Why States Won't Give Nuclear Weapons to Terrorists

@article{Lieber2013WhySW,
  title={Why States Won't Give Nuclear Weapons to Terrorists},
  author={Keir A. Lieber and Daryl G. Press},
  journal={International Security},
  year={2013},
  volume={38},
  pages={80-104}
}
Many experts consider nuclear terrorism the single greatest threat to U.S. security. The fear that a state might transfer nuclear materials to terrorists was a core justification for the invasion of Iraq in 2003 and, more recently, for a strike against Iran's nuclear program. The logical basis for this concern is sound: if a state could orchestrate an anonymous nuclear terror attack, it could destroy an enemy yet avoid retaliation. But how likely is it that the perpetrators of nuclear terrorism… Expand
On fear and nuclear terrorism
Fear of nuclear weapons is rational, but its extension to terrorism has been a vehicle for fear-mongering that is unjustified by available data. The debate on nuclear terrorism tends to distract fromExpand
Evaluating The Threat of Nuclear Terrorism: Cutting through the rhetoric
This major research paper (MRP) provides a strong case for dismissing the overblown rhetoric of nuclear alarmism by demonstrating that a multitude of constructive actions are being taken in order toExpand
Terrorism and Bathtubs: Comparing and Assessing the Risks
ABSTRACT The likelihood that anyone outside a war zone will be killed by an Islamist extremist terrorist is extremely small. In the United States, for example, some six people have perished each yearExpand
Nuclear Terrorism: Assessing the Danger
Abstract This article attempts to make a realistic assessment of the danger of nuclear terrorism. While acknowledging the catastrophic consequences of an act of terrorism employing either anExpand
Defending the “Acquisition-Use Presumption” in Assessing the Likelihood of Nuclear Terrorism
  • Mark S. Bell
  • Political Science
  • International Studies Quarterly
  • 2019
In an important article, McIntosh and Storey (2018) challenge the “acquisition-use presumption” that a terrorist organization with a nuclear weapon would inevitably seek to detonate it in an attack.Expand
Domestic Terrorism in the United States
Domestic Terrorism in the United States by Joe B. Williams MS, Kaplan University, 2010 BA, University of North Florida, 2008 Dissertation Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for theExpand
Know thy enemy: Education about terrorism improves social attitudes toward terrorists.
TLDR
Education's potential ability to reduce extreme negative attitudes toward terrorists is explored, finding that learning about terrorism can decrease the extreme negative reactions it evokes, which is desirable if one wishes to implement effective counterterrorism policies. Expand
A Model for the Probability of Nuclear War
The probability of nuclear war is a major factor in many important policy questions, but it has gotten little scholarly attention. This paper presents a model for calculating the total probability ofExpand
NUCLEAR TERRORISM: HOW BIG IS THE RISK TO JAPAN
But in addition to the risks of purely accidental events, the risks posed by intentional events – particularly terrorist actions – are also substantial, requiring further action to reduce them.Expand
Occidentalism, Terrorism, and the Shari’a State: New Multivariate Perspectives on Islamism Based on International Survey Data
Our article attempts to be yet another empirical contribution to the evolving international debate about global Islamist terrorism. We rely on the analysis of PEW and World Values Survey data fromExpand
...
1
2
3
4
...

References

SHOWING 1-10 OF 44 REFERENCES
Avoiding Nuclear Anarchy: Containing the Threat of Loose Russian Nuclear Weapons and Fissile Material
What if the bomb that exploded in Oklahoma City or New York's World Trade Center had used 100 pounds of highly enriched uranium? The destruction would have been far more vast. This danger is not soExpand
The Terrorism Delusion: America's Overwrought Response to September 11
The reaction of Americans to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, has been massively disproportionate to the actual threat posed by al-Qaida either as an international menace or as anExpand
Nuclear Blackmail and Nuclear Balance
In numerous crises after World War II--Berlin, Korea, the Taiwan Straits, and the Middle East--the United States resorted to vague threats to use nuclear weapons in order to deter Soviet or ChineseExpand
Iran, Terrorism, and Weapons of Mass Destruction
This article reviews Iran's past and current use of terrorism and assesses why U.S. attempts to halt Iran's efforts have met with little success. With this assessment in mind, it argues that Iran isExpand
Do Counterproliferation and Counterterrorism Go Together
Americans heard a rare note of harmony during the otherwise acrimonious 2004 debate between President George W. Bush and Senator John Kerry. When moderator Jim Lehrer asked the candidates to identifyExpand
Crisis Bargaining and Nuclear Blackmail
Abstract Do nuclear weapons offer coercive advantages in international crisis bargaining? Almost seventy years into the nuclear age, we still lack a complete answer to this question. While scholarsExpand
Same As It Ever Was: Nuclear Alarmism, Proliferation, and the Cold War
  • F. Gavin
  • Political Science
  • International Security
  • 2010
A widely held and largely unchallenged view among many scholars and policymakers is that nuclear proliferation is the gravest threat facing the United States today, that it is more dangerous thanExpand
A Mathematical Model of the Risk of Nuclear Terrorism
This article presents a mathematical model for measuring the global risk of nuclear theft and terrorism. One plausible set of parameter values used in a numerical example suggests a 29 percentExpand
Audrey Kurth Cronin, “How Terrorism Ends: Understanding the Decline and Demise of Terrorist Campaigns”
Amid the fear following 9/11 and other recent terror attacks, it is easy to forget the most important fact about Amid the most often works attending, to an important fact about its careful and short.Expand
Nuclear Myths and Political Realities
Two pervasive beliefs have given nuclear weapons a bad name: that nuclear deterrence is highly problematic, and that a breakdown in deterrence would mean Armageddon. Both beliefs are misguided andExpand
...
1
2
3
4
5
...