Analysis
of
the
Contemporary
Debate. Nonproliferation
Review. 4(1)Fall,
43–60
-
Ogilvie-White,
43–60
-
Scott D.
Sagan (1996/97)
Why
Do
States
Build
Nuclear
Weapons?
Three
Models
in
Search
of
a
Bomb. International
Security. 21(3)Winter,
54–86
<http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2539273>
-
Scott D.
Sagan (2010)
Nuclear
Latency
and
Nuclear
Proliferation. In
Potter
and
Mukhatzhanova
Forecasting
Nuclear
Proliferation
Volume
1. chapter 5,
80–101
15-Feb: 04.2. Motives: How do we know? (104 Pages)
-
Sonali
Singh
and
Christopher R.
Way (2004)
The
Correlates
of
Nuclear
Proliferation:
A
Quantitative
Test. Journal
of
Conflict
Resolution. 48(6)December,
859–885
<http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0022002704269655>
-
Dong-Joon
Jo
and
Erik
Gartzke (2007)
Determinants
of
Nuclear
Weapons
Proliferation:
A
Quantitative
Model. Journal
of
Conflict
Resolution. 51(1)February,
167–194
<http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0022002706296158>
-
Alexander H.
Montgomery
and
Scott D.
Sagan (2009)
The
Perils
of
Predicting
Proliferation. Journal
of
Conflict
Resolution. 53(2)April,
302–328
<http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0022002708330581>
-
Jacques
E. C.
Hymans (2010)
When
Does
a
State
Become
a
“Nuclear
Weapons
State”?
An
Exercise
in
Measurement
Validation. In
Potter
and
Mukhatzhanova
Forecasting
Nuclear
Proliferation
Volume
1. chapter 6,
102–123
22-Feb: 05.1. Intel: Can we really know who is seeking the bomb? (102 Pages)
22-Feb: 05.2. Strategy: What should we do with it? (134 Pages)
-
Bernard
Brodie (1959)
Chap. 8
in
Strategy
in
the
missile
age. Princeton,
NJ:
Princeton
University
Press,
264–304
-
Richard
Pipes (1977)
Why
the
Soviet-Union
Thinks
It
Could
Fight
and
Win
a
Nuclear
War. Commentary. 64,
21–34
-
Carol
Cohn (1987)
Sex
and
Death
in
the
Rational
World
of
Defense
Intellectuals. Signs. 12(4)Summer,
687–718
<http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/494362>
-
Scott D.
Sagan (2000)
The
Commitment
Trap:
Why
the
United
States
Should
Not
Use
Nuclear
Threats
to
Deter
Biological
and
Chemical
Weapons
Attacks. International
Security. 24(4)Spring,
85–115
<http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/016228800560318>
-
Department
of
Defense (2010)
Nuclear
Posture
Review
Report
(Front
Matter).
Further
-
J. D.
Crouch (2002)
Special
Briefing
on
the
Nuclear
Posture
Review. January
9
DoD
News
Briefing
by
the
Assistant
Secretary
of
Defense
for
International
Security
Policy
<http://www.defenselink.mil/transcripts/transcript.aspx?transcriptid=1108>
-
Department
of
Defense (2001)
Nuclear
Posture
Review
(Excerpts).
<http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/policy/dod/npr.htm>
-
Department
of
Defense (2010)
Nuclear
Posture
Review
Report.
-
Herman
Kahn (1970)
Issues
of
Thermonuclear
War
Termination. Annals
of
the
American
Academy
of
Political
and
Social
Science. 392November,
133–172
<http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/000271627039200113>,
ISSN
00027162
-
National
Security
Council (2006)
National
Security
Strategy. March
-
Lawrence
Freedman (1986)
The
First
Two
Generations
of
Nuclear
Strategists. In
Peter
Paret,
Gordon Alexander
Craig
and
Felix
Gilbert,
editors
Makers
of
Modern
Strategy:
From
Machiavelli
to
the
Nuclear
Age.
