Abstract
Do you agree with Waltz's recommendation to spread nuclear weapons? On Sunday, April 9, 2006, the Washington Post announced that 'the Bush administration is studying options for military strikes against Iran as part of a broader strategy of coercive diplomacy to pressure Tehran to abandon its alleged nuclear development program'. That shows perfectly that the question of the nuclear proliferation is one of the burning issues of the day. Nuclear proliferation means the spread of nuclear weapons to states that for the moment are known as non nuclear weapon states. Only five states are acknowledged by the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons treaty, as possessing nuclear weapons: China, France, Russia, United-Kingdom and United-States, yet several others have the capability to construct nuclear devices at short notice and deliver them, if necessary, by increasingly sophisticated means. A traditional view states that further nuclear proliferation is likely to increase instability and the potential for conflict between states. This contrasts with the 'more may be better' thesis advanced by Kenneth N. Waltz in the early 1980s, and restated in the mid 1990s, to account for changes brought about by the end of the cold war.
