the-evolution-of-international-security-studies

the technological imperative 175Gordon, 1994; Mattoo, 1996), and then with the Indian and Pakistanitests in 1998, over their nuclear status. 5 The reality of a new nuclear dyadin South Asia triggered discussions about the implications for the stabilityof the India–Pakistan relationship, and how deterrence would work,or not, in this context (Bhimaya, 1994; Hagerty, 1995/6; Joeck, 1997;Heisbourg, 1998/9; Zook, 2000; Quinlan, 2000/1; Basrur, 2001). BeyondSouth Asia what would be the implications for the Sino–Indian relationship(Garver, 2001) and India’s strategic position generally (Tellis, 2002)?Although neither India nor Pakistan was a member of the NPT, there waswidespread concern about how the arrival of two new nuclear weaponsstates might damage the non-proliferation regime generally (Singh, 1998;Gupta, 1999; Talbott, 1999; Thakur, 1999; Vivekanandan, 1999; Mahapatra,2000; Mutimer, 2000; Nizamani, 2001; Shaikh, 2002), and challengeUS non-proliferation policy in particular (Mahmudul, 1997; Singer et al.,1998; Ayoob, 1999; Mistry, 1999; Carranza, 2002).The other region of intense interest regarding proliferation was theMiddle East, where Israel was a long-standing nuclear weapon stateand subject of interest (Sayed, 1993; Inbar and Sandler, 1993/4; Keeley,1993/4; Cochran, 1996; Cohen, 1998). During the 1990s, Iraq (Kelly,1996) and increasingly Iran (Chubin, 1995; Eisenstadt, 1999) were widelysuspected of aspiring to that status. In this region, as elsewhere, concernabout nuclear proliferation was accompanied by that about the proliferationof missile capability and the Missile Technology Control Regime(MTCR) (A. Karp, 1991; Pedatzur, 1994; Pikayev et al., 1998). And, as inSouth Asia, the seeming approach of states crossing the nuclear thresholdrevived interest in proliferation chains (Russell, 2001), and the implicationsand prospects for arms control (Oxenstierna, 1999; Solingen, 2001).By the 1990s, Latin America was no longer of much concern as a possiblesite of proliferation, but it still attracted some attention in the literature,mainly as historical retrospectives (Carasales, 1996; Wrobel, 1996;Hymans, 2001).Like the literature on non-proliferation, other technology-driven concernsalso showed a lot of continuity. Long-standing debates about theMIC (Hartung, 2001) and arms racing (Gray, 1996; Sample, 1997; Diehland Crescenzi, 1998; Koubi, 1999) simply carried on without much impactfromtheendingoftheColdWar.ThedebatesonNoDlosttheirNATO5 Ahmed et al., 1998; Chellaney, 1998/9; Ahmed, 1999; Ahrari, 1999; Chellaney, 1999; Ganguly,1999; Gizweski, 1999; Hagerty, 1999; Huntley, 1999; Synnott, 1999; Yasmeen, 1999;Ahmed, 2000; Bajpai, 2000; Kampani, 2001.