Princeton,
NJ:
Princeton
University
Press,
ISBN
0691027641. chapter 25,
735–778
-
Roger
Speed
and
Michael
May (2005)
Dangerous
Doctrine. Bulletin
of
the
Atomic
Scientists. 61(2)March/April,
38–49
<http://dx.doi.org/10.2968/061002012>
-
Marc
Trachtenberg (1988-1989)
A
”Wasting
Asset”:
American
Strategy
and
the
Shifting
Nuclear
Balance,
1949-1954. International
Security. 13(3)Winter,
5–49
<http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2538735>
29-Feb: 06.1. Impact: What has the spread of nuclear weapons led to? (132 Pages)
Review
-
Montgomery
and
Sagan,
302–328
29-Feb: 06.2. Impact: Are we sure about that? (112 Pages)
-
John E
Mueller (2010)
Deterring
World
War
III:
Essential
Irrelevance. In
Mueller
Atomic
Obsession:
Nuclear
Alarmism
from
Hiroshima
to
Al-Qaeda. chapter 3,
29–42
-
John E
Mueller (2010)
Modest
Influence
on
History. In
Mueller
Atomic
Obsession:
Nuclear
Alarmism
from
Hiroshima
to
Al-Qaeda. chapter 4,
43–54
-
T. V.
Paul (1995)
Nuclear
Taboo
and
War
Initiation
in
Regional
Conflicts. Journal
of
Conflict
Resolution. 39(4)December,
696–717
<http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0022002795039004005>
-
Jutta
Weldes (1999)
The
Cultural
Production
of
Crises:
U.S.
Identity
and
Missiles
in
Cuba. In
Jutta
Weldes,
editor
Cultures
of
Insecurity:
States,
Communities,
and
the
Production
of
Danger.
Minneapolis,
MN:
University
of
Minnesota
Press,
ISBN
081663307X,
35–62
-
Nina
Tannenwald (1999)
The
Nuclear
Taboo:
The
United
States
and
the
Normative
Basis
of
Nuclear
Non-Use. International
Organization. 53(3)Summer,
433–468
<http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/002081899550959>
Review
-
Graham T.
Allison (1969)
Conceptual
Models
and
the
Cuban
Missile
Crisis. American
Political
Science
Review. 63(3)September,
689–718
<http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1954423>
7-Mar: 07.1. Sociology of Science: What social configurations aid or prevent weapons? (186 Pages)
-
Jacques
E. C.
Hymans (2012)
A
Theory
of
Nuclear
Weapons
Project
Efficiency
and
Inefficiency. In
Hymans
Achieving
Nuclear
Ambitions. chapter 2,
41–78
-
Jacques
E. C.
Hymans (2012)
The
Puzzle
of
Declining
Nuclear
Weapons
Project
Efficiency. In
Hymans
Achieving
Nuclear
Ambitions. chapter 1,
3–37
-
Steven
Flank (1993-1994)
Exploding
the
Black
Box:
The
Historical
Sociology
of
Nuclear
Proliferation. Security
Studies. 3(2)Winter,
259–294
<http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09636419309347549>
-
Donald
MacKenzie
and
Graham
Spinardi (1995)
Tacit
Knowledge,
Weapons
Design,
and
the
Uninvention
of
Nuclear
Weapons. American
Journal
of
Sociology. 101(1),
44–99
<http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/230699>
-
Hugh
Gusterson (2001)
The
Virtual
Nuclear
Weapons
Laboratory
in
the
New
World
Order. American
Ethnologist. 28(2)May,
417–437
<http://dx.doi.org/10.1525/ae.2001.28.2.417>
Further
-
Geoffrey
Forden (2009)
PCS:
The
How
of
Proliferation. August
6
Armscontrolwonk
website
<http://www.armscontrolwonk.com/2410/pcs-the-how-of-proliferation>
-
Geoffrey
Forden (2009)
PCS:
The
How
of
Proliferation,
Part
2. August
6
Armscontrolwonk
website
<http://www.armscontrolwonk.com/2413/pcs-the-how-of-proliferation-part-2>
-
Hugh
Gusterson (2004)
Nuclear
Weapons
Testing
as
Scientific
Ritual. In
Gusterson
People
of
the
Bomb. chapter 8,
147–164
-
Hugh
Gusterson (2011)
The
Assault
on
Los
Alamos
National
Laboratory:
A
Drama
in
Three
Acts. Bulletin
of
the
Atomic
Scientists. 67(6)November ,
9
–18
<http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0096340211426631>
-
Donald A.
