Performing Nuclear Peace
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
The Department of International Environment and Development Studies, Noragric, is the international gateway for the Norwegian University of Life Sciences (NMBU). Eight departments, associated research institutions and the Norwegian College of Veterinary Medicine in Oslo. Established in 1986, Noragric’s contribution to international development lies in the interface between research, education (Bachelor, Master and PhD programmes) and assignments. The Noragric Master thesis are the final theses submitted by students in order to fulfill the requirements under the Noragric Master programme “International Environmental Studies”, “International Development Studies” and “International Relations”. The findings in this thesis do not necessarily reflect the views of Noragric. Extracts from this publication may only be reproduced after prior consultation with the author and on condition that the source is indicated. For rights of reproduction or translation contact Noragric. © Paul Beaumont, December 2014 [email protected] Noragric Department of International Environment and Development Studies P.O. Box 5003 N-1432 Ås Norway Tel.: +47 64 96 52 00 Fax: +47 64 96 52 01 Internet: http://www.nmbu.no/noragric i Acknowledgments Everything that follows would have remained a figment of my untapped imagination had Norway followed Britain’s higher education policy. Therefore, I would first like to put in writing my eternal thanks to this cold, jagged, and generous country for granting utlendinger like me the opportunity to study here without prohibitive fees. A close second to Norway, I must next thank my supervisor Benjamin de Carvalho for his support in guiding me through this long process, and for consistently offering constructive criticism: encouraging me think big, and guiding me away from the stupid. Without him, this thesis would literally be unrecognizable and immeasurably worse. Beyond Ben, I have been privileged to have such an incredibly smart collection of IR geek-friends to bounce ideas off, discuss and sometimes argue with about nuclear weapons and international relations. In particular, Pål Røren, Joakim Brattvoll, and Anders Bjørkheim have helped shape my thinking, and thus sharpen the arguments found here. Meanwhile, I am indebted to my friends John Todd and anton Lazarus who sadistically agreed to read, proof and comment on these 200 pages for such a small fee I am certain they later regretted it. I would also like to thank my ex-girlfriend Gina Ekholt, who put with over a year of sleep disrupted by nuclear weapons related tossing and turning and 3.am-Dictaphone entries. Finally, I want to thank my current (and hopefully last) girlfriend Maria Eugenie Buene, whose calm encouragement has provided the antidote to my self-doubt and thus has been crucial in helping me over the finishing line. ii Declaration I, Paul Beaumont, declare that this thesis is a result of my research investigations and findings. Sources of information other than my own have been acknowledged and a reference list has been appended. This work has not been previously submitted to any other university for award of any type of academic degree. Signature: Date: iii Abstract The question of why states maintain nuclear weapons typically receives short shrift: it’s security, silly. The international is a perilous place, and nuclear weapons represent the ultimate self-help device. Other ‘factors’ like status and domestic interests provide the background music. This thesis seeks to unsettle this complacency by drawing on Foucault to reconceptualise nuclear weapon-armed states as nuclear regimes of truth, refocusing on the processes through which governments produce and maintain country-specific discourses that enable their continued possession of nuclear weapons. Building on Derrida’s observation that nuclear weapons are a “fabulously textual” phenomenon, this thesis argues that because nuclear weapons are represented to work by not being used (deterrence) their utility depends on hypotheticals, and therefore remains transcendental. Consequently, maintaining a nuclear regime of truth requires considerable discursive imagination and labour to constitute the benefits of possessing nuclear weapons—whether that be status, security or both at the same time. To investigate these nuclear regimes of truth, this thesis critiques and modifies Lene Hansen’s Foreign Policy/Identity Nexus: developing a more flexible Weberian conception of legitimacy, theorizing how Hansen’s degrees of otherness can illuminate status seeking, borrowing from nukespeak and Lakoff to theorize policy representations, and adding desirability to the goal of policy makers. Using the UK nuclear weapons policy between 1980 and 2010 as an exploratory case study, this thesis