ETHICS AND ARMED FORCES - Ethik und Militär
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
ETHICS AND ARMED FORCES CONTROVERSIES IN M I LI TA R Y E T H I C S A N D SECURIT Y POLICY ISSUE 01/2020 The Core Question: Nuclear Deterrence in the Focus of Peace Ethics and Security Policy SPECIAL Nuclear Weapons, Service and Conscience
CONTENT
THE CORE QUESTION:
NUCLEAR DETERRENCE IN THE
FOCUS OF PEACE ETHICS
AND SECURITY POLICY
Editorial Nuclear Arms Control,
Veronika Bock Page 03 Disarmament and Nonproliferation
Regimes in Deep Crisis
The Ende of the “Interlude”: Nuclear Tom Sauer Page 50
Deterrence in the Light of Roman
Catholic Social Teaching „No Way Out“: Nuclear Weapons
Heinz-Günther Stobbe Page 04 Remain an Important Factor in
International Politics
Waiting for Armageddon: Michael Rühle Page 57
Theological and Ethical Aspects
of Nuclear Deterrence Russian Nuclear Weapons:
Drew Christiansen Page 12 Reason or Feelings?
Konstantin Bogdanov Page 64
The Relevance of the Heidelberg
Theses Today China’s Nuclear Strategy in a New
Ines-Jacqueline Werkner Page 18 Geopolitical Environment
Sven Bernhard Gareis Page 70
Exposing Flaws in the Logic(s)
of Nuclear Deterrence as an Inter
national Security Strategy:
A Feminist Postcolonial Perspective
SPECIAL: NUCLEAR
Madita Standke-Erdmann/ WEAPONS, SERVICE
Victoria Scheyer Page 25
AND CONSCIENCE
We Are the Bomb: Military Personnel in Conflicts of
Opaque Financial Flows Conscience: Between Church
and Unwitting Involvement Idealism and Political Realism
in Nuclear Armament Markus Bentler Page 78
Robin Jaspert Page 32
The Nuclear Question: Pious Hopes
Extended Nuclear Deterrence and Real Opportunities
and Sharing: Overcome Together, Burkhard Bleul Page 85
Don’t Go It Alone
Wolfgang Richter Page 39 Impressum/Alle Ausgaben Page 91
2 ETHICSANDARMEDFORCES.COM ETHICS AND ARMED FORCES 01/20
EDITORIAL
“Our world is marked by a perverse dichoto- start of this year, the publishers of the U.S. ac-
my that tries to defend and ensure stability ademic journal Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists
and peace through a false sense of security set their symbolic Doomsday Clock to 100 sec-
sustained by a mentality of fear and mistrust.” onds to midnight – as an urgent warning and
With these words, spoken in Nagasaki at the expression of “the most dangerous situation
end of 2019, Pope Francis once again con- that humanity has ever faced”. Several articles
demned the system of nuclear deterrence. are therefore devoted to the current security
Peace and international stability cannot be policy situation and possible ways out of the
built on the threat of total annihilation, he deterrence paradigm. The editorial team also
said. By taking the view that not only the use thought it particularly important to include
of nuclear weapons but also threatening their two separate articles outlining the position of
use and even their possession cannot be jus- the nuclear powers Russia and China.
tified, the pope has set a new course in the The resurgent discussion about Germany’s
Church’s peace ethics. “nuclear sharing” further illustrates the con-
Weapons whose use can never be ethically tinuing topicality of the issue. Our special fea-
legitimate are supposed to secure peace. For ture edition examines the question of what the
a long time, this paradox has played a central papal pronouncements mean for service ren-
role in peace ethics discussions in the Catho- dered by German military personnel.
lic Church. For example, the papal encyclical Our sincere thanks go to all the authors, and
Pacem in terris (1963) issued by Pope John XX- we hope that this edition will help bring about
III was a response to the atomic threat of the a deeper understanding of the core issues. If
Cuban Missile Crisis the year before. For him, after reading these articles, you conclude that
it was a precept equally of justice, reason and it is perhaps no longer quite so clear who is
human dignity that the arms race should cease “naive” and who is not, then much will already
and effective agreements on disarmament have been accomplished.
should be reached. The pastoral constitution
Gaudium et spes promulgated in 1965 takes up
this teaching. From then on, official teachings
would be shaped by the idea of an “interlude
granted us from above” so that we might find
political alternatives to war.
This edition takes the Vatican’s current
“change of course” as its starting point, and
asks what motives are behind the pope’s state-
ments. At the same time, the Holy See is not
alone in its fundamental criticism – so the edi-
tors also wanted to give a voice to civil society
initiatives such as the International Campaign
to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN), and femi-
nist research.
On almost no other subject are the fronts Dr. Veronika Bock
of opinion so hardened. Opponents of nucle- Director of zebis
ar weapons claim that supporters of deter-
rence are irresponsible. The latter respond
almost reflexively with accusations of naivety.
At any rate, the clear position of the Catholic
Church, the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nu-
clear Weapons (TPNW), and also the general
state of international relations have reignited
the debate. It is not without reason that at the
ETHICS AND ARMED FORCES 01/20 ETHICSANDARMEDFORCES.COM 3
THE END OF THE
“INTERLUDE” Author: Heinz-Günther Stobbe
NUCLEAR DETERRENCE IN THE Pope Francis’ current input
LIGHT OF ROMAN into the debate
CATHOLIC SOCIAL TEACHING On November 10/11, 2017, the Dicastery for
Promoting Integral Human Development – a
new central body created by Pope Francis – or-
ganized an expert symposium in the Vatican on
“Prospects for a World Free of Nuclear Weap-
ons and for Integral Disarmament”. During the
conference, the pope invited participants to
an audience. In the Clementine Hall, he gave
Abstract
an address in which he welcomed the fact that
“in a historic vote at the United Nations, the
Pope Francis’ statements on banning nuclear weapons have attracted
majority of the members of the international
much attention, but they can be placed in the long tradition of peace community determined that nuclear weap-
ethics in the Church’s teachings. The Second World War and the ons are not only immoral, but must also be
development of weapons of mass destruction intensified open skep- considered an illegal means of warfare. This
ticism toward armaments and military conflict resolution. But this decision filled a significant juridical lacuna,
did not bring about a fundamental rejection of the bellum iustum [... but] even more important is the fact that it
doctrine as an ethical framework for assessing the legitimacy of was mainly the result of a ‘humanitarian initi-
warfare. It was the Second Vatican Council that pointed out that ative’ sponsored by a significant alliance be-
the destructive power of nuclear weapons puts them beyond any tween civil society, states, international organ-
permissible defense. It coined the idea of an “interlude granted us izations, churches, academies and groups of
from above” – in view of the threat of extinction, the time remain- experts.”1
Pope Francis reaffirmed this position – as had
ing for humanity to find an appropriate way of resolving conflicts.