MacKenzie (1999)
Theories
of
Technology
and
the
Abolition
of
Nuclear
Weapons. In
Donald A.
MacKenzie
and
Judy
Wajcman,
editors
The
Social
Shaping
of
Technology.
Philadelphia,
PA:
Open
University
Press,
ISBN
0335199143. chapter 30,
419–442
7-Mar: 07.2. Sociology of Science: How did China succeed and Iraq fail? (78 Pages)
-
Jacques
E. C.
Hymans (2012)
Spinning
in
place:
Iraq’s
fruitless
quest
for
nuclear
weapons. In
Hymans
Achieving
Nuclear
Ambitions. chapter 3,
79–123
-
Jacques
E. C.
Hymans (2012)
How
did
China’s
nuclear
weapons
project
succeed?
In
Hymans
Achieving
Nuclear
Ambitions. chapter 4,
124–156
Spring Break: No Class
21-Mar: 09.1. Sensitive Nuclear Cooperation: Does it work? (90 Pages)
-
Jacques
E. C.
Hymans (2012)
Empirical
extensions:
Libya,
Pakistan,
North
Korea,
Iran. In
Hymans
Achieving
Nuclear
Ambitions. chapter 7,
239–261
-
Alexander H.
Montgomery (2005)
Ringing
in
Proliferation:
How
to
Dismantle
an
Atomic
Bomb
Network. International
Security. 30(2)Fall,
153–187
<http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/016228805775124543>
-
Matthew
Kroenig (2009)
Importing
the
Bomb:
Security
Threats,
Sensitive
Nuclear
Assistance,
and
Nuclear
Proliferation. Journal
of
Conflict
Resolution. 53(2)April,
161–180
<http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0022002708330287>
-
Alexander H.
Montgomery (2010)
Stop
Helping
Me:
When
Nuclear
Assistance
Impedes
Nuclear
Programs. In
Nuclear
Renaissance
and
International
Security
workshop.
Center
for
International
Strategy,
Technology,
and
Policy,
Sam
Nunn
School
of
International
Affairs,
Georgia
Institute
of
Technology
-
Joshua
Pollack (2012)
The
Secret
Treachery
of
A.Q.
Khan. Playboy.January/February,
12
<http://www.playboy.com/magazine/the-secret-treachery-of-a-q-khan>
Further
21-Mar: 09.2. Civilian Nuclear Cooperation: Does it cause nuclear programs? (155 Pages)
28-Mar: 10.1. Control: What attempts have been made to keep them from it? (148 Pages)
-
John E
Mueller (2010)
Arms
Races:
Positive
and
Negative. In
Mueller
Atomic
Obsession:
Nuclear
Alarmism
from
Hiroshima
to
Al-Qaeda. chapter 6,
73–88
-
John E
Mueller (2010)
Controlling
Proliferation:
Modest
Success. In
Mueller
Atomic
Obsession:
Nuclear
Alarmism
from
Hiroshima
to
Al-Qaeda. chapter 9,
115–128
-
John E
Mueller (2010)
Costs
of
the
Proliferation
Fixation. In
Mueller
Atomic
Obsession:
Nuclear
Alarmism
from
Hiroshima
to
Al-Qaeda. chapter 10,
129–142
-
John E
Mueller (2010)
Reconsidering
Proliferation
Policy. In
Mueller
Atomic
Obsession:
