Abstract
AbstractUS arms control policies have shifted frequently in the last 60 years, ranging from the role of a ‘brakeman’ regarding international arms control, to the role of a ‘booster,’ initiating new agreements. My article analyzes the conditions that contribute to this mixed pattern. A crisp-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) evaluates 24 cases of US decisions on international arms control treaties (1963–2021). The analysis reveals that the strength of conservative treaty skeptics in the Senate, in conjunction with other factors, has contributed to the demise of arms control policies since the end of the Cold War. A brief study of the Trump administration’s arms control policies provides case-sensitive insights to corroborate the conditions identified by the QCA. The findings suggest that conservative treaty skeptics contested the bipartisan consensus and thus impaired the ability of the USA to perform its leadership role within the international arms control regime.
Funder
Technische Universität Kaiserslautern
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Political Science and International Relations,Geography, Planning and Development
Reference62 articles.
1. Amirfar, C., and A. Singh. 2018. The Trump Administration and the ‘Unmaking’ of International Agreements. Harvard International Law Journal 59 (2): 443–459.
2. Arms Control Association. 2020. Treaties & Agreements. https://www.armscontrol.org/treaties. Accessed 1 March 2021.
3. Auerswald, D. 2006. Senate Reservations to Security Treaties. Foreign Policy Analysis 2 (1): 83–100.
4. Axelrod, R. 1984. The Evolution of Cooperation. New York: Basic Books.
5. Axelrod, R., and R. Keohane. 1985. Achieving Cooperation Under Anarchy. Strategies and Institutions. World Politics 38 (1): 226–254.
Cited by
8 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献