been generally expected – in the context of his
In their pastoral letter “The Challenge of Peace”, the U.S. bishops
visit to Japan at the end of November 2019. On
did not declare nuclear deterrence to be completely unacceptable.
his return flight, he declared in a press confer-
But they did indissolubly link its temporary acceptance to conditions ence: “Hiroshima was a true human catechesis
such as serious arms control and disarmament efforts. Thus we on cruelty. Cruelty.” He added that moral con-
find indications of the Vatican’s current position – removing the demnation of the use and possession of nu-
distinction between (conditionally) permitted possession of nuclear clear weapons “must also be included in the
weapons and their prohibited use – at an early stage. Long-held eth- Catechism of the Catholic Church”2. Ever more
ical doubts about a policy that establishes “peace” only on the basis of urgent in tone, but without going into further
the threat of mutual annihilation are compounded by the judgment detail, the pope indicated that he wished the
that the will to disarmament is not discernible, and therefore an Roman Catholic Church to show a greater de-
essential condition for toleration is not met. The German Commis- gree of commitment in its rejection of nuclear
sion for Justice and Peace has also adopted this line of argument, weapons, comparable to developments in re-
gard to capital punishment. As he explained in
declaring in 2019 that banning nuclear weapons is the starting
his message from the Peace Park in Nagasaki,
point for the desired disarmament process. It therefore sought to
this has a fundamental basis in the Church’s
draw a line under abusive interpretations of the “interlude”. The
tradition: “[T]he Catholic Church is irrevoca-
Catholic Church’s commitment to a complete ban on and abolition bly committed to promoting peace between
of nuclear weapons is perceived as turnaround, but in reality it is a peoples and nations. This is a duty to which
stringent continuation of its social teaching. Regardless of religious the Church feels bound before God and every
affiliation, this teaching appeals to our human sense of morality as man and woman in our world. We must never
the Church seeks to gain broad support for a gradual turning away grow weary of working to support the principal
from nuclear deterrence. international legal instruments of nuclear disar-
4 ETHICSANDARMEDFORCES.COM ETHICS AND ARMED FORCES 01/20
mament and non-proliferation, including the may prevent, the weapons would have such
Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons” a devastating effect that they would leave the
(author’s emphasis).3 earth as it were ‘waste and void’ [Gen 1,2; at-
tached as a note in the original, the author],
The history of the as wasteland and chaos, similar to the deso-
current debate lation not of its original beginning, but of its
downfall.”6 Significant enough for the drama
For many people, it may come as a surprise of the situation, however, the Pope no longer
to find that the pope and the Holy See are dares to repeat the statement made shortly
strongly committed to outlawing nuclear after the war that the experience of war had
weapons. But even in Dès le début of August „spurred the longing for peace and the will to
1917 – the first papal “Peace Note” of the 20th work for it“, and „has placed the problem of
century, addressed “to you who at this tragic disarmament at the center of international
hour direct the destinies of the warring na- aspirations with entirely new considerations
tions” – Pope Benedict XV set out a number and with an emphasis never felt before“7.
of points as the basis for a “just and lasting In the Cold War, disarmament efforts take a
peace”. It states: “First of all, the fundamen- back seat and bring the doctrine and theo-
tal point must be that the material force of
arms must be replaced by the moral force of Up to the present day, ethical discussion
right; hence there should be a just agreement
by all for the simultaneous and reciprocal of security and armament policy
reduction of armaments, in accordance with
rules and guarantees to be established, to the
has been conducted in the context of the
extent necessary and sufficient to maintain traditional doctrine of just war
public order in each state.”4 From that time
onward, these concerns remain a constant ry of nuclear deterrence to the fore. It is the
theme in Roman Catholic teachings on peace. encyclical Pacem in terris (April 11, 1963) by
The magisterium of the Catholic Church is Pope John XXIII which gives the topic an un-
consistently and unmistakably skeptical to- precedented rank.
ward the armament efforts of states, even if
it holds no pacifist expectations. This attitude The position of the U.S. bishops’ conference:
becomes much more severe in the case of It is important to remember that up to the
nuclear weapons. Already in 1954, in his East- present day, ethical discussion of security and
er speech in St. Peters Square, Pope Pius XII armament policy has been conducted in the
stressed the urgent need for international un- context of the traditional doctrine of just war,
derstanding by vividly invoking the horror of a both at the level of the papal magisterium
nuclear war: “Thus before the eyes of the ter- and in large parts of Catholic moral theology.
rified world lies the vision of gigantic destruc- However, this does not apply to those groups
tion, of vast territories rendered uninhabita- and movements within the Catholic Church
ble and useless to mankind, in addition to the who take a strictly pacifist stance – similar
biological consequences that may be pro- to the so-called historic peace churches (e.g.
duced, both by mutations induced in germs Quakers, Mennonites) in Protestant Christiani-
and microorganism, and by the uncertain ty – and who consequently reject the doctrine
outcome that a prolonged radioactive stimu- of just war. Because of this strictly ethical po-
lus may have on major organisms, including sition, the Roman Catholic Church has never
humans, and their descendants.”5 The Pope been drawn into regarding nuclear weapons
thus concretizes an earlier motif which he and the possibility of atomic self-destruction
had unfolded in his Christmas message from as an end-of-days phenomenon, as some sec-
1950 under the impression of an imminent tions of the Protestant communities and other
new world war: “Today, in a war which God apocalyptic dystopias do.
