14.02.2017 Views

DIPLOMACY ДИПЛОМАЦИЯ

2kGfdFv

2kGfdFv

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

A SHIFTING ASIAN NUCLEAR ORDER<br />

believed Washington assurances were credible.<br />

Further, US nuclear weapons provide a useful backstop to Australian security, one which<br />

we should be reluctant to abandon in any event. It’s unrealistic to believe that our security<br />

turns solely upon continental defence. Rather, it turns upon a secure region and a stable,<br />

favourable set of force balances along the Eurasian rimlands. Those balances would be<br />

harder to sustain in the absence of nuclear weapons.<br />

But if nuclear weapons are here to stay, and if Asian nuclear relationships are destined<br />

to become more complicated and – probably – contentious, Australia should do what it can<br />

to make sure that regional deterrence policies don’t become shrill. As this paper has argued,<br />

there’s long been a degree of shrillness to North Korean nuclear policy – softened only a<br />

little by a more responsible pledge at the recent party congress – and it’s unclear whether<br />

Canberra can do much to alter that tone. Pakistan’s nuclear policy, shaped like North Korea’s<br />

on the premise of a considerable power differential with a likely adversary, turns increasingly<br />

upon a promise of early use of nuclear weapons in conflict. Finding ways to draw Pakistan<br />

towards nuclear normalcy will be one of the key challenges of the emerging order.<br />

The US-China relationship constitutes a different sort of problem. Managing the tone of<br />

the relationship is clearly important, but both players sense a flattening of the power gradient<br />

between them, and that makes for a set of new challenges to the current strategic order<br />

and not merely the nuclear one. Both orders seem likely to tangle together: it will be hard to<br />

insulate the US-China nuclear relationship from the broader bilateral strategic one, and vice<br />

versa. Beijing, in particular, having only a thin record of formal nuclear arms control and no<br />

record at all of formal nuclear weapons ceilings and reductions, might well be uncomfortable<br />

with any attempt to move the bilateral relationship from one based on voluntary restraint<br />

to one based on formal commitments. But its willingness to do so seems likely to be an<br />

emerging test of China’s regional leadership.<br />

Australia can’t redesign the nuclear order to its will. But we should do what we can to<br />

support the continuing pre-eminence of deterrence in regional nuclear doctrines, work where<br />

we can to enhance crisis-stability arrangements, and advocate the continuing importance of<br />

the principle of voluntary restraint in Asia’s pre-systemic, pre-managed nuclear order.<br />

Finally, even with such efforts, we must accept that nuclear weapons could spread quickly<br />

in Asia. Worries among US allies about the continued willingness of the US to offer extended<br />

nuclear assurances – something previously taken for granted but now less certain – could<br />

be a particularly important driver of near-term regional proliferation. Such an outcome would<br />

leave Canberra with a series of complex and unattractive choices, not merely over how<br />

to respond to proliferation by US allies in Northeast Asia, but in thinking through what a<br />

fundamental shift in the regional order meant for Australia’s own nuclear identity.<br />

NOTES<br />

1. See, for example, Devin Hagerty, The consequences of nuclear proliferation: lessons from South Asia, MIT<br />

Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1998.<br />

2. Muthiah Alagappa (ed.), The long shadow: nuclear weapons and security in 21st century Asia, Stanford<br />

University Press, California, 2008, pp. 13–21.<br />

3. Ashley Tellis, ‘Overview’, in A Tellis, AM Denmark, T Tanner (eds), Strategic Asia 2013–14: Asia in the second<br />

nuclear age, National Bureau of Asian Research, Seattle, p. 23.<br />

4. Toby Dalton, Michael Krepon, 2015. ‘Nuclear mainstream’, Dawn, 27 August 2015.<br />

5. The terms ‘extended nuclear deterrence’ and ‘extended nuclear assurance‘ are used here, and throughout<br />

the paper, to refer in particular to the nuclear elements of US extended deterrence and assurance policies.<br />

Washington offers in support of its allies a range of capabilities that deter adversaries and assure friends. Some<br />

176<br />

<strong>ДИПЛОМАЦИЯ</strong> 18/2016

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!