the-evolution-of-international-security-studies

traditionalist iss post-9/11 241specifically. 17 There was even a bit of history on the nuclear taboo (Tannenwald,2005). The nuclear policies of Britain and France continued toattract a surprising amount of interest, the former because of debatesabout renewing (or not) the small but expensive fleet of ballistic missilecarrying submarines. 18 Less surprising, given the concerns about proliferation,was the interest in the deterrence logic of small/new nucleararsenals (Goldstein, 2003; Ghosh, 2004), and nuclear weapons as a wayfor rogue states such as North Korea, Iraq and Iran to deter the US fromthreatening them with regime change (D. D. Smith, 2006). The impact ofthe GWoT was visible in a new concern with deterring non-state actors(Auerswald, 2006).As during the 1990s, horizontal proliferation of WMD was the centralconcern driven by technology. The links to deterrence and BMD havebeen noted immediately above, and the link to the post-9/11 concernwith terrorism noted in the discussion under events at the beginning ofthis chapter. Although worries about terrorism infused and reinforcedthe general agenda of nuclear proliferation, they did not change theoverall shape and direction of the literature, which had already undergonea turn towards rogue states. A more formalised sense now emergedof a so-called ‘second nuclear age’ (Cha, 2001; Schmitt, 2001; Bracken,2003; Gavin, 2004), in which a new wave of mainly Third World stateswas acquiring nuclear weapons. These developments provided fuel forthe long-established debates between optimists and pessimists about theeffects of nuclear proliferation (Woods, 2002; Knopf, 2003; Asal andBeardsley, 2007; Rendall, 2007; Singer, 2007). Either way, along with theGWoT, this second nuclear age was clearly putting heavy pressure on thenon-proliferation regime, and opened a substantial discussion about theopportunities and challenges for the existing components of the nonproliferationregime from the new wave of nuclear weapon and missileproliferation. 19 A whole issue of International Affairs (2007) was devotedto this topic. Within this debate, new initiatives such as the ‘proliferationsecurity initiative’ (Cotton, 2005; Valencia, 2005) and other measures tocurb the trade in nuclear technology (Montgomery, 2005) also attractedattention. The existing debates about US counter-proliferation policies17 Butfoy, 2002; Ross, 2002; Russell and Wirtz, 2004; Yost, 2005a; Cimbala, 2006; Gormley,2006; Lieber and Press, 2006; Colby, 2007.18 On Britain: M. Clarke, 2004; Simpson, 2004; Yost, 2005a; Lewis, 2006; MccGwire, 2006;Quinlan, 2006; Stocker, 2007. On France: Simpson, 2004; Yost, 2005a, 2005b.19 Deibel, 2002; Levite, 2002/3; Mistry, 2003a, 2003b; Paul, 2003; Braun and Chyba, 2004;Gahlaut and Bertsch, 2004; D. D. Smith, 2006; Quinlan, 2007; O’Hanlon, 2008.