According to feminism, the discipline of international relations (IR) a decade ago had, and indeed still has, connotations similar to 'maleness'. This maleness is not based strictly on individual personalities, but on a 'hegemonic masculinity' that expresses what masculine men should be in opposition to femininities, which are less valued. Women are not a strong factor in the discipline, and knowledge gained from women's experiences also remains at the periphery of the discipline's analysis. It is clear to Professor J. Ann Tickner that there are gendered perceptions in IR, hidden by purported 'gender neutrality' and 'objectivity'. In other words, although women and gender are both important parts of the daily operation and scholarship of IR, this presence is neither debated nor analysed by most theorists. The goal then of feminist IR is two-fold: to recognise gender where it exists in IR, and to move beyond gendered ideas into collaborative scholarship. In this way, feminist IR theory challenges other strands of IR theory on a number of levels, contributing to the major theoretical debates in the discipline and raising new areas of analysis.
This article looks at U.S. non-proliferation approaches after May 1998. The first section deals with the consequences of the May 1998 nuclear tests in South Asia. The second section deals with the nonproliferation objectives and instruments as articulated and debated by the US. media, the Congress, and the U.S. Administration.' A third section deals w i t h the non-proliferation debate of civil society groups, primarily the think tanks. The conclusion delineates the objectives and instruments ofthe various domestic constituents in the U.S. The Consequences of the 1998 TestsOn May 11 and 13,1998, India conducted two sets of nuclear tests at the Pokhran test site.2 The Indian Prime Minister, Atal Behari Vajpayee, proclaimed that India was a "nuclear weapons state". The tests included a fission device, a thermonuclear device and a low-yield device. Two days later, New Delhi declared that it had conducted two more tests, both alleged to have sub-kiloton yields. At a press conference on May 17, Rajagopala Chidambaran, Secretary of India's Department ofAtamic Energy and Chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission, announced the yields of the first tests as 12, 43 and 0.2 kilotons, respectively. The announced yields of the second set of tests were between 0.2 and 0.6 kilotons respectively. A.P.J. Abdul-Kalam, science advisor to the prime minister, claimed that these tests were critical for the authentication of India's nuclear capability and its prospective modernization. He also said that the data from the tests could be used for 'subcritical' tests.)The Indian tests were followed by the Pakistani tests on May28 and 30. These tests took place in the Chagai Hills region. The yields ofthe tests on May 28 were stated to be, as claimed by Dr. A.Q. Khan, in the 30 to 35 kiloton range for one test and the other four were stated to be smaller yields suitable for tactical ~e a p o n s .~The test on May 30 was in
This article is about U.S. non-proliferation objectives towards South Asia in the period 1990-2000. The article begins with an inquiry into the reasons for the transition of South Asia in the U.S. security debate from a "basket case" or an irrelevancy to "the greatest flashpoint" on earth.' Not only has there been an increase in the political salience and visibility of South Asia in American internal analysis and comment, but South Asia is the most commonly quoted example ofproliferation concern. Secondly, the article draws up a balance sheet of U.S. perceptions of threat visa -vis South Asia. This understanding is vital because a nation's security policy has to be predicated on its threat perceptions, whether perceived or real. Thirdly, it categorizes U.S. non-proliferation objectives towards South Asia in three ways, as they emerge from its domestic structure.? These are, first, prevention or renunciation of nuclearization. This is the NPT centered approach, aiming for the prevention of a nuclear breakout between India and P'akistan and is chiefly advocated within the Congress, the orthodox non-proliferation community and some think tanks. Second, there is the objective of cap, roll back and eliminate nuclear weapons advocated primarily by the U.S. administration. Third, there are some who advocate a limited overt capability for South Asia, among the defence and politico-militay organizations. Elimination is total renunciation or dismantlement. It can be voluntary or enforced. One ofthe best examples in recent years is South Africa, which, perhaps opts for voluntary dismantlement. Iraq is a good case of enforced dismantlement. The NPT centric: approach advocates elimination as an immediate goal, given that the P5 states have registered major progress in arms control agenda. The progress towards disarmament was one of the central conditions of the NPT "bargain". "Capping" is a more comprehensive and all encompassing term and would imply complete
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.