imiМеждународная аналитикаJournal of International Analytics2587-84762541-9633MGIMO University10.46272/2587-8476-2026-17-2-30-45imi-712Research ArticleИССЛЕДОВАТЕЛЬСКИЕ СТАТЬИRESEARCH ARTICLESДискурс вокруг ядерного оружия в политических исследованиях: эволюция и тенденцииDiscourse on Nuclear Weapons in Political Research: Evolution and TrendsМихайленкоЕ. БMikhaylenkoE. B.

Екатерина Борисовна Михайленко, д.полит.н., доцент Кафедры теории и истории международных отношений

620002, Екатеринбург, ул. Мира, 19

Ekaterina B. Mikhaylenko, PhD (Polit. Sci.), Associate Professor, Department of Theory and History of International Relations

12, Mira street, Ekaterinburg, 6

earslanova@urfu.ruУральский федеральный университет имени первого Президента России Б.Н. ЕльцинаРоссияUral Federal University named after the First President of Russia B.N. YeltsinRussian Federation2026170820261723045Copyright © Михайленко Е.Б., 20262026Михайленко Е.Б.Mikhaylenko E.B.Данная работа распространяется под лицензией Creative Commons Attribution 4.0.This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.https://www.interanalytics.org/jour/article/view/712

Ядерное оружие играет ключевую роль в обеспечении как национальной безопасности отдельных государств, так и стабильности международной системы безопасности в целом. Эта тема не ограничена исключительно практикой, она стала неотъемлемой частью обсуждений на академическом, государственном и международном уровнях. В политической науке и международных отношениях вопросы, связанные с ядерным оружием, порождают острые дискуссии и разнообразие точек зрения. «Ядерный дискурс» (то есть дискурс, формирующийся вокруг ядерного оружия) является частью исследований международной безопасности, которые после окончания холодной войны претерпели существенную эволюцию: изменились базовые представления о природе реальности (онтология), подходы к познанию и анализу (эпистемология) и, как следствие, теоретические основания. «Ядерный дискурс» в рамках политической науки и международных отношений оставался относительно консервативным сегментом и был менее подвержен новым теоретическим трендам. Ситуация стала меняться в первом десятилетии XXI в. – именно тогда началась трансформация этого дискурса. Подходы к обсуждению и анализу вопросов, связанных с ядерным оружием, стали пересматриваться и обретать новые контуры в контексте современных вызовов и изменений в мировой политике. В статье показана эволюция «ядерного дискурса» в политической науке. Этот дискурс представлен в виде трех больших групп: традиционные исследования стратегического контроля над вооружениями; работы, посвященные режиму ядерного нераспространения и разоружению; критические исследования. На формирование дискурса вокруг ядерного оружия влияют трансформирующийся мировой порядок, технологические изменения, ключевые события последних двадцати лет и формализация в рамках научных публикаций, научных журналов, ведущих институтов. «Ядерный дискурс» оформился в качестве самостоятельного аналитического направления, предоставляющего обширное поле для научных дискуссий.

Nuclear weapons play a key role in ensuring both the national security of individual states and the stability of the international security system as a whole. At the same time, the topic of nuclear weapons is not limited solely to practical aspects; it has become an integral part of discussions at the academic, governmental, and international levels. In political science and international relations, issues related to nuclear weapons generate heated debates and a variety of viewpoints. The discourse on nuclear weapons is part of international security studies, which have undergone a significant evolution since the end of the Cold War: basic ideas about the nature of reality (ontology), approaches to cognition and analysis (epistemology), and general theoretical concepts have changed. Nuclear discourse within political science and international relations has remained a relatively conservative segment, less susceptible to new theoretical trends. The situation began to change in the first decade of the 21st century, when the transformation of nuclear discourse began. Approaches to discussing and analyzing nuclear issues began to be revised, taking on new contours in the context of contemporary challenges and changes in world politics. This study presents the evolution of nuclear discourse in political science. Nuclear discourse is presented in the form of three large groups: traditional studies of strategic arms control; works devoted to the nuclear non- proliferation regime and disarmament; and critical studies. The formation of nuclear discourse is influenced by the transforming world order, technological changes, key events of the last two decades, and formalization within scientific publications, scientific journals, and leading institutions. Nuclear discourse has emerged as an independent analytical field, providing a broad scope for scientific discussion.

