THE NAKED NUCLEAR EMPEROR: Debunking Nuclear Deterrence.

• Author: WILSON-ROBERTS, GUY
• Position: Review

THE NAKED NUCLEAR EMPEROR: Debunking Nuclear Deterrence Author: Robert Green Published by: The Disarmament and Security Centre, Christchurch, 2000, 96pp, $20.

Robert Green perhaps protests too much when, in the introduction to The Naked Nuclear Emperor, he laments the absence of a current and concise refutation of nuclear deterrence. As he correctly points out, though, there is a great volume of literature on the subject. A researcher or serious reader should, however, not be deterred by having to consult a variety of sources or the application of academic rigour. There are excellent books written from post-Cold War perspectives and the classics of nuclear deterrence are certainly not out-of-date. Nonetheless, as this book does achieve its goal by being well written, extensively sourced, and attractively presented, it should be given a wide audience.

While humbly not comparing himself to General Lee Butler, Green still has an inspiring tale to tell of his service with the Royal Navy and his rejection of conventional nuclear wisdom. This story is recounted in Chapter 1 and adds a nice personal touch to the analysis that follows.

The remainder of the book is a detailed critique of nuclear deterrence from practical, moral, and legal perspectives. Chapters 2 and 3 recount the evolution and history of deterrence strategies respectively. There is some overlap and a combination of the two chapters might have been a preferable structure. However, definition followed by exposition works well enough. Chapter 3 contains the most illuminating quote of the whole book, General Lee Butler describes the US nuclear war plan as `the single most absurd and irresponsible document I had ever reviewed in my life', the type of criticism usually reserved for undergraduate essays.

The practical limitations of nuclear deterrence are presented in Chapter 4, the longest of the critiquing chapters. A series of strong arguments is made, particularly on how nuclear deterrence undermines security, creates instability and promotes proliferation. However, brevity overwhelms in places and there was opportunity for a more detailed discussion of, for example, second-strike credibility (Paul Nitze's recent comments spring to mind). Also, the concept of aggressor self-deterrence seems unconvincing. The classic, rationality-constructed arguments in favour of deterrence are given only brief attention. There is a vast amount of literature on this aspect of deterrence, much of it...