ETHICS AND ARMED FORCES 01/20 ETHICSANDARMEDFORCES.COM 5
THE CORE QUESTION: NUCLEAR DETERRENCE IN THE FOCUS OF PEACE ETHICS AND SECURITY POLICY
The official attitude of the Roman Catholic ticular by directing its attention to the weapons
Church to war was outlined by the U.S. bish- of mass destruction that were now available:
ops’ conference in 1983 in their pastoral letter “[... A]cts of war involving these weapons can
The Challenge of Peace: God’s Promise and Our inflict massive and indiscriminate destruction,
Response, in five points. The American bish- thus going far beyond the bounds of legitimate
ops adhere to the traditional view, inasmuch defense.”10 According to the Council, the ten-
as it ascribes to peoples “a right and even a dency toward total war is an intrinsic charac-
duty” to “protect their existence and freedom teristic of weapons of mass destruction, which
by proportionate means against an unjust ag- it condemns categorically, due to its destruc-
gressor”, and at the same time denies moral tive consequences, as “a crime against God
legitimacy to any war of aggression.8 With and man himself”11. The Council saw only one
reference to the Second Vatican Council, the way to counter this danger: “Warned by the ca-
bishops underline the crucial importance of lamities which the human race has made pos-
the principle of distinguishing between com- sible, let us make use of the interlude granted
batants and civilians in acts of war, and the us from above and for which we are thankful
need to observe the criterion of proportion- to become more conscious of our own respon-
ality even in the case of a defensive war: “No sibility and to find means for resolving our dis-
defensive strategy, nuclear or conventional, putes in a manner more worthy of man. Divine
which exceeds the limits of proportionality, is Providence urgently demands of us that we
morally permissible.”9 free ourselves from the age-old slavery of war”
The American bishops also discuss the ethi- (author’s emphasis).12
cal problems of nuclear deterrence in the light From then on, official teachings on nuclear
of the criteria developed in the doctrine of just deterrence would be shaped by the idea of an
war. They therefore set out these criteria in “interlude granted us from above” so that we
might find political alternatives to war. Thus
None of the innovations of the Second the U.S. bishops, in their 1983 pastoral letter
mentioned above, acknowledged that the
Vatican Councilfell from heaven, interlude serves to ensure a certain kind of
so to speak. They had already started to peace – “our present peace” – and therefore
stopped short of a fundamental rejection.13
develop in the Church and in theology However, their stated intention was “to rein-
force with moral prohibitions and prescrip-
detail in their pastoral letter and critically re- tions the prevailing political barrier against
flect on them with regard to the situation in resort to nuclear weapons”. And they urged
the modern world. These criteria form the eth- “negotiations to halt the testing, production,
ical foundation of all Church and magisterial and deployment of new nuclear weapons sys-
pronouncements on the question of nuclear tems. Not only should steps be taken to end
weapons. development and deployment, but the num-
bers of existing weapons must be reduced in a
The idea of the “interlude” manner which lessens the danger of war.” The
bishops conclude: “There is an urgent moral
The Second Vatican Council (1962-1965) has and political responsibility to use the "peace
fundamentally renewed the self-image of the of a sort" we have as a framework to move to-
Roman Catholic Church and many of its teach- ward authentic peace through nuclear arms
ings. But none of the innovations fell from control, reductions, and disarmament.”14 This
heaven, so to speak. They had already start- view does not necessarily imply the abolition
ed to develop in the Church and in theology. of nuclear weapons as the end goal of disar-
Also with regard to Church doctrine on peace, mament, but it is logically compatible with
the Council took up the core elements of the the concept of minimal deterrence. Neverthe-
insights associated with the world wars, in par- less, even in 1983 the bishops did not regard
6 ETHICSANDARMEDFORCES.COM ETHICS AND ARMED FORCES 01/20
adherence to the deterrence strategy or moral Hiroshima bomb, Paul VI called for prayer that
tolerance of nuclear deterrence as being the fi- nuclear weapons might be banned.18 In 1978,
nal word in this matter. They saw it as a condi- in his address to the First Special Session of the
tional acceptance. As they put it: “Deterrence United Nations Devoted to Disarmament, he
is not a suitable strategy for securing peace in reaffirmed the goal of “completely eliminating
the long term. It is a transitional strategy that the atomic arsenal”19. The step taken by the
can only be justified in connection with an ab- present pope has continued this line consist-
solute determination to work for arms control ently and more specifically by now condemn-
and disarmament” (author’s emphasis).15 Also ing nuclear weapons in principle. As such, this
in 1983, in their pastoral letter Gerechtigkeit decision came as a surprise to the public, but
schafft Frieden (“Justice Creates Peace”), the
German Bishops’ Conference (Deutsche Bis-
chofskonferenz) also mentions the Council’s
The goal of a nuclear weapon-
“interlude” – (in German: “Frist”)16 – granted
to us from above, which allows a “temporary”
free world has been present for a long
toleration of nuclear weapons. This can be de- time in papal proclamations
scribed as an “emergency ethics”.17
Talk of an “interlude” was clearly intended it had been in the making for decades, first-
to underline the urgency of the political task ly in the deliberations of the Pontifical Acad-
of disarmament. It served to initiate a process emy of Sciences, and also in the context of
which, by means of arms control and disarma- the diplomatic activities of the Holy See. In
ment, had to be geared towards overcoming 1981, the Academy published a statement on
the strategy of nuclear deterrence. For this the consequences of using nuclear weapons,
reason, “interlude” did not refer primarily to followed by a declaration on the prevention
a certain period of time, but to factual condi- of nuclear war in 1982, and finally, in 1984,
tions that must be fulfilled so that the strategy by a “warning” about the nuclear winter that
of nuclear deterrence can be tolerated. These would result from a nuclear conflict.20 In the
conditions imply, on the on hand, the criteria 1982 document, the academicians warned
that apply to war and war planning in general, that any use of a nuclear weapon, even if lim-
and on the other hand, the decisive and in- ited, carried a great risk of nuclear escalation.
dissoluble link between a possible temporary Considering the “overwhelming dangers” of
acceptance and the political engagement to nuclear deterrence, they finally conclude: “It is
overcome the strategy of nuclear deterrence. imperative to reduce distrust and to increase
With this in mind, the tolerance of nuclear hope and confidence through a succession of
weapons depends on a political decision, or steps to curb the development, production,
more precisely, on a judgment on the credibil- testing and deployment of nuclear weapons
ity and seriousness of a targeted disarmament systems, and to reduce them to substantially
policy which is geared towards an abolition of lower levels with the ultimate hope of their
nuclear weapons. Therefore, the crucial ques- complete elimination.”21 Once again, the ar-
tion is: Given the present state of affairs, and gument focuses not on a general prohibition
looking at the conditions mentioned above, of nuclear weapons, but on the urgency of a
how should this strategy be assessed? political process that is clearly and unambigu-
ously oriented toward this ultimate goal.
