In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

174 BOOK REVIEWS The Logic of Deterrence. By ANTHONY KENNY. New York: Oxford University Press, 1986. Pp. 101. .$6.95 paper. Professor Kenny should have entitled his book "The Logic of Nuclear Deterrence ", for that is the subject he discusses. For Kenny the logic of nuclear deterrence cannot meet either the jus ad bellum or the jus in bello criteria of the just war tradition. It can fulfill neither the former criteria because " there can be no hope of victory " nor the latter because implementation of the deterrent threat can be neither proportionate nor discriminate. Kenny does recognize a just cause for war; however, for him the death and destruction caused by the use of nuclear weapons in a just cause would be immoral. Thus, on the one hand Kenny states : The defence of the independence of the nations of the West against aggression from the Communist bloc would in itself provide a just cause for war. Leaving aside for the moment the nuclear issue, it would be right to risk our own lives, and to take those of enemy combatants, to preserve our independence and our traditions. On the other hand, he does not believe that there could he any actual use of nuclear weapons in defense of this just cause that would not involve the massive destruction of population areas. Thus Kenny concludes that the use of nuclear weapons can never be materially or morally proportionate. They can never be materially proportionate for : (T)he differences which at present exist between the United States and the Soviet Union would be insignificant in comparison with the difference between the United States as it now is and the United States as it would be after absorbing a full-scale nuclear attack, or the difference between the Soviet Union as it now is and the Soviet Union as it would be after such an attack. And they could never be morally proportionate: ... for it is necessary to keep reminding people of what the world would be like after (a nuclear war) in order to bring home that there is no desirable goal which can rationally be pursued by launching such a war. For Kenny, the material and spiritual costs resulting from the use of nuclear weapons would always be disproportionate, whatever good was being protected : Respect for innocent human life and for international law is as much a part of what gives us a right to defend the values of Western democracy as is freedom of speech or rights against arbitrary arrest. To the extent to which we forfeit our respect for life and law we forfeit our claim to have any moral superiority to defend against communist threat. As for democratic institutions, few of these are likely to survive a war in which both sides suffer nuclear devastation. BOOK REVIEWS 175 Kenny's view about the disproportionality of the use of nuclear weapons, it should be noted, is a function of his belief that limited nuclear was is not possible, and so the just war criteria of " probability of success " (not " hope of victory", to use Kenny's formulation) cannot be met. For Kenny, "war is justifiable only if it can be limited". Concerning the use of nuclear weapons in a "limited war" context, Kenny holds that there are two principal questions to be asked: The first is whether, on the assumption that the war remains as limited as the strategists envisage, it would be in itself a morally acceptable option. The second is whether it is likely that a nuclear war, once begun, could be kept under control and remain within the limits which were planned at the outset. It appears that Kenny has already answered the first question by denying that it is possible, in practice, for any use of nuclear weapons to be either discriminate or proportionate, even in a " limited war" context. Perhaps Professor Kenny should have read what Fr. John Courtney Murray, S.J., had to say on this subject: First, there are those who say that the limitation of nuclear war, or any war, is today impossible, for a variety of reasons-technical, political , etc. In the face of this position, the traditional doctrine...

pdf

Share