ядерное оружие«ядерный дискурс»изменение парадигмыстратегический контроль над вооружениямирежим ядерного нераспространенияразоружениекритические исследованияnuclear weaponsnuclear discourseparadigm shiftstrategic arms controlnuclear nonproliferation regimedisarmamentcritical researchReferencesАлексеева, Т.А., Лебедева, М.М. Международно-политическая мысль: вызовы и обновление. Диалог политологов // Полис. Политические исследования, no. 5 (2025): 7–23. https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2025.05.02.Alekseeva Tatyana A., and Marina M. Lebedeva. “International Political Thought: Challenges and Renewal. Dialogue of Political Scientists.” Polis. Political Studies, no. 5 (2025): 7–23 [In Russian].Антонов, А.И. Контроль над вооружениями: история, состояние, перспективы. М.: РОССПЭН; ПИР-Центр, 2012.Antonov, Anatoly I. Kontrol’ nad vooruzheniyami: istoriya, sostoyanie, perspektivy. Moscow: ROSSPEN; PIR Center, 2012 [In Russian].Арбатов, А.Г. Многосторонний стратегический диалог: дилеммы и препятствия // Мировая экономика и международные отношения. 2023. Т. 67. № 7. С. 5–21. https://doi.org/10.20542/0131-2227-2023-67-7-5-21.Arbatov, Alexey G. “Multilateral Strategic Dialogue: Dilemmas and Obstacles.” World Economy and International Relations 67, no. 7 (2023a): 5–21 [In Russian].Арбатов, А.Г. Ядерные метаморфозы // Полис. Политические исследования. 2023. № 5. С. 7–28. https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2023.05.02.Arbatov, Alexey G. “Nuclear Metamorphoses.” Polis. Political Studies, no. 5 (2023b): 7–28 [In Russian].Барановский, В.Г., Бужинский, Е.П., Загорский, А.В., Никитин, А.И., Ознобищев, С.К. Избежать ядерной войны. Проблемы эскалации / деэскалации вооруженных конфликтов при приближении к «ядерному порогу» // Полис. Политические исследования. 2022. № 6. С. 114–134. https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2022.06.09.Baranovsky, Vladimir. G., Evgeniy P. Buzhinsky, Andrei V. Zagorsky, Alexander I. Nikitin, and Sergey K. Oznobishchev. “Avoiding Nuclear War. Problems of Escalation / De-Escalation of Armed Conflicts When Approaching the ‘Nuclear Threshold’.” Polis. Political Studies, no. 6 (2022): 114–134 [In Russian].Батюк, В.И. Новая холодная война // Дипломатическая служба. 2020. № 1. С. 27–34. https://doi.org/10.33920/vne-01-2001-04.Batiuk, Vladimir I. “New ‘Cold War’.” Diplomatic Service, no. 1 (2020): 27–34 [In Russian].Громыко, А.А. Мир полицентризма: роль ценностей в конкуренции ведущих держав // Полис. Политические исследования. 2024. № 6. С. 7–21. https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2024.06.02.Gromyko, Alexey A. “The World of Polycentrism: The Role of Values in Major Powers’ Competition.” Polis. Political Studies, no. 6 (2024): 7–21 [In Russian].Караганов, С.А. Век войн? Статья первая // Россия в глобальной политике. 2024. Т. 22. № 1. С. 52–64. https://doi.org/10.31278/1810-6439-2024-22-1-52-64.Karaganov, Sergey A. “An Age of Wars? Article One.” Russia in Global Politics 22, no. 1 (2024): 52–64 [In Russian].Лекаренко, О.Г. Создание Евратома и проблема ядерных гарантий // Вестник Томского государственного университета. 2019. № 449. С. 149–155. https://doi.org/10.17223/15617793/449/18.Lekarenko, Oksana G. “The Establishment of Euratom and the Problem of Nuclear Safeguards.” Bulletin of Tomsk State University, no. 449 (2019): 149–155 [In Russian].Михайленко, Е.Б., Дегтярев, Н.С. Эволюция идеи запрещения ядерного оружия в контексте режима ядерного нераспространения // Вестник Томского государственного университета. История. 2019. № 62. С. 115–127. https://doi.org/10.17223/19988613/62/14.Mikhaylenko, Ekaterina B., and Nikita S. Degtyarev. “The Evolution of the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons Idea in the Context of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Regime.” Bulletin of Tomsk State University. History, no. 62 (2019): 115–127 [In Russian].Михайленко, Е.Б. От политики убеждения к дипломатии: уроки международной кампании по запрещению ядерного оружия // Международные процессы. 2022. Т. 20. № 1. С. 55–79. https://doi.org/10.17994/IT.2022.20.1.68.5.Mikhaylenko, Ekaterina B. “From Advocacy to Diplomacy: The Case of the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons.” International Trends / Mezhdunarodnye protsessy 20, no. 1 (2022): 55–79 [In Russian].Никитин, А.И., Зведре, Е.К. Ключевые задачи сохранения и упрочения стратегической стабильности // Актуальные проблемы Европы. 2019. № 1. С. 78–99. https://doi.org/10.31249/ape/2019.01.04.Nikitin, Alexander I., and Evgeny K. Zvedre. “Key Tasks for Preserving and Strengthening Strategic Stability.” Actual Problems of Europe, no. 1 (2019): 78–99 [In Russian].Ознобищев, С.К. Политика и контