In this paper, we discuss Nuclear asymmetry in the prospect of liberal peace. Nuclear asymmetry means a nuclear imbalance between states. Nuclear asymmetry doesn’t mean one state has nuclear and other state doesn’t have. It also means in nuclear power states some states have large stockpiles of nuclear than others.
There are two perspectives of Nuclear asymmetry one is at the point when a nuclear asymmetry exists between two states, there are more chances of mobilized clashes and war. Conversely, when there is symmetry and the two states hold atomic weapons, at that point the chances of war will be dropped and the second perspective of nuclear asymmetry is it reduced the major risk of conflict.
In context of first perspective nuclear asymmetry increase the chances of militarized disputes like the hostile asymmetric nuclear relations between the United States and China in the early 1960s, between the Soviet Union and China in the late 1960s, between Israel and Iraq in 1977–1981, between the United States and North Korea in 1992–1994 and, finally, between the United States and the Soviet Union during the 1962 Cuban missile crisis. Furthermore, when one out of two parties holds nuclear it creates deterrence and puts the state in competition for survival.
Pakistan and India are two rival countries to address the security dilemma. Both states have acquired the nuclear capability to balance each other. This situation has led to the arms race and increased hostility in their relations. It is so because states do not know the intentions of other state and their survival depend on self-help.
While in the second viewpoint atomic asymmetry decreases the real danger of war and makes harmony between states by financial linkages. States in atomic asymmetry are expected to incline toward one another as exchanging accomplices on the grounds that each accomplice gets diverse advantages. I assume that in a circumstance of nuclear asymmetry, a non-nuclear state goes into a trade alliance with a nuclear state to get the security that is offering by nuclear states.
At the point when an atomic state completely hopes to expand adequate exchange gains from its non-nuclear trading partner, it could willingly offer security to its non-nuclear trading partner so as to save those exchange gains but When these states engage in disputes, both accepted to lose security or exchange gains.
Non-atomic states are generally confined from an acceleration of strife with trading partners who have nuclear capability. Because they are weak and dependent on others for security like in the south Asian region India is a nuclear power and Bangladesh and Srilanka are its neighboring countries. Both are the week that’s why they make good relations with India. Because they are not capable of fighting with India.
It means the trade linkages in nuclear asymmetry are more likely to reduce conflict. The two perspectives of nuclear asymmetry show that Nuclear deterrence and economic interdependence are key factors of war or peace between states like the US and China can deter each other with a combination of conventional and nuclear forces but reduces the risk of war by economic linkages. If they reduce their economic dependence on each other, then there will be little risk of war between them.
In the prospect of liberal peace, the liberal peace theory has been considered as a standout amongst the most encouraging plans to advance peace and harmony in global relations. the expansion in bilateral relations is assessed to assist the security relations on the grounds that the two nations are limited from the struggle of conflicting behavior due to the severance of trade relations.
Immanuel Kant viewed that war was a natural phenomenon and peace was created by the will of people. He insisted that because the power of money, which is obtained through commerce, was the most dependable of all the powers, including military, states were ultimately forced to promote peace rather than war. So in the age of globalization world is in complex interdependence that leads the world to peace and no one wants war.
The issue in nuclear asymmetry is, it creates deterrence that increases the chances of war or militarized conflict between states. Nuclear asymmetry also creates a security dilemma that leads states to the arms race.
The objective of the study:
The objective of the study is to examine whether liberal peace is likely in the situation of nuclear asymmetry by the economic and trade linkages between nuclear and non-nuclear states. It also examines the nuclear deterrence and security dilemma which is caused by nuclear asymmetry.
Nuclear asymmetry will probably decrease the risk of war.
There are both independent and dependent variables in this hypothesis. The independent variable causes while the dependent variable is the effect. It means the chances of war between states will decrease or remain constant if one state possesses a nuclear weapon. In this hypothesis, the independent variable is nuclear asymmetry while conflict or war is a dependent variable. A hypothesis shows the relationship between the risk of war and the distribution of power.
Evaluating the Nuclear Peace Hypothesis: A Quantitative Approach by Robert Rauchhaus. This paper quantitatively assesses the nuclear peace hypothesis. The outcomes show that the effect of atomic weapons is more confused. Both proliferation optimists and pessimists find confirmation of some of their key claims.
