Mutually Assured Destruction

Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) is a theory that two nations have enough nuclear weapons to attack and destroy the other. It also incorporates the fact that if one side is attacked, the other nation is able to attack back with greater force. Typically the concept of MAD prevents nuclear weapons from being used since they are so destructive and it is also associated with deterrence theories. Also, with MAD a nation with the most nuclear weapons is seen as the most stable. I believe that the Cuban Missile Crisis was a threat of MAD and a factor in determining what happened with the crisis. I also think that nuclear proliferation should not be condoned but at the same time can’t be completely dismantled.

During the Cuban Missile Crisis, the Soviet Union leader, Khrushchev, had put missiles directed toward the United States in Cuba. The nuclear missiles had enough power to destroy most of the United States. In terms of MAD, the United States also had missiles in Turkey pointed toward the Soviet Union to fire a second strike if necessary. One event that could have occurred was that the Soviet Union or US used their nuclear weapons and a nuclear war would have begun. In lecture it was discussed that no rational leader would use nuclear weapons without thinking about the consequences. US is a rational nation and nuclear war is very unlikely from happening. Also dictators like Stalin and Mao had access to nuclear weapons but never used them. I believe that was showcased when the US dropped atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The effects of that deterred even the most of irrational leaders from using nuclear weapons. That then led to the Cuban Missile Crisis to be resolved by the US retrieving their missiles from Turkey and the Soviet Union doing the same in Cuba.

A critique of MAD is that it is seen as wanting to spread nuclear weapons. Also, a state with more nuclear weapons is seen as the most stable state. I believe that it’s almost impossible from stopping a nation from creating nuclear weapons or getting that nation to dismantle them. No amount of different sanctions could prevent a nation from halting their nuclear weapon programs. An example would be when North Korea successfully continued building nuclear weapons, although, they were put on various different sanctions by the UN security council. The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty was a start to creating a universal treaty to stop nuclear weapons from being created and to get them dismantled but in essence can’t completely prevent a country from creating or dismantling their nuclear weapons. Iran is seen as irrational and them having access to nuclear weapons is a major threat to Israel and other nations. As stated in the Foreign Affair article that the reason Iran wants nuclear weapons, it is for the purpose of security. I agree with that statement considering that the most irrational leaders have not used nuclear weapons. Of course the crisis of Iran and nuclear weapons should be monitored but the chances that nuclear weapons are used is almost unlikely.

The Cuban Missile Crisis was an example of the threat of MAD and how it ultimately allowed the US missile crisis to end how it did. Also, the desired idea of having no nation build up their nuclear weapons is a difficult one to accomplish. Nuclear weapons are destructive that almost no nation will actually use their weapons. Most nations have nuclear weapons as a sense of security and it makes them a stable nation.