The Myth of the “Poor Man's Atomic Bomb”: Knowledge, Method, and Ideology in the Study of Chemical, Biological, and Nuclear Weapons

IF 1.7 Q2 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS Journal of Global Security Studies Pub Date : 2022-12-19 DOI:10.1093/jogss/ogac037
Biejan Poor Toulabi
{"title":"The Myth of the “Poor Man's Atomic Bomb”: Knowledge, Method, and Ideology in the Study of Chemical, Biological, and Nuclear Weapons","authors":"Biejan Poor Toulabi","doi":"10.1093/jogss/ogac037","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Chemical and biological weapons (CBWs) have often been characterized as a “poor man's atomic bomb”: a cheap and easy to acquire alternative to nuclear weapons that is particularly appealing to so-called Third World states. This idea is also reflected in Western government and expert estimates that have long exaggerated the spread of CBWs, especially among states in the Global South. In this article, I break down the ways in which the idea that the spread of CBWs is prevalent and that it primarily happens among states in the Global South has come to exist and persist. By dissecting an oft-cited dataset on CBW spread, I unravel frequently occurring methodological flaws—such as conceptual confusion, misinterpretation of sources, and a bias toward proliferation charges originating from the US government—that breed and sustain inflated estimates and faulty allegations. Subsequently, I show that a dominant cognitive framework that centers on the metaphorical use of the terms “proliferation” and “poor man's atomic bomb” primes analysts and policymakers to interpret the history and future of chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons as being characterized by inevitable spread, particularly among the non-Western “Other.” In conclusion, I offer ways to counter the orthodoxies of this ideology in teaching, research, and policy.","PeriodicalId":44399,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Global Security Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Global Security Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jogss/ogac037","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Chemical and biological weapons (CBWs) have often been characterized as a “poor man's atomic bomb”: a cheap and easy to acquire alternative to nuclear weapons that is particularly appealing to so-called Third World states. This idea is also reflected in Western government and expert estimates that have long exaggerated the spread of CBWs, especially among states in the Global South. In this article, I break down the ways in which the idea that the spread of CBWs is prevalent and that it primarily happens among states in the Global South has come to exist and persist. By dissecting an oft-cited dataset on CBW spread, I unravel frequently occurring methodological flaws—such as conceptual confusion, misinterpretation of sources, and a bias toward proliferation charges originating from the US government—that breed and sustain inflated estimates and faulty allegations. Subsequently, I show that a dominant cognitive framework that centers on the metaphorical use of the terms “proliferation” and “poor man's atomic bomb” primes analysts and policymakers to interpret the history and future of chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons as being characterized by inevitable spread, particularly among the non-Western “Other.” In conclusion, I offer ways to counter the orthodoxies of this ideology in teaching, research, and policy.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
“穷人的原子弹”的神话:化学、生物和核武器研究中的知识、方法和意识形态
化学和生物武器(CBWs)经常被描述为“穷人的原子弹”:一种廉价且容易获得的核武器替代品,对所谓的第三世界国家特别有吸引力。这一观点也反映在西方政府和专家长期夸大生化武器扩散的估计中,尤其是在全球南方国家中。在这篇文章中,我分析了生化武器的传播是普遍的,它主要发生在全球南方国家之间,这种观点是如何存在和持续的。通过剖析一个经常被引用的关于生化武器传播的数据集,我揭示了经常出现的方法缺陷——比如概念混淆、对来源的误解,以及对来自美国政府的扩散指控的偏见——这些缺陷滋生并维持了夸大的估计和错误的指控。随后,我展示了一个以隐喻性使用“扩散”和“穷人的原子弹”为中心的主流认知框架,使分析人士和政策制定者将化学、生物和核武器的历史和未来解释为不可避免的扩散,特别是在非西方的“他者”之间。最后,我提出了在教学、研究和政策方面对抗这种意识形态正统的方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Global Security Studies
Journal of Global Security Studies INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS-
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
6.20%
发文量
34
期刊最新文献
Multilateral Maritime Exercises, Grand Strategy, and Strategic Change: The American Case and Beyond Trust at Risk: The Effect of Proximity to Cyberattacks Do States Really Sink Costs to Signal Resolve? Geopolitics and Genocide: Patron Interests, Client Crises, and Realpolitik Digital Rights and the State of Exception. Internet Shutdowns from the Perspective of Just Securitization Theory
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1