Beyond the Non-Proliferation Treaty. A Case Study of India, Pakistan and North Korea

Main Article Content

Radosław Fiedler


The main aim of the article is the presentation of important premises which were considered by these three states in conducting their military nuclear program. In the article both internal factors, such as political consolidation and strong society support, and external factors, such as deterrence and prestige were emphasised. For North Korea, nuclear weapons also became an attribute for gaining more international aid. The motives of India, North Korea and Pakistan for being a nuclear state are worrisome examples, because these three governments decided on nuclear weapons,,, despite the significant costs, such as sanctions, a risk of nuclear war or unstoppable arms race and the undermining of the non-proliferation regime.


Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

Jak cytować
Fiedler, R. (2012). Beyond the Non-Proliferation Treaty. A Case Study of India, Pakistan and North Korea. Przegląd Strategiczny, (2), 29-40.


  1. The Four Faces of Nuclear Terrorism, Monterey 2004.
  2. Fiedler R., Pesymiści i optymiści. Dwa podejścia wobec proliferacji broni jądrowej po zimnej wojnie, “Przegląd Strategiczny” 2011, No. 2, 10593/2411/1/5.FIEDLER.pdf.
  3. Perkovich G., Nuclear Proliferation, “Foreign Policy”, Fall 1998.
  4. Cirincione J., Wolfsthal J., Rajkumar M., Deadly Arsenals: Nuclear, Biological and Chemical Threats, Washington 2005.
  5. Cirincione J., Bomb Scare. The History and Future of Nuclear Weapons, New York, 2007.
  6. Duelfer Ch., Comprehensive Report of the Special Adviser to the DCI on Iraq’s WMD, September 30, 2004, (22.07.2012).
  7. Pilat J. F., The End of the NPT Regime?, “International Affairs” 2007, Vol. 83, No. 3.
  8. Korb J., A. Rothman, No first use: The way to contain nuclear war in South Asia, “Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists” 2012, Vol. 68, No. 2.
  9. Sagan S. D., Waltz K., The Spread of Nuclear Weapons: A Debate Renewed, New York 2003.
  10. Monto G., Nuclear India – to be or not to be?, “Current Sci-ence” 2012, Vol. 102, No. 7.
  11. Ahmed S., Pakistan’s Nuclear Weapons Program, “International Security” 1999, Vol. 23, No. 4.
  12. Kristensen H. M., Norris R. S., Pakistan’s nuclear forces, “Bulletin of Atomic Scientists” 2011, Vol. 67, No. 4.
  13. Blair Ch. P., Fatwas for fission: Assessing the terrorist threat to Pakistan’s nuclear assets, “Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists” 2011, Vol. 67, No. 6.
  14. Sagan S. D., Why Do States Build Nuclear Weapons? Three Models in Search of a Bomb, “International Security” 1996/7, Vol. 21, No. 3.
  15. Kristensen H. M., Norris R.S., Chinese Nuclear Forces, 2011, “Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists” 2011, Vol. 67, No. 6.
  16. Yasmeen S., Is Pakistan’s Nuclear Bomb an Islamic Bomb?, “Asian Studies Review” 2001, Vol. 25, No. 2.
  17. Coleman D. G., Siracusa J. M., Real – World Nuclear Deterrence: The Making of International Strategy, London 2006.
  18. Hecker S. S., Denuclearizing North Korea, “Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists” 2008, Vol. 64, No. 2.
  19. Cumings B., Korea’s Place in the Sun: A Modern History, New York 2005.
  20. Cirincione J., Bomb Scare. The History and Future of Nuclear Weapons, New York 2007.
  21. Delpech T., Nuclear Deterrence In the 21st Century. Lessons from the Cold War for a new Era of Strategic Piracy, Rand Corporation 2012.
  22. Pollack J. D., North Korea’s Nuclear Weapons Program to 2015: Three Scenarios, “Asia Policy” 2007, No. 3.
  23. Fuqua J. L., Nuclear Endgame: The Need for Engagement with North Korea, London 2007.
  24. Lee J. J., To fuel or not to fuel: China’s energy assistance to North Korea, “Asian Security” 2009, Vol. 5, No. 1.
  25. Habib B., North Korea’s nuclear weapons programme and the maintenance of the Songun system, “The Pacific Review” 2011, Vol. 24, No. 1.
  26. North Korea – Denuclearization Action Plan, Acronym Institute for Disarmament Policy, 13 February 2007.
  27. (10.08.2012).
  28. International Non-Proliferation Conference, November 8, 2005, (10.08.2012).