POLI 347 Lecture Notes - Lecture 11: Security Dilemma, Biological Warfare, Tulkarm
26 Oct 2018
School
Department
Course
Professor
October 23, 2018 / Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) in the Arab-Israeli Conflict
Key IR Concepts
• Nuclear deterrence: threat of nuclear strike deters enemies from attacking
• Mutually-assured destruction: If two opposing sides possess nuclear weapons, the
guarantee that both sides will be annihilated in case of war actually lessens likelihood of
war
o Actually made the world safer and more stable – deterred each side from
attacking because they both knew that lots of people would die
• Security dilemma: not knowing their opponents’ true intentions and fearing the worst,
states prepare for war
• Conflict spiral: each side interprets the other side’s defensive actions as offensive,
leading to escalation
• Arms racing: as each side improves its weapons technology and capabilities, the other
side is motivated to do the same
• Weapons of mass destruction (WMD): nuclear, chemical (deadly agents), and
biological (deadly pathogens) weapons
Weapons of Mass Destruction in the Conflict
• Israel launched its nuclear weapons program in 1952; possessed a bomb by c.1968-70;
also launched chemical and biological warfare programs in 1950s-60s
o Top-down order
o Israel and France collaborated
o Security dilemma: Israel knew their enemies had used chemical weapons – even if
not deployed directly against them (Israeli decision makers took this into account)
• Egypt used chemical weapons against Yemen 1963-67 during its intervention in Yemeni
civil war
• Iraq used chemical weapons against Iran in 1980-88 war, and also bombed Iraqi Kurds
with nerve gas, 1988
• Iran used chemical weapons vs. Iraq in 1980-88 war
• Syria has used chemical weapons vs. rebel-held areas in its civil war
Nuclear deterrence
• Classic nuclear deterrence argument: Israel’s nuclear weapons represent an
impediment to their actual use and to the commencement of regional nuclear war
(Beres)
Should the region disarm?
• “If deprived of its nuclear forces because of misconceived hopes for regional
cooperation, the Jewish state could become vulnerable to overwhelming attacks” (Beres)
-> Security Dilemma
• Even if the Middle East became a nuclear-free zone, many states possess advanced
conventional, chemical, and biological weaponry
Ambiguous deterrence
• Israel has declared that t “will not be the first to introduce nuclear weapons in the
Middle East”
Document Summary
October 23, 2018 / weapons of mass destruction (wmd) in the arab-israeli conflict. Nuclear deterrence: classic nuclear deterrence argument: israel"s nuclear weapons represent an impediment to their actual use and to the commencement of regional nuclear war (beres) Should the region disarm: if deprived of its nuclear forces because of misconceived hopes for regional cooperation, the jewish state could become vulnerable to overwhelming attacks (beres) > security dilemma: even if the middle east became a nuclear-free zone, many states possess advanced conventional, chemical, and biological weaponry. Israel has declared that t will not be the first to introduce nuclear weapons in the. Has israeli nuclear deterrence worked: 1973: egypt launches war vs. israel but limits its strategic objectives to retaking sinai, 1991: facing massive us-led coalition attack after 1990 kuwait invasion, iraq launches. Cold war rivalry: israel vs. the ussr: by 1970s, israeli jets had sufficient range to hit ussr; by 1980s, israeli missiles could hit targets in southern ussr.
