Anledningar till staters anskaffande och behållande av kärnvapen och faktorer som påverkar staters kärnvapenpolitik
ABMArms raceArms tradeDeterrenceDisarmamentInterest groupsMilitary-Industrial ComplexMissile-defenseNon-proliferationNuclear weaponsNuclear weapons policyProliferationSecurity Dilemma
The purpose of this thesis is to explain why states obtain nuclear weapons and the role variousactors and interests play in the making of states´ nuclear policies. The main questions are asfollows: (1) What big theories exist concerning states obtaining nuclear weapon and nucleararmament in International Relations and what relevance do they have of the post cold-war period?,(2) What is the meaning of the perspective of the Military-Industrial Complex (MIC)?, and (3)Arethere empirical studies which supports the existence of a MIC in the United States?The focus lies on actors and driving forces that are internal to states and it is also important toinvestigate if the theories have relevance for the post 9/11-era. The study uses the method ofqualitative literature-study with some quantitative segments. It is claimed that states might beinterested in justifying their behaviour in a morally appealing way and that real reasons may behidden. There are many reasons for states to obtain and keep nuclear weapons and relatedtechnology (which includes many of the most lucrative elements of the arms industry´s sales).Among this reasons are that arms and related technology may be used to influence other states andnuclear weapons-construction and modernisation might be used to protect the state from externalthreats, stop unwanted interference from other actors, secure job and gain recognition and prestigein world politics. For security reasons states might hold onto their own nuclear weapons and try tohinder other actors from getting access to them. The internal actors and driving forces we look atare bureaucratic, economical and political, and the MIC-perspective. The military can be said tohave interests in as much resources and capabilities as possible, which includes advancedweaponary such as nuclear weapons and related technologies, at its disposal because of the goal todefend the state from all possible threats and for officers career reasons. Much of its influence issaid to come from its expert knowledge and position and it is said to be especially influential inmatters of foreign policy, military spending and foreign policy. The major economical actorsmentioned are big corporations involved in military spending and these have interests inmaximizing profits. Nuclear weapons making and maintenance and the related areas of missiledefense and delivering methods for nuclear weapons seem to be areas with high changes of beingprofitable for the involved major companies. The actors wield influence for example throughlobbying and campaign contributions. An economic driving force claim is that state spending isnecessary for stimulating the economy and defense spending is easily justified in other ways.Political actors and driving forces concerns politicians interest in promoting the interests ofsupporting groups, there are indications that the weapon industry is such a group. Research haveshown various results about the extent politicians tend to further the interests of supporting groups.The MIC-perspective talks about groups with interest in high levels of military spending. Mostresearchers seem to agree that the complex exists but there are different opinions about what actorsbelongs to it and its power on various issues. There is some mention of the core of the complexconsisting of such internal actors as mentioned above. MIC-related empirical research has beenconducted and this author finds that the MIC is a relevant analytical tool for the post cold war ? and9/11 era.