Theories of Disarmament

What is theory?
Theory is a tool to understand complexity of IR

Theory helps us understand “WHY” something

happened

Theory helps us predict the future in IR

 Theories
 Peace Theory

 Economic Theory

 Pragmatic Theory

 Moral Theory
Peace Theory
 Proponents’ take…
 Armament creates jealousy & insecurity among states,
thus they go for arms race which ultimately leads to war.
Only through disarmament, state’s insecurity can be
reduced & peace can be established.

 Disarmament leads to peace

 Elimination of weapons reduces capabilities of war
 Elimination of weapons reduces tensions in IR
 Proponents’ take…
 Armament creates tension & fear among nations.
Disarmament helps release tension & fear, thus creating a
pitch for peace.

 Armament makes it tempting & convenient for rulers to

wage war. Through disarmament, this instinct can be
removed. (Iris Claude)

 Peace is a pre-condition for disarmament. (Jhon Burton)

 Proponents’ take…
 When a state multiplies its weapons at the cost of its
soul, then this nation is in greater danger than its
enemy. Soul of a nation believes in humanity &
understanding. (Rabindranath Tagore)

 Japanese writer Kenzzaburro has also written about the

deadly effects of military power for peace.
 Opponents’ take…
 To disarm is to invite aggression. (Quincy Wright)

 Political disputes push states to war, not possession of weapons.

 Men don’t fight because they have arms. They have arms
because they deem it necessary to fight. (Questioning the
premise that disarmament will bring peace.)

 War usually happens when there is a will for war by leadership,

it’s not because of possession of weapons.
 Overall take….
Peace theory contains a partial truth.

Disarmament can be a means to peace but it can not be

the only means.
Economic Theory
 Proponents’ take…
 Funds saved through Disarmament can be used for the development of the
country.

 Expenditure on Armaments was a major cause for Great Depression in 1929.

(President of US Herbert Hoover, World Disarmament Conference, 1932)

 Funds saved through Arms reduction should be utilized for international

cooperation & world industrialization.

 In order to bring these developments, Peace race should substitute Arms

race. (Possible only through Disarmament)
 Opponents’ take…
 No guarantee that funds saved will be used for
development.

 Funds released due to disarmament can result in

economic depression.

 Disarmament will prevent development of new

science & technology. This will be harmful for the
defense & security of nations.
 Opponents’ take…
 Disarmament does not guarantee that rival state is not
developing arms clandestinely.

 Huge economic development without a strong defense

is like a bank without security guards.

 Disarmament can result in economic & employment

loss in many countries.
Pragmatic Theory
 Major Premises…
 Weapons of Mass Destruction in reality have no use,
so should be disarmed.

 Presence of Weapons of Mass Destruction is like a

ticking bomb, posing a threat to humanity.

 Weapons of Mass Destruction can wreak havoc from

which we might not recover.
Moral Theory
 Proponents Take…
 Wars are evil & immoral so preparation for war is also
immoral.

 Armament is posing a threat to unity of mankind (from

religious perspective)

 Investment in Arms is actually showing no “Respect for

human life”, a theme for which various social & political
reforms have been made across history.
 Proponents’ Take…
 States should disarm themselves unilaterally on
humanitarian grounds. (C.Wright Mills, 1959)

 Violence is morally wrong, be it personal, national or

international. (Gandhi)

 Many religions consider war as immoral as it results in

a loss of innocent lives.
 Opponents’ Take…
 Preparation for self-defense is not immoral rather
moral.

 Unilateral disarmament can become suicidal for a

country. It can invite aggression.

 Military defense system can be replaced with non-

violent defense system; however, it’s time taking.