Obama's naivete about nuclear proliferation

The notion that lesser powers only want nuclear weapons because the United States has so many reflects a peculiar kind of American provincialism. In reality, nuclearization is usually driven by regional concerns — from India’s rivalry with Pakistan to Israel’s fear of Middle Eastern encirclement. So is disarmament, when it happens: South Africa gave up its nuclear capability only after it gave up apartheid, and Brazil and Argentina dropped their nascent programs as part of a broader march toward regional détente.

Moreover, even when the fear of American power is a factor in a country’s quest for W.M.D., the fear of our nuclear weapons usually isn’t. Saddam Hussein wasn’t chasing fissile material because he thought the United States would drop an ICBM on Baghdad. For rogue states, the bomb is an obvious way to offset America’s enormous conventional military advantage — and this will hold true no matter how low our nuclear stockpiles go.

This doesn’t mean that America shouldn’t enter into reasonable arms control agreements. But linking the antiproliferation agenda to the dream of universal abolition makes an already difficult problem even harder to solve.