The end of the “interlude” Apart from extensive involvement in efforts
to ban nuclear testing, the diplomatic activi-
Developments in the Vatican’s activities: ties of the Holy See are focused mainly on two
The goal of a nuclear weapon-free world has processes of international diplomacy relating
been present for a long time in papal procla- to the problem of nuclear weapons: first and
mations. Back in 1965, in his message to mark foremost, the negotiations for the Non-Prolif-
the 20th anniversary of the dropping of the eration Treaty (NPT), and secondly the Vienna
ETHICS AND ARMED FORCES 01/20 ETHICSANDARMEDFORCES.COM 7
THE CORE QUESTION: NUCLEAR DETERRENCE IN THE FOCUS OF PEACE ETHICS AND SECURITY POLICY
Conference on the Humanitarian Impact of for and against nuclear deterrence. Its overall
Nuclear Weapons. The idea for this confer- conclusion is that nuclear deterrence can no
ence arose in the context of the NPT, and it longer be regarded as a policy that stands on
convened for the third time in 2014. Finally, firm moral ground.
the negotiations on the conclusion of the First of all, the document refers to the
Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weap- growing consensus on the strict condemna-
ons (TPNW) should be mentioned. This has tion of any use of nuclear weapons. But it
now been signed by the Holy See. Archbish- also recalls that the Church has nevertheless
op Auza, as Vatican representative, addressed provisionally accepted their possession for
the purpose of nuclear deterrence, albeit un-
In a letter to the Austrian Chancellor, der the condition that this is “a step on the
Pope Francis stated that nuclear deterrence and way toward progressive disarmament”. Then
follows a decisive statement: “This condition
the threat of mutual annihilation cannot be has not been fulfilled – far from it.” “It is now
the basis for an ethics of brotherly and peaceful time,” the text continues, “to question the
coexistence between peoples and states distinction between possession and use [of
nuclear weapons].” The time has come for
the Ninth Review Conference of the Parties to new thinking “to embrace the abolition of
the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nucle- nuclear weapons as an essential foundation
ar Weapons. He concluded by quoting Pope of collective security.” Now is the time “to
Francis, saying that nuclear deterrence and affirm not only the immorality of the use of
the threat of mutual annihilation cannot be nuclear weapons, but the immorality of their
the basis for an ethics of brotherly and peace- possession, thereby clearing the road to nu-
ful coexistence between peoples and states.22 clear abolition.”26
This statement appears in the pope’s letter to It is clear that in his recent statements, the
the Austrian Chancellor, Sebastian Kurz, on pope has neither changed nor corrected this
the occasion of the Vienna Conference on the assessment. Instead, he varies it by placing
Humanitarian Impact of Nuclear Weapons.23 different emphases, but always with the call
For this conference, the Holy See presented to work with all one’s energy for the aboli-
an extensive contribution titled Nuclear Dis- tion of nuclear weapons. But how exactly is
armament: Time for Abolition.24 According to this position to be understood? According to
the American theologian Gerard Powers, this Gerard Powers, one possible reading is that
document summarizes the Vatican’s position the Vatican has become a nuclear pacifist.
on the interrelated ethics of the use of nucle- However, he himself offers a more “nuanced
ar weapons, deterrence and disarmament.25 interpretation” to consider: that the Vatican
It could also be said that the text reflects the has not abandoned its attitude of condition-
development of decades of papal teaching. al acceptance or the concept of deterrence
It examines once again a series of arguments as such, but condemns the behavior of the
nuclear powers who are evidently not willing
The Author to fulfill the conditions of acceptance. Thus it
is not the idea of deterrence that is criticized,
but rather the morality of its structure as it
currently exists.27
Is this “more nuanced” reading accurate?
Prof. (ret.) Dr. Heinz-Günther Stobbe is Not quite, if we compare it with the position
moderator of the “Just Peace” working group of the German Commission for Justice and
at the German Commission for Justice and Peace (Deutsche Kommission Justitia et Pax).
Peace. For many years he worked at the West- Or not unless we separate the idea of deter-
phalian-Wilhelminian University of Münster rence from its nuclear realization.
(WWU) and the University of Siegen.
8 ETHICSANDARMEDFORCES.COM ETHICS AND ARMED FORCES 01/20
Developments in the Roman Catholic mament”, the Commission once again exam- Church in the Federal Republic of Germa- ined the question of whether the strategy of ny: The German Commission for Justice and nuclear deterrence can satisfy the necessary Peace is run by the German Bishops’ Confer- criteria of ethics and international law for an ence (Deutsche Bischofskonferenz) and the extension of the “interlude”. Their verdict is un- Central Committee of German Catholics (Zen- equivocal: the reasons for rejecting any further tralkomitee der Deutschen Katholiken, ZDK). continuation now outweigh all others. Not only It represents Catholic institutions and organi- are the treaty-based pillars of armaments and zations in Germany. As such, given the pope’s control policy being eroded, but disarmament position and with regard to the current interna- successes have obviously been limited by the tional political situation, it felt obliged to assess will of the nuclear powers to maintain the strat- whether it could share his position. A decade egy of nuclear deterrence. Its internal contradic- earlier, the Commission had given extensive tions are encapsulated in NATO’s repeated as- consideration to the issue. In 2008, it published sertion that its policy will remain based on this a study with the title “The growing significance strategy for as long as nuclear weapons exist. of nuclear armaments. A challenge for the eth- To want a world free of nuclear weapons, but ics of peace and the political sphere”. In this at the same time to declare that the absence study, the Commission clearly states: “In light of nuclear weapons is the critical condition for of the fact that the continued tolerance which was expressed in the 1980s and which was al- The internal contradictions of nuclear ways combined with appeals to all sides for dis- deterrence are encapsulated in NATO’s repeated armament was all too often either ignored by those in power or was misconstrued as an ac- assertion that its policy will remain based on ceptance predicated upon the ethics of peace, this strategy for as long as nuclear weapons exist something which allowed the Church’s position to be exploited, it is particularly important that ending nuclear deterrence, is only credible if the Church clarify its position with regard to the overcoming the strategy of nuclear deterrence ethics of peace. Use of the word ‘continued’ has begins with banning nuclear weapons. In 2008, never been meant to be understood as an at- the Commission for Justice and Peace had stat- tempt to legitimise the simple continuance of ed relatively vaguely: “An essential step on the deterrence. It should merely serve to retain the road to the elimination of nuclear weapons is necessary political leeway to clearly reduce the ensuring that they do not have any interna- dependence of efforts to prevent war on the tional legitimacy”.30 But now the Commission means of nuclear deterrence and to achieve specifies the necessary steps in sequence: an the strived for full elimination of nuclear ar- international ban on nuclear weapons cannot maments and scenarios for their utilisation. be at the end of a process leading to their actual Political action must be measured against what elimination – it must mark its beginning.31 it actually does with this leeway” (author’s em- phasis).28 The political process towards Apart from the argument that the “interlude” banning and eliminating was deliberately misinterpreted, a trend toward nuclear weapons undermining the arms control treaties was already noted in 2008, on which the Commis- The social teachings of the Roman Catholic sion comments: “[... O]bservation of the trends Church are by no means intended only for which are currently evident with regard to nu- its members. According to a phrase coined clear armaments is giving increasing weight to by Johannes XXIII, they are addressed “to those who argue that this continued tolerance all people of good will”. In other words, the is increasingly losing its justification.”29 Church’s arguments should also be under- In its recent 2019 position paper “Outlawing standable to people who may not share the Nuclear Weapons as the Start of Nuclear Disar- faith of the Church, but who nevertheless ETHICS AND ARMED FORCES 01/20 ETHICSANDARMEDFORCES.COM 9
THE CORE QUESTION: NUCLEAR DETERRENCE IN THE FOCUS OF PEACE ETHICS AND SECURITY POLICY
see themselves subject to the demands of controlled elimination of nuclear weapons,
moral reason as imposed by the human con- instead of developing and perfecting their
dition. Accordingly, the popes have always nuclear capabilities.