Nuclear
Alarmism
from
Hiroshima
to
Al-Qaeda. chapter 11,
143–160
-
Jacques
E. C.
Hymans (2012)
Proliferation
implications
of
footloose
nuclear
scientists:
theory
and
a
case
study
of
Perón’s
Argentina. In
Hymans
Achieving
Nuclear
Ambitions. chapter 6,
203–238
-
Treaty
On
The
Non-Proliferation
Of
Nuclear
Weapons.
<http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Documents/Treaties/index.html>
-
Emanuel
Adler (1992)
The
Emergence
of
Cooperation:
National
Epistemic
Communities
and
the
International
Evolution
of
the
Idea
of
Nuclear
Arms
Control. International
Organization. 46(1)Winter,
101–145
<http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0020818300001466>,
ISSN
00208183
Further
28-Mar: 10.2. Control: What are we doing to stop others? Is that really a good idea? (112 Pages)
4-Apr: 11.1. Safety: How safe are we or others in making the bomb? (232 Pages)
-
Scott D.
Sagan (2003)
Sagan
Responds
to
Waltz. In
Sagan
and
Waltz
The
Spread
of
Nuclear
Weapons. chapter 5,
155–184
-
Scott D.
Sagan (2003)
More
Will
be
Worse. In
Sagan
and
Waltz
The
Spread
of
Nuclear
Weapons. chapter 2,
46–87
-
Kenneth N.
Waltz (2003)
Waltz
Responds
to
Sagan. In
Sagan
and
Waltz
The
Spread
of
Nuclear
Weapons. chapter 4,
125–155
-
Kenneth N.
Waltz (2003)
More
May
be
Better. In
Sagan
and
Waltz
The
Spread
of
Nuclear
Weapons. chapter 1,
3–45
-
Scott D.
Sagan
and
Kenneth N.
Waltz (2003)
Indian
and
Pakistani
Nuclear
Weapons:
For
Better
or
Worse?
In
Sagan
and
Waltz
The
Spread
of
Nuclear
Weapons. chapter 3,
88–124
-
Hugh
Gusterson (1999)
Nuclear
Weapons
and
the
Other
in
the
Western
Imagination. Cultural
Anthropology. 14(1)February,
111–143
<http://dx.doi.org/10.1525/can.1999.14.1.111>,
ISSN
08867356
-
Scott
Sagan,
Kenneth
Waltz,
and
Richard K.
Betts (2007)
A
Nuclear
Iran:
Promoting
Stability
or
Courting
Disaster?
Journal
of
International
Affairs. 60(2)Spring/Summer,
135–150
<http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AN=25069438>,
ISSN
0022197X
Further
11-Apr: 12.1. Terrorists: Should we worry about them? (184 Pages)
-
John E
Mueller (2010)
Task. In
Mueller
Atomic
Obsession:
Nuclear
Alarmism
from
Hiroshima
to
Al-Qaeda. chapter 12,
161–180
-
John E
Mueller (2010)
Likelihood. In
Mueller
Atomic
Obsession:
Nuclear
Alarmism
from
Hiroshima
to
Al-Qaeda. chapter 13,
181–198
-
John E
Mueller (2010)
Progress
and
Interest. In
Mueller
Atomic
Obsession:
Nuclear
Alarmism
from
Hiroshima
to
Al-Qaeda. chapter 14,
199–216
-
John E
Mueller (2010)
Capacity. In
Mueller
Atomic
Obsession:
Nuclear
Alarmism
from
Hiroshima
to
Al-Qaeda. chapter 15,
217–234
-
J. Carson
Mark et al. (1987)
Can
Terrorists
Build
Nuclear
Weapons?
