THE NUCLEAR TABOO: THE UNITED STATES AND THE NON-USE OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS SINCE 1945
THE NUCLEAR TABOO: THE UNITED STATES AND THE NON-USE OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS SINCE 1945
复制标题
核禁忌：美国和自 1945 年以来不使用核武器
DOI：
10.1080/10736700802407267
复制
发表时间：
2008
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
J. Nolan
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
J. Nolan
为什么自从美国在第二次世界大战期间向日本投掷原子弹以来，拥有核武库的国家没有使用这些武器来获得军事和政治优势？即使对于那些可能已经厌倦了这个问题或认为他们已经拥有所有答案的人来说，Nina Tannenwald的《核禁忌》提供了一个新的解释，这必然会激起好奇心 * 特别是当核武器的效用作为迅速飙升的核裁军运动的一部分被激烈辩论时，被称为“全球零”。Tannenwald的论文并不新鲜。现实主义者对美国不愿使用核武器的解释似乎是不够的。上级军事力量的最大化并不能解释冷战的重大事件，包括苏联的灭亡，尽管它是一个军事超级大国（尽管学术界对这个问题仍有争议）。威慑的复杂心理和政治层面的重要性，长期以来由亚历山大、乔治、罗伯特·杰维斯及其众多追随者的经典贡献所确立，几十年来一直是主流话语的一部分。但坦嫩瓦尔德对权力的非军事方面的影响的看法是不同的;当然，它更有说服力。根据坦嫩瓦尔德的说法，自1945年以来，核武器一直被主要大国严格保密，因为政治家和公众已经形成了一种共同的信念，即发动核战争在道德上是如此可悲，以至于它等于违反了一个神圣的禁忌，与食人，恋童癖或乱伦相提并论。因此，“首次使用”核武器 * 自20世纪60年代以来一直是北约军事战略的核心 *，这是一种违法行为，会使肇事者蒙羞，以至于从这种行为中获得政治或军事优势简直是不可想象的。根据这一逻辑，即使使用一件核武器，也会撕裂文明秩序的结构，意味着向黑暗的一面迈出了一步，可能不会有任何回报。这是一件严肃的事情 * 百万吨的原罪。
Why have nations armed with nuclear arsenals refrained from using these weapons to gain military and political advantages* ever since the United States dropped atomic bombs on Japan during World War II? Even for those who may have grown weary of this question or think they have all the answers, Nina Tannenwald’s The Nuclear Taboo offers a new twist on an explanation that is bound to incite curiosity* especially when the utility of nuclear weapons is being hotly debated as part of a rapidly surging campaign for nuclear disarmament known as ‘‘Global Zero.’’Tannenwald’s thesis is hardly new.‘‘Realist’’explanations for the US reluctance to use nuclear weapons seem inadequate. The maximization of superior military power does not add up as an explanation for the seminal events of the Cold War, including the Soviet Union’s demise despite its status as a military hyperpower (continued academic disputes over this issue notwithstanding). The importance of complex psychological and political dimensions of deterrence, long established by the classic contributions of Alexander George, Robert Jervis, and their many followers, has been part of mainstream discourse for decades now. But Tannenwald’s version of the influence of the non-military dimension of power is different; certainly it is more emphatic. According to Tannenwald, nuclear weapons have been kept closely under wraps by the major powers since 1945 because statesmen and publics have developed a shared conviction that starting a nuclear war is so morally deplorable that it is tantamount to violating a sacred taboo, on a par with cannibalism, pedophilia, or incest. As such,‘‘first use’’of nuclear weapons* the heart of NATO military strategy since the 1960s* represents a kind of transgression that would so disgrace the perpetrator that gaining political or military advantage from such an act is literally inconceivable. The use of even one nuclear weapon, according to this logic, would rend the fabric of civilized order, representing a step into the dark side from which there might be no return. This is serious business* original sin by the megaton.