addressed the political and public spheres, In this political process, military personnel
appealing to recognize and live up to our play a role that can be fraught with tension
common human responsibility. Pope Fran- and difficulties. Not only, but particularly
cis is building on the exemplary efforts of all in the Church, a sense of solidarity with our
those who are actively committed to the abo- fellow human beings demands that this role
lition of nuclear weapons: “A world of peace, be taken seriously. Military personnel can
easily find themselves in a conflict of loyalty
Pope Francis is building on the with their military and political leaders. This
burdens their conscience and affects or even
exemplary efforts of all those who jeopardizes their professional future. In such
are actively committed to situations, they need pastoral advice and
support. However, it is not only a question of
the abolition of nuclear weapons political loyalty and military obedience. Pri-
marily this is about the moral integrity of the
free from nuclear weapons, is the aspiration individual person, who must reconcile within
of millions of men and women everywhere. themselves their duties as a member of the
To make this ideal a reality calls for involve- Church and as a citizen on the one hand, and
ment on the part of all: individuals, religious their duties as a member of the armed forc-
communities and civil society, countries that es on the other. This can be achieved if they
possess nuclear weapons and those that do contribute their military expertise to the pub-
not, the military and private sectors, and in- lic and political debate on how to gradually
ternational organizations. Our response to move beyond nuclear deterrence. Deterrence
the threat of nuclear weapons must be joint is part of the military craft, but deterrence with
and concerted, inspired by the arduous yet nuclear weapons is not.
constant effort to build mutual trust and thus
surmount the current climate of distrust.”32
In the Roman Catholic Church, new think-
ing about the strategy of nuclear deterrence
has taken root, and some bishops’ confer-
ences have already adopted the pope’s posi-
tion. As a universal church that embraces and
transcends all national contexts, the Church
could be a laboratory for political and social
debate which then serves as a model. With-
out such debate, an effective global consen-
sus leading to success in the fight against
nuclear weapons cannot be achieved. A
global public must put pressure on the gov-
ernments of the nuclear powers to return to
the negotiating table immediately and agree
on concrete disarmament steps, instead of
gradually terminating or not renewing the ex-
isting treaties. The populations of the nuclear
powers must not accept the refusal of their
governments to sign the ban treaty (TPNW).
Rather they should constantly and strongly
urge their governments to agree jointly on the
10 ETHICSANDARMEDFORCES.COM ETHICS AND ARMED FORCES 01/201 Address by Pope Francis to participants in the 20 Statement on the Consequences of the Use of international symposium “Prospects for a World Free Nuclear Weapons (1981); Declaration on Prevention of of Nuclear Weapons”, Friday, November 10, 2017. Nuclear War (1982); Nuclear Winter: A Warning http://www.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/ (1984). speeches/2017/november/documents/papa-frances- 21 Quotation from “Declaration on Prevention of co_20171110_convegno-disarmointegrale.html Nuclear War”. English version available at: http:// (accessed 2.6.2020). All texts mentioned or quoted www.academyofsciences.va/content/dam/accademia/ below are available from the internet address www. pdf/documenta4.pdf (accessed 2.6.2020). vatican.va/content/vatican/en.html. Unless noted 22 Cf. Statement by H.E. Archbishop Bernardito Auza, otherwise, the English text is taken directly from this Apostolic Nuncio and Permanent Observer of the Holy source. See to the United Nations, New York. Wednesday, 2 Apostolic journey of Pope Francis to Thailand and April 15, 2015. Japan. Press conference with the Holy Father on the 23 Cf. Message of His Holiness Pope Francis on the return flight to Rome, Tuesday, November 26, 2019. occasion of the Vienna Conference on the Humanitari- 3 Apostolic journey of Pope Francis to Thailand and an Impact of Nuclear Weapons to His Excellency Mr. Japan. Address of the Holy Father on Nuclear Weapons. Sebastian Kurz, Federal Minister for Europe, Atomic Bomb Hypocenter Park (Nagasaki), Sunday, Integration and Foreign Affairs of the Republic of November 24, 2019. Austria, President of the Conference on the Humani- 4 http://www.vatican.va/content/benedict-xv/fr/ tarian Impact of Nuclear Weapons. apost_exhortations/documents/hf_ben-xv_ 24 Nuclear Disarmament: Time For Abolition. A exh_19170801_des-le-debut.html (accessed 2.6.2020). Contribution of the Holy See. Permanent Mission of (Translated from French.) the Holy See to the United Nations and Other 5 http://w2.vatican.va/content/pius-xii/it/messages/ International Organizations in Geneva, Vienna, urbi/documents/hf_p-xii_mes_19540418_urbi-easter. December 8, 2014. Available at: http://www.fciv.org/ html (accessed 2.6.2020). (Translated from Italian.) downloads/Holy%20See%20Contribution-Vien- 6 For the speech in German, see: Utz, Arthur-Fridolin na-8-DEC-2014.pdf. and Groner, Joseph-Fulko (eds.) (1962): Aufbau und Ent- 25 Powers, Gerard. From Nuclear Deterrence to faltung des gesellschaftlichen Lebens: soziale Summe Pius XII. Disarmament: Evolving Catholic Perspectives, in: Arms 2. ed. Freiburg, S. 1980-1983, S. 1981. (Translated from Control Today, vol. 45 no. 4. https://www.armscon- German.) trol.org/act/2015-05/features/nuclear-deterrence-dis- 7 Christmas message to the College of Cardinals, armament-evolving-catholic-perspectives. 