The Atomic Bomb and the Origins of the Cold War
This book provides a helpful and accessible stocktaking of the position reached in the long-running debates on the relationship between the development and detonation of the first nuclear weapons and the onset of the Cold War. It is particularly good on the less familiar Russian material, including Stalin's determination not to let the West have the satisfaction of superior strength. The authors argue that without the bomb, it might have been possible for the United States and the Soviet Union to pursue a cooperative relationship; their nuclear programs, and the associated features of spies being unmasked and futile negotiations on international control, created additional mistrust between the two powers. Unfortunately, the evidence for this in the book is less than compelling, especially from the Soviet side. More time spent on what was going in Germany and Poland from 1945 on would have demonstrated the implausibility of the book's thesis. And it is at least worth examining the orthodox proposition that, since conflict was always in the cards, the bomb helped prevent the Cold War from getting too hot.
Related
Last year's nuclear tests by both India and Pakistan brought world attention to the decades-old Kashmir conflict. Claimed by both countries, the former princely state has been ravaged by a war that shows no sign of ending. Both rivals have invested heavily in blood and treasure to make Kashmir their own. Now Afghan-trained mujahideen are leading the fight, bringing their own foreign brand of radical Islam. Neither New Delhi nor Islamabad has ever asked what Kashmiris want. They would not like the answer: more than anything else, Kashmiris hope to be left alone.
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.
As Cold War threats have diminished, so-called weapons of mass destruction -- nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons and ballistic missiles -- have become the new international bugbears. The irony is that the harm caused by these weapons pales in comparison to the havoc wreaked by a much more popular tool: economic sanctions. Tally up the casualties caused by rogue states, terrorists, and unconventional weapons, and the number is surprisingly small. The same cannot be said for deaths inflicted by international sanctions. The math is sobering and should lead the United States to reconsider its current policy of strangling Iraq.

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