Second-Strike Nuclear Forces and Neorealist Theory: Unit-Level Challenge or Balance-of-Power Politics as Usual?

Abstract

ABSTRACT: What are the implications of second-strike nuclear forces for neorealism? The end of the Cold War yielded a unipolar structure of international politics defined by the military, economic, and political preponderance of the United States. According to balance-of-power theory, which lies at the heart of neorealism, unipolarity has a short life span as secondary states waste little time in rectifying the global imbalance of power. Thus far, America remains unbalanced. Are we to take this as a refutation of balance-of-power theory? My thesis argues that second-strike arsenals render void the need to balance superior American military power. But because state survival is contingent not only upon military invulnerability (for which nuclear weapons are a sure guarantee), but also upon economic invulnerability (for which there is no absolute remedy), nuclear-weapon states are impelled to balance superior economic power for security reasons. By recasting balance-of-power theory in light of these assumptions, one can make sense of the great-power politics of the post-Cold War era.