<http://www.nci.org/k-m/makeab.htm>
-
David
Albright
and
Holly
Higgins (2003)
A
Bomb
for
the
Ummah. Bulletin
of
the
Atomic
Scientists. 59(2)March/April,
49–55
<http://dx.doi.org/10.2968/059002012>
-
William C.
Potter,
Charles D.
Ferguson,
and
Leonard S.
Spector (2004)
The
Four
Faces
of
Nuclear
Terror
and
the
Need
for
a
Prioritized
Response. Foreign
Affairs. 83(3)May-June,
130–132
<http://www.jstor.org/stable/20033982>
-
Graham T.
Allison (2004)
How
to
Stop
Nuclear
Terror. Foreign
Affairs. 83(1)January/February,
64–74
<http://www.jstor.org/stable/20033829>
-
Linda
Rothstein,
Catherine
Auer,
and
Jonas
Siegel (2004)
Rethinking
doomsday. Bulletin
of
the
Atomic
Scientists. 60(6)November/December,
11
<http://dx.doi.org/10.2968/060006010>,
ISSN
00963402
-
William
Langewiesche (2006)
How
to
Get
a
Nuclear
Bomb. Atlantic. 298(5)December,
80–98
<http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=rlh&AN=23242733>
-
Matthew
Bunn
and
Anthony
Wier (2006)
Terrorist
Nuclear
Weapon
Construction:
How
Difficult?
Annals
of
The
American
Academy
of
Political
and
Social
Science.September
10,
11
-
William M.
Arkin (2006)
The
continuing
misuses
of
fear. Bulletin
of
the
Atomic
Scientists. 62(5)September/October,
42–45
<http://dx.doi.org/10.2968/062005018>
-
Peter D.
Zimmerman
and
Jeffrey G.
Lewis (2006)
The
Bomb
in
the
Backyard. Foreign
Policy.(157)November/December,
32–39
<http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=mth&AN=22995331>
-
Matthew
Bunn (2009)
Reducing
the
Greatest
Risks
of
Nuclear
Theft
&
Terrorism. Daedalus. 138(4),
112–123
<http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/daed.2009.138.4.112>
-
David E.
Albright (2010)
Al
Qaeda’s
Bomb. In
Peddling
Peril:
How
the
Secret
Nuclear
Trade
Arms
America’s
Enemies.
New
York:
Free
Press,
ISBN
9781416549314. chapter 8,
169–184
Further
-
Graham
Allison (2004)
Nuclear
Terrorism. New
York,
NY:
Times
Books,
ISBN
0805076514
-
William
Dunlop
and
Harold
Smith (2006)
Who
Did
It?
Using
International
Forensics
to
Detect
and
Deter
Nuclear
Terrorism. Arms
Control
Today. 36(8)October,
6
<http://www.armscontrol.org/act/2006˙10/CVRForensics.asp>
-
Richard A.
Falkenrath (1998)
Confronting
Nuclear,
Biological,
and
Chemical
Terrorism. Survival. 40(3)January,
43–65
<http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/survival/40.3.43>
-
Ira
Helfand,
Lachlan
Forrow,
and
Jaya
Tiwari (2002)
Nuclear
Terrorism. British
Medical
Journal. 324February
9,
356–359
-
Bill
Keller (2002)
Nuclear
Nightmares. New
York
Times.May
26,
13
-
Douglas
Pasternak (2001)
Too
many
nuclear
plants
are
not
prepared
to
prevent
attacks. U.S.
News
and
World
Report.September
5,
3
18-Apr: 13.1. Conclusions: The Future of Nuclear Weapons (109 Pages)
-
John E
Mueller (2010)
Epilogue
and
an
Inventory
of
Propositions. In
Mueller
Atomic
Obsession:
Nuclear
Alarmism
from
Hiroshima
to
Al-Qaeda. chapter 16,
235–239
-
Mueller
Reconsidering
Proliferation
Policy,
143–160
-
Jacques
E. C.
Hymans (2012)
Lessons
for
policy
and
directions
for
future
research.