24.12.1946. In: Utz, Arthur-Fridolin and Groner, 26 Quotations in this paragraph are taken from: Joseph-Fulko (eds.) (1962), pp. 1918–1932, p. 1925. Nuclear Disarmament, pp. 4 f. (Translated from German.) 27 Cf. Powers, op. cit. 8 The Challenge of Peace: God's Promise and Our Response. 28 Deutsche Kommission Justitia et Pax (ed.) (2008): A Pastoral Letter on War and Peace by the National Die wachsende Bedeutung nuklearer Rüstung. Heraus- Conference of Catholic Bishops. May 3, 1983. No. 78. forderung für Friedensethik und Politik. (Gerechtigkeit http://www.usccb.org/upload/challenge-peace-gods- und Frieden no. 113.) Bonn, section 3.1, p. 56. promise-our-response-1983.pdf (accessed 2.6.2020). English translation: “The growing significance of 9 Ibid. nuclear armaments. A challenge for the ethics of peace 10 Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern and the political sphere.” https://www.justitia-et-pax. World. Gaudium et spes. Promulgated by His Holiness, de/jp/publikationen/pdf/guf_113e.pdf, pp. 56 f. Pope Paul VI On December 7, 1965. No. 80. http:// (accessed 2.6.2020). www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_ 29 Ibid., section 3.1, pp. 55 f. council/documents/vat-ii_const_19651207_gaudi- 30 Ibid., section 3.2, p. 57. um-et-spes_en.html (accessed 2.6.2020). 31 Deutsche Kommission Justitia et Pax (ed.) (2019): 11 Ibid., no. 81. Die Ächtung der Atomwaffen als Beginn nuklearer 12 Ibid., no. 81. Abschreckung. Ein Positionspapier der Deutschen 13 Cf. The Challenge of Peace, chapter I., B.3. For the text Kommission Justitia et Pax. (Gerechtigkeit und Frieden in the following quotation, see no. 194. no. 137.) Bonn, section 6, p. 15. 14 Ibid., no. 189. English translation: “Outlawing Nuclear Weapons as 15 Ibid., chapter I., B.3. the Start of Nuclear Disarmament. A position paper of 16 Gaudium et spes, no. 81. the German Commission for Justice and Peace.” 17 Cf. Deutsche Bischofskonferenz (1983): Gerechtigkeit https://www.justitia-et-pax.de/jp/publikationen/pdf/ schafft Frieden. Wort der Deutschen Bischofskonferenz zum guf_138.pdf (accessed 2.6.2020). Frieden. (Die Deutschen Bischöfe no. 34) Bonn, no. 32 Address of the Holy Father on nuclear weapons, 3.5.2, p. 36. (Translated from German.) Nagasaki, November 24, 2019. 18 Part of the text appears in: Sekretariat der Deutschen Bischofskonferenz (Hg.) (1980): Dienst am Frieden. Stellungnahmen der Päpste, des II. Vatikanischen Konzils und der Bischofssynode. Von 1963-1980. (Verlautbarungen des Apostolischen Stuhls no. 23.) Bonn, pp. 42-43, here p. 43. 19 Message of His Holiness Paul VI to the First Special Sesssion of the United Nations General Assembly dedicated to disarmament, delivered on 6 June 1968 by H.E. Archbishop Agostino Casaroli. . ETHICS AND ARMED FORCES 01/20 ETHICSANDARMEDFORCES.COM 11
WAITING FOR
ARMAGEDDON Author: Drew Christiansen
THEOLOGICAL AND ETHICAL From the beginning, nuclear weapons have car-
ASPECTS OF ried a sense of ultimacy that required religious
language to voice their human significance.1
NUCLEAR DETERRENCE Following the detonation of the first atomic
bomb at the Trinity site in July, 1945, Robert Op-
penheimer recited the words of Krishna in the
Bhagavad-Gita, “Now I am become Death the
destroyer of worlds.” Oppenheimer intuited the
latent religious dimension of the Manhattan Pro-
ject: The atom as the first flash of creation and as
the explosive instrument of its annihilation.
When General Leslie Groves inquired why Op-
penheimer had named the test explosion Trini-
ty, the physicist replied, “I know what thoughts
were in my mind. There is a poem of John
Abstract Donne, written just before his death, which I
know and love :
Nuclear weapons have always been associated with the “end of As West and East
days”. A repertoire of concepts and images to express this religious In all flat Maps—and I am one—are one,
dimension can be found in the Bible and in theology. However, it is So death doth touch the Resurrection.”
apparent that these associations do not provide us with a consist- Oppenheimer continued, “That still does not
ent assessment of the phenomenon of “nuclear weapons”. Instead, make a Trinity, but in another, better known de-
contrary positions are supported with reference to the same biblical votional poem Donne opens,
motifs. This is explained by the interrelationships between reli- Batter my heart, three-person’d God.”2
The first citation from Donne’s Hymne to God
gious symbols, basic religious attitudes, and personal dispositions.
in my sicknesse, meditates on dying as the way to
Furthermore, even an identical assessment – such as a rejection of
resurrection. The second poem, Batter my heart,
nuclear weapons – can be used to justify different responses.
three person’d God, prays for liberation from all
Political and ethical debates about the legitimacy of nuclear that holds the poet back from surrendering to
weapons and nuclear deterrence have in each case taken account God. Whether Oppenheimer was unconsciously
of changes in technological and political environments. During thinking about his own liberation from the coils
the Cold War, they have moved from the question of a ban in of his research or voicing guilt over constructing
principle to the conditions under which the use of nuclear weapons the bomb, we can only conjecture. Nevertheless,
could be justified. But fundamental skepticism toward attempts to he seems to have been alert to the religious im-
declare weapons of mass destruction compatible with the Just War plications of the test.
principles has been reflected not least in the 1983 pastoral letter by
the U.S. bishops, “The Challenge of Peace”. While this influential The Theology of Nuclear
document did not rule out the possible use of nuclear weapons in Deterrence
defense of fundamental values, it opposed nuclear war-fighting and
Theology is the language in which we articu-
allowed deterrence only under strict conditions.
late the religious dimensions of our experience.