When an atomic asymmetry exists between two states, there is a more prominent risk of mobilized clashes and war. Interestingly, when there is symmetry and the two states have atomic weapons, at that point the chances of war sharply drop.
furthermore, these findings provide support for the existence of the stability instability paradox. Evidence suggests that while nuclear weapons promote strategic stability they all the while taking into consideration more hazard taking in lower intensity disputes.
Power Asymmetry and Nuclear Option in India and Pakistan Security Relation by Ravichandran Moorthy, Hau Khan Sum and Guido Benny The India-Pakistan contention is a legacy of past opposition. The two nations have battled three wars and a few wicked clashes over the ownership of Kashmir.
This regional debate which started not long after the India-Pakistan segment in 1947. That has been a noteworthy hindrance in their respective relations for over six decades. To address this security issue, the two nations have obtained the atomic capacity to adjust one another.
This circumstance has prompted weapons contest and expanded threatening vibe in their relations. It contends that, in uneven power relations, nations may try to adjust each other through military coalitions. Or by creating an atomic weapons store.
To make balance both countries play a card of their atomic and other security. The atomic choice has likewise given Pakistan a superior haggling power in its exchanges in dealing with the Kashmir question and different quarrelsome issues with India.
Is Liberal Peace Likely in Nuclear Asymmetry by Jin Myoung Lee? This paper basically expects to address the topic of whether liberal peace is likely in circumstances of atomic asymmetry. non-atomic state goes into an exchange partnership with an atomic state to acquire the security that the atomic state is capable of offering.
What’s more, the atomic state goes into exchange linkages with a non-atomic state to acquire exchange gains. Whenever atomic and non-atomic states take part in a debate, the two states lose security or exchange gains.
As needs be, while states in atomic asymmetry are exceedingly struggling inclined, monetary ties in atomic asymmetry could advance peace by advancing the sharing and trading of both financial and security gains and monetary relations in circumstances of atomic asymmetry have a critical impact in decreasing the probability of dyadic debate, yet just when the exchanging linkages are particularly significant and broadly and commonly reliant
Nuclear Asymmetry and Deterrence:
Jan Ludvik’s book offers a more extensive hypothesis of atomic prevention and looks at the manner in which atomic and traditional discouragement interface with non-military factors in a progression of authentic contextual analyses. the current collection of writing to a great extent inclines toward the scientific power of atomic prevention and usually verifiably accepted that atomic weapons are important to the point that, when they are available, different elements need not be examined.
This book tends to this oversight. It builds up an exploration structure that consolidates the military parts of discouragement, both atomic and traditional, together with different perceptual components, universal conditions, household governmental issues, and standards.
The antagonistic unbalanced atomic relations between the United States and China in the mid1960s; among Israel and Iraq in 1977– 1981; between the United States and North Korea in 1992– 1994; and, at long last, between the United States and the Soviet Union amid the 1962 Cuban rocket emergency. The principle observational discoveries challenge the normal desire that the danger of atomic striking back speaks to a definitive obstruction.
Nuclear asymmetry got momentum after the cold war. liberal peace nuclear asymmetry plays an important role in creating interdependence. And economic linkages but it plays a role in those areas where states have their own interest. Otherwise, nuclear asymmetry creates deterrence for those states where they are in competition. In this way, nuclear asymmetry creates a security dilemma that leads the state to balance the power and arms race. Peace is not based on symmetry or asymmetry of power but it is based on the intentions of states
Is Liberal Peace Likely in Nuclear Asymmetry by Jin Myoung Lee The Korean Journal of International Studies? Vol.13-1 (April 2015), 29-61
Evaluating the Nuclear Peace Hypothesis: A Quantitative Approach by Robert Rauchhaus1 Word count: 9,204
Power Asymmetry and Nuclear Option in India and Pakistan Security Relation by Ravichandran Moorthy, Hau Khan Sum, and Guido Benny
Nuclear Asymmetry and Deterrence: Theory, Policy, and History by Jan Ludvik
Read more Click here.