In
Hymans
Achieving
Nuclear
Ambitions. chapter 8,
262–277
-
Thomas C.
Schelling (2009)
A
World
without
Nuclear
Weapons?
Daedalus. 138(4),
124–129
<http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/daed.2009.138.4.124>
-
Sverre
Lodgaard (2009)
Toward
a
Nuclear-Weapons-Free
World. Daedalus. 138(4),
140–152
<http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/daed.2009.138.4.140>
-
Sam
Nunn (2009)
Taking
Steps
toward
a
World
Free
of
Nuclear
Weapons. Daedalus. 138(4),
153–156
<http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/daed.2009.138.4.153>
-
Scott D.
Sagan (2009)
Shared
Responsibilities
for
Nuclear
Disarmament. Daedalus. 138(4),
157–168
<http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/daed.2009.138.4.157>
-
William C.
Potter (2010)
The
NPT
&
the
Sources
of
Nuclear
Restraint. Daedalus. 139(1),
68–81
<http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/daed.2010.139.1.68>
-
Steven E.
Miller
and
Scott D.
Sagan (2010)
Alternative
Nuclear
Futures. Daedalus. 139(1),
126–137
<http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/daed.2010.139.1.126>
-
Steven E.
Miller (2012)
Nuclear
Weapons
2011:
Momentum
Slows,
Reality
Returns. Bulletin
of
the
Atomic
Scientists. 68(1)January ,
20–28
<http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0096340211434471>
18-Apr: 13.2. Conclusions: The Future of Nuclear Power (112 Pages)
-
Steven E.
Miller
and
Scott D.
Sagan (2009)
Nuclear
Power
without
Nuclear
Proliferation?
Daedalus. 138(4),
7–18
<http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/daed.2009.138.4.7>
-
Richard K.
Lester
and
Robert
Rosner (2009)
The
Growth
of
Nuclear
Power:
Drivers
&
Constraints. Daedalus. 138(4),
19–30
<http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/daed.2009.138.4.19>
-
Robert H.
Socolow
and
Alexander
Glaser (2009)
Balancing
Risks:
Nuclear
Energy
&
Climate
Change. Daedalus. 138(4),
31–44
<http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/daed.2009.138.4.31>
-
Paul L.
Joskow
and
John E.
Parsons (2009)
The
Economic
Future
of
Nuclear
Power. Daedalus. 138(4),
45–59
<http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/daed.2009.138.4.45>
-
Harold A.
Feiveson (2009)
A
Skeptic’s
View
of
Nuclear
Energy. Daedalus. 138(4),
60–70
<http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/daed.2009.138.4.60>
-
José
Goldemberg (2009)
Nuclear
Energy
in
Developing
Countries. Daedalus. 138(4),
71–80
<http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/daed.2009.138.4.71>
-
John W.
Rowe (2009)
Nuclear
Power
in
a
Carbon-Constrained
World. Daedalus. 138(4),
81–90
<http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/daed.2009.138.4.81>
-
Anne
Lauvergeon (2009)
The
Nuclear
Renaissance:
An
Opportunity
to
Enhance
the
Culture
of
Nonproliferation. Daedalus. 138(4),
91–99
<http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/daed.2009.138.4.91>
-
Anatoly S.
Diyakov (2010)
The
Nuclear
“Renaissance”
&
Preventing
the
Spread
of
Enrichment
&
Reprocessing
Technologies:
A
Russian
View. Daedalus. 139(1),
117–125
<http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/daed.2010.139.1.117>
-
Mark
Hibbs (2012)
Nuclear
Energy
2011:
A
Watershed
Year. Bulletin
of
the
Atomic
Scientists. 68(1)January ,
10–19
<http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0096340211434470>
25-Apr: 14.1. Presentations