Arsenals of Folly: The Making of the Nuclear Arms Race
Following first-rate histories of the making of the atomic and hydrogen bombs, this latest in Rhodes' accounts of the nuclear age comes as something of a disappointment. Part of the problem is that Rhodes is on a well-trodden path, and although there is always a new vignette to be told, this story has many more strands and lacks focus. Rhodes offers just the bare bones of the early nuclear decades so that he can concentrate on the endgame of the Cold War. He focuses, in particular, on the events of 1986, with the Chernobyl nuclear disaster in April and the Reykjavik summit in November, when Mikhail Gorbachev and Ronald Reagan seriously discussed nuclear abolition. (Rhodes takes this to be a missed opportunity.) He writes well, and there are some telling passages, but instead of concentrating on getting the history right, Rhodes allows his own prejudices to shine through.
Related
The specter of weapons of mass destruction being used against America looms larger today than at any time since the Cuban missile crisis. The World Trade Center bombing scarcely hints at the enormity of the danger. America is prepared only for conventional terrorism, not a nuclear, chemical, or biological weapons catastrophe. With the right approach and organization, however, the United States can be ready. Herewith a plan to reorganize the U.S. government to ensure that it can handle the threats of the next century.
The Clinton administration supports crippling economic sanctions that punish the Iraqi people but seems ready to live with the demise of international inspections to monitor Saddam Hussein's nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons programs. Washington has it exactly backward. It should offer Baghdad a blunt trade: lightened sanctions in return for renewed, intrusive arms inspections. The sweeping sanctions regime does nothing to advance U.S. interests, undermine Saddam, or contain Iraq. Leaving Saddam's arsenal unwatched is folly. Better to have arms inspections without sanctions than sanctions without arms inspections.
After the Cold War, the demands on American leadership are no less stern than they were in Dean Acheson's day. Present again at the creation, U.S. diplomacy must pass a series of tests -- of vision, pragmatism, spine, and principle -- to build a foundation for a new world. This will mean encouraging democracy, stopping the spread of weapons of mass destruction, working to shore up the international financial system, engaging Beijing, and standing up to Baghdad and Belgrade. But America needs resources to lead, and Congress has foreign policy living hand-to-mouth. America cannot afford to abdicate its world role.

Sign-up for free weekly updates from ForeignAffairs.com.