The Arsenal and the Ballot Box: Scoping the Incompatibility of Nuclear Weapons and Democracy

This paper systematically explores incompatibilities between nuclear weapons and democracy. Based on a procedural definition of democracy, it argues that nuclear weapons’ relationship with democracy is defined both by inherent limitations stemming from the features of nuclear weapons and by assumptions about the requirements of nuclear strategy. It concludes that although ideas on the requirements of nuclear strategy modify the level of compatibility between nuclear weapons policy and democracy, none allow for sufficient compatibility. Excessive power concentration with executives, limitations on advance agreement on nuclear strategy, and secrecy can all be avoided with different assumptions about the requirements of nuclear strategy, in particular nuclear deterrence. However, the destructivity and speed of nuclear wars mean that they inherently cannot be subject to adequate control. Equally, they cannot be subject to control by a sufficiently inclusive demos. Thus, nuclear weapons are incompatible with democracy, but significant democratization of nuclear policy is possible.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Perspectives on Politics
Published
2025-02-28
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1017/s1537592724002664
Primary Topic
Nuclear Issues and Defense
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The Arsenal and the Ballot Box: Scoping the Incompatibility of Nuclear Weapons and Democracy

Sterre van Buuren
Perspectives on Politics
Nuclear Issues and Defense
article

The Arsenal and the Ballot Box: Scoping the Incompatibility of Nuclear Weapons and Democracy

Sterre van Buuren
article en

Abstract

This paper systematically explores incompatibilities between nuclear weapons and democracy. Based on a procedural definition of democracy, it argues that nuclear weapons’ relationship with democracy is defined both by inherent limitations stemming from the features of nuclear weapons and by assumptions about the requirements of nuclear strategy. It concludes that although ideas on the requirements of nuclear strategy modify the level of compatibility between nuclear weapons policy and democracy, none allow for sufficient compatibility. Excessive power concentration with executives, limitations on advance agreement on nuclear strategy, and secrecy can all be avoided with different assumptions about the requirements of nuclear strategy, in particular nuclear deterrence. However, the destructivity and speed of nuclear wars mean that they inherently cannot be subject to adequate control. Equally, they cannot be subject to control by a sufficiently inclusive demos. Thus, nuclear weapons are incompatible with democracy, but significant democratization of nuclear policy is possible.

Perspectives on Politics
Openalex Percentile: Top 96%
Nuclear Issues and Defense
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.