Preventive Attack in the 1990s?

The decline of the Soviet Union has upset the world's balance of power. This change has opened the door to third world proliferation since the superpowers no longer have tight control over their client states. This increase in proliferation has raised the issue of how the US should respond to a third world nation that is acquiring nuclear weapons. Should the US depend on preventive attacks to stop the proliferation of nuclear weapons? This is not a new issue. Proliferation and preventive war have both been issues since the end of World War II. The US considered a preventive attack against the Soviet Union in the post war years. The USSR considered preventive attacks against the Peoples' Republic of China in 1969. Israel conducted a preventive attack in 1981 against the Osiraq nuclear reactor in Iraq. Preventive attacks are politically untenable and are not militarily possible. Without perfect political conditions, it is unacceptable for the only remaining superpower to attack a second rate power. It is militarily impossible for the United States to guarantee the removal of all nuclear weapons in a single preventive attack. The conclusion of this study is that the United States should not depend on preventive attacks to stop proliferation of nuclear weapons.

This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.

This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.

As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.