provides practical insights beyond the grasp of conventional approaches to nuclear weapons research. From how Thatcher’s reification of the nuclear peace correlation contributes to a 21st disarmament-taboo in UK politics, to how the end of the Cold War saw the UK replace its Security legitimacy with a new Non-Proliferation Treaty-based Prefect legitimacy that divests ethical responsibility for the world’s nuclear weapons problem through the performance of a counting bombs narrative, this thesis historicizes and deconstructs the many moving parts of the UK’s 21st century nuclear common sense. Ultimately, this thesis provides the theoretical legwork for future empirical investigations into other nuclear regimes of truth. iv Contents Preface………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………vii 1. Problematizing the Maintenance of Nuclear Weapons ………………………………………………………1 2. Discourse, Foreign Policy and Identity ……………………………………………………………………………14 3. Literature Review: Unsettling Explanations of British Nuclear Policy……………………………….49 4. Constructing the Nuclear Weapons Problem……………………………………………………………………71 5. Thatcher’s Nuclear Regime of Truth ………………………………………………………………………………..89 6. Blair’s Nuclear Regime of Truth ……………………………………………………………………………………...122 7. Conclusion: Breaking Down Britain’s Nuclear Regime of Truth…………………………………………162 Appendices…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………173 References………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….174 v Abbreviations BBC – British Broadcasting Corporation CASD - Continuous at sea deterrence CND – Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament EU – The European Union ICaN – The International Campaign for abolishment of Nuclear Weapons IAEa – The International atomic Energy agency ILPI – The International Law and Policy Institute (Norway) IR – International Relations (the discipline) MoD – The Ministry of Defence (UK) MP – Member of Parliament (UK) NAM – The Non-Aligned Movement NATO – North atlantic alliance Organisation NWFW – Nuclear Weapons Free World NPT – Non-Proliferation Treaty NWS – Nuclear Weapons State NNWS – Non Nuclear Weapons State RUSI – The Royal United Service Institute SDP – Social Democratic Party (UK) SSBN – Ships Submersible Ballistic Nuclear (Ballistic missile equipped submarines) TASM – Tactical air surface missiles UN – United Nations vi Preface I am going to do what I can to show you how I have arrived at this opinion about the room and the money. I am going to develop in your presence as fully and freely as I can the train of thought which led me to think this. Perhaps if I lay bare the ideas, the prejudices that lay behind this statement you will find that they have some bearing upon women and some upon fiction. Virginia Woolf, A Room of One’s Own, 1928 Laying your cards face up on the table at the beginning is a terrible strategy for winning at poker, but should be mandatory for social scientists. From a constructivist perspective, humans are formed by, and contribute to the construction of the social world. As a consequence Doty (2004, p. 390) argues critical scholars should “undertake a continual interrogation of [their] own identities” and “any body of thought, perspective, approach, or critical attitude that uses the rhetoric of social construction and takes this notion seriously must include oneself in the equation or admit to a deceit.”1 However, this is no easy task; Neumann’s dream of a “magic self- reflecting quill” (2008a, p. 78) that could account for an author’s subjectivity has yet to be realised. Indeed, the implications of this– and I use the first person very deliberately - cannot be avoided by what Barthes (1967) called “zero degree writing”: writing that generates authority though the illusion of objectivity, neutrality and ultimately separation between the researcher and the object and world under investigation (Doty, 2004) Drawing on these insights, this thesis occasionally uses the first person to remind the reader I am engaged in an interpretive exercise: telling a story, producing my own discourse(Gusterson, 2008). Indeed, I hope my representation will be enlightening, convincing, and fascinating, but I do not make any pretence of it being a definitive truth (lest I be shipwrecked by the laughter of the gods). Moreover, following Doty’s advice, I will now disclose the elements of my identity that will have compromised my objectivity; I leave it to the reader to judge how much. My Identity Bias I selected the British nuclear weapons policy as the object for my analysis late. I had initially sleepwalked into writing about George W. Bush’s “War on Terror”, but it soon began to dawn on me that I clearly lacked what Neumann (2008; 63-64) calls the “cultural competence” on the 1 I would go further: All scholars should interrogate their own identities and their