Ultimately, the moral assessment of a phenomenon in accordance
Theologians, preachers and religious activists
with the Church’s social teachings always proceeds from a theolog- use biblical images to ground their positions on
ical, ethical and social “overall view”. In view of conditions in the deterrence.3 Consider three root images drawn
world today – including increasing international tensions, terror- from the Hebrew and Christian scriptures that
ism and proliferation risks – the Vatican’s current condemnation of have been applied to nuclear weapons: Babel
the deterrence policy leaves no doubt that it constitutes a heightened (Gen. 11: 1-32), Armageddon (Rev. 16:16), and
risk to the future of humanity and the planet. the Kingdom of God (Matt. 5:9, 44).
12 ETHICSANDARMEDFORCES.COM ETHICS AND ARMED FORCES 01/20Babel is a story of the construction of an Kingdom has already come and our duty is to live “earthly city,” as Augustine later wrote, “to the according to its demands, nonviolently.10 contempt of God.”4 The political theorist Michael Others like the US Catholic bishops in their Oakeshott considered Babel an object lesson in 1983 pastoral letter The Challenge of Peace, collective ambition.5 It evokes the hubris of tech- though they believe that the Kingdom has be- nological achievement, an apposite metaphor gun, also believe the fullness of the Kingdom is for construction of the atomic bomb. The French still to be. The incompleteness of the Kingdom Calvinist Jacques Ellul, for another, found in nu- allows a complex moral posture embracing clear power a rigid and irreversible system that both nonviolence and Just War. Accordingly, the resists reform.6 bishops’ nuanced just-war position allows just By contrast, Catholic Social Teaching sees enough ambiguity to make nuclear deterrence technology as in need of conscious human con- credible. trol (Pope Francis (2015), Laudato Si’, nos. 52, 114, 184; henceforth LS). “Never has humanity Fundamental Religious Attitudes had such power over itself,” Pope Francis wrote, The deeper human attitudes and dispositions “yet nothing ensures that it will be used wisely” draw on a single experience to inspire a perva- (LS, no. 104). Humanity’s responsibility for na- sive response to life as a whole. The relation be- ture, including the use of nuclear energy, is a tween symbol and religious affections is recip- theme of Francis’ encyclical Laudato Si’ (LS, no. rocal.11 Symbols can inspire religious attitudes. 104, and Pope Benedict XVI (2009), Caritas in ver- Alternatively, religious attitudes may incline the itate, nos. 68-77). Pope Francis’ invocation of hu- imagination to certain metaphors or influence man responsibility applies the Second Vatican how a person interprets them. The symbols may Council’s teaching on the authentic exercise of evoke a particular affection, wariness or trust, conscience in history (Vatican Council II, Gaudi- e.g., and the affection in turn may lead to con- um et spes, nos. 9 and 16). struing a particular symbol in a certain way, say, Armageddon represents the Last Battle at the determining whether a nuclear Armageddon is end of history in which God’s enemies are utterly welcomed as divine retribution or serves as a destroyed.7 The prospect of apocalyptic destruc- motive to abolish nuclear weapons. tion fascinates biblical fundamentalists and Consider this example. While Augustine is readers of dystopian fiction. In Dispensation- the father of Christian just-war thinking, at one alist theology, the righteous long for the end of point an overwhelming sense of the chanciness history, and Fundamentalists may even regard of human existence led him to despair of moral nuclear war favorably as an act of divine retribu- choice in wartime, so that he cast himself on the tion. Armageddon even provides a hermeneutic mysterious ways of God: for anti-nuclear opinion. Both liberal Christians “… since the whole mortal life of man upon and secular critics invoke the catastrophic de- earth is a trial, who can tell whether it may be struction associated with Armageddon to focus good or bad in any particular case – in time of attention on the disastrous risks involved in de- peace to reign or to serve, or to be at ease or to terrence strategy.8 die – or in time of war, to command or to fight, The Kingdom of God images an everlasting or to conquer or to be killed? At the same time, reign of justice and peace. It provides the vision it remains true, that whatever is good is so by the for Christian pacifists who refuse to join in war as divine blessing, and whatever is bad is so by di- well as for meliorist Christians who hope to trans- vine judgment.”12 form human existence by instituting “a world Augustine appeals to the image of a remote without war” or, better, one in which the risk of sovereign God, who dispenses blessing and war is far less likely. Christian pacifists condemn judgment by no standard but his own whim. nuclear weapons and urge trust in God. Among The strength of Augustine’s anxious bewilder- these were the monk and spiritual writer Thomas ment informs the image of the sovereign God Merton and the historian and nonviolent activist he applies to the experience of war. There is Gordon Zahn.9 For committed pacifists, God’s no hint of God’s goodness or providence, as ETHICS AND ARMED FORCES 01/20 ETHICSANDARMEDFORCES.COM 13
THE CORE QUESTION: NUCLEAR DETERRENCE IN THE FOCUS OF PEACE ETHICS AND SECURITY POLICY
modern interpretations of human finitude pro- Energy Commission and the House Un-Ameri-
vide.13 Events are beyond human control. Driv- can Activities Committee over his opposition to
en by this sentiment, Augustine’s will is immo- further development of the bomb, in particular
bilized and his mind shuts down. He is unable Edward Teller’s quest for “the Super,” the hydro-
to make the moral judgments required by the gen bomb.
Just War. Thus, in addition to the ordinary ra- The ethical debate evolved with the develop-
tional elements I list above (rational argument, ment of technology and government policy.16
From the earliest days, policymakers differed on
From the earliest days, policy- whether the weapons should be used at all. Ber-
nard Brodie, whose The Absolute Weapon: Atom-
makers differed on whether nuclear ic Power and World Order laid the foundations of
deterrence theory, argued that atomic weapons
weapons should be used at all were useful only as a deterrent to prevent war.
