| The nuclear proliferation dilemmas of the second nuclear age are irreducibly moral or ethical, and the political/strategic success in addressing them depend upon treating them first and foremost as problems of political theory. A moral ethnographic account of the main justificatory discourses for nuclear weaponization is undertaken to support two claims. One, that the main theoretical anchors employed to politically justify nuclear weapons aspirations -- e.g., "security", "identity", and "retribution" -- are irreducibly moral. Secondly, that these discourses are evidence that state and non-state nuclear aspirants are (knowingly or not) implicated in at least one of the following interrelated moral dilemmas: (1) morality and law, (2) obligation and ignorance, (3) competing moral requirements, and (4) contradictory moral rules. Under current international conditions, these dilemmas appear not to be resolvable. Only if a radical transformation of thought and action is undertaken will the moral dilemmas of the second nuclear age be transcended. I conclude by exploring at least two avenues of such transformation. Ultimately, my dissertation enables future research that evaluates the moral validity of each justificatory discourse and draws conclusions for theoretical and policy-oriented research. |