The diplomat George Kennan contended that
circumstances), one must assess the religious the weapons were “superfluous to our basic mil-
affections that inform the application of the re- itary posture.” Both thought the sole purpose of
ligious symbol. possessing nuclear weapons came to be to avert
Both the monk Thomas Merton and the activ- their use.
ist Jesuit Daniel Berrigan opposed nuclear arms,
but they split over how to resist them. Berrigan MAD
and the Catholic Left found inventive ways to The deterrent posture of the superpowers in
demonstrate their rejection of the economy of the Cold War came to be known as Mutually
death with public displays of resistance, acting Assured Destruction or “MAD.” That is, deter-
out their anger against the establishment. They rence relies on the fear of an aggressor that a
were righteous prophets. Merton, by contrast, nuclear first strike will result in an unacceptable
believed practitioners of nonviolence needed degree of destruction in a retaliatory attack by
to show greater unease over the anger in them- an adversary. Strategists divided over the size
selves and place their trust in God. “The key to of the arsenal needed for deterrence. Some ad-
nonviolence,” he wrote, “is the willingness of the vocated a numerical edge to provide survivabil-
nonviolent resister to suffer a certain amount of ity for the nuclear force and to project a more
accidental evil in order to bring about a change imposing threat to adversaries. Others urged
of mind in the oppressor and awaken him to that arsenals be only large enough to retaliate
personal openness and to dialogue.”14 A gen- following a pre-emptive strike. The expansion
uinely nonviolent response, he argued, “does of nuclear weapons, these strategists believed,
not insistently demand that persons and events had the perverse effect of decreasing national
conform to their own abstract ideals,” as the security.
Catholic Left did.15 Strategists like Henry Kissinger, Paul Nitze
and Herman Kahn held that nuclear war could
The Ethics of Deterrence be continuous with conventional war, with
tactical nuclear weapons permitting escala-
Ethical debates have stirred around the bomb tion short of an all-out nuclear war. The mo-
since before Trinity. Leo Szilard circulated a let- rality of tactical nuclear weapons and nuclear
ter to scientists at the Manhattan Project labs war-fighting came to the fore in debates over
warning President Roosevelt of the dangers of the deployment of the intermediate range mis-
an atomic arms race. Later he continued to warn siles in Europe during the Carter Administra-
about the dangers of nuclear weaponry, but his tion (1977-81). The moral status of deterrence
protests never came to the attention of Pres- evoked even greater concern as the first Rea-
idents Roosevelt or Truman. Before and after gan Administration (1981-85) accelerated the
the bombings in Japan Oppenheimer wrangled arms race with the Soviet Union and prepared
with General Groves, Lewis Strauss of the Atomic its “Star Wars” Anti-Ballistic Missile system. The
14 ETHICSANDARMEDFORCES.COM ETHICS AND ARMED FORCES 01/20administration’s talk of fighting and “winning” Deterrence and the Just War
protracted nuclear war gave a great spur to the For the most part, ethicists treated fundamental
anti-nuclear movement in the 80s. values as questions of marginal concern. Most
of the debate over deterrence was conducted
Defending Basic Values in terms of the in-bello principles of proportion-
The hardliners believed that tactical nuclear op- ality and noncombatant immunity. Beginning
tions offered a way out between massive nuclear with the Second Vatican Council (1962-65), the
retaliation and political capitulation. In the Cold Catholic Church had condemned, “Any act of
War when Liberal Democracy and Communism war aimed indiscriminately at the destruction
were engaged in a titanic ideological struggle, of entire cities or of extensive areas along with
theorists assumed defeat would involve an un- their population” (GS, no. 80). The condemna-
acceptable loss of a basic value: political liber- tion grew out of the atomic bombings of Hiro-
ty. As Michael Walzer, the premier 20th century shima and Nagasaki, but also the wide-area
just-war thinker, wrote, “We accepted the risk bombing campaigns, known as “obliteration
of nuclear war in order to avoid the risk, not of bombing,” against Germany including the
ordinary, but of totalitarian, subjugation.”17 The fire-bombings of Dresden and Hamburg (GS,
Jesuit theologian John Courtney Murray, build- no. 80).
ing on the teaching of Pope Pius XII, observed: For some critics, any use of nuclear weapons,
“There is no indication that the reaffirmation including deterrence, was prohibited by virtue
of the traditional principle of defensive warfare, of the axiom that “it is forbidden to threaten
to which Pius XII was driven by the brutal facts of what it is forbidden to do.”22 Deterrence, they
international life, extends only to wars conducted believed, is participation in a threat to com-
by so-called conventional arms. On the contrary, mit murder. Much of the debate during the last
the Pope extended it explicitly, not only to atomic years of the Cold War, however, focused on is-
warfare but even to ABC warfare.”18
In later years, even some moralists strongly op-
posed to deterrence were hesitant to apply their
Much of the debate during the
conclusions firmly, not only because of the deep
values at stake but also because of their percep-
last years of the Cold War focused
tion of the implacable hostility of the enemy.19 on issues of discrimination
Even the U.S. Catholic bishops (1983), while
condemning nuclear war-fighting and express- sues of discrimination, whether civilian targets
ing skepticism about tactical nuclear war in The could be reasonably distinguished from mili-
Challenge of Peace, the most influential com- tary ones in a nuclear exchange.
mentary on the issue, allowed that “the defense If nuclear warfighting was forbidden, how did
of key values, even against great odds, may be a the focus on in-bello norms arise? The shift of
proportionate witness” (National Conference of policy to waging nuclear war stimulated dis-
Catholic Bishops, The Challenge of Peace: God’s cussion during the first Reagan Administration
Promise and Our Response, no. 98; henceforth on how to wage a limited nuclear war short of
CP.) In an exception to their fundamental posi- Mutually Assured Destruction. In response, re-
tion, they conceded that a limited nuclear war alist ethicists, like Paul Ramsey, believed that
might be waged to defend a people’s “cherished responsible ethicists had to try to apply just-
values” (CP, no. 220). Likewise, Michael Walzer, war norms to this extreme condition.
though fundamentally opposed to deterrence, Ramsey’s fundamental concern was with up-
nonetheless opened a narrow margin for limit- holding deterrence; but to do so, he made some
ed nuclear war under the category of “Supreme dubious moves. He argued that the impact of
Emergency” for the survival of a political or faith counterforce nuclear attacks could be limited
community.20 He found his warrant in the role po- as to have only tolerable collateral impact on
litical or faith communities serve as “the source(s) the civilian population.23 Of course, Mutually
of our identity and self-understanding.”21 Assured Destruction made no such distinctions,
ETHICS AND ARMED FORCES 01/20 ETHICSANDARMEDFORCES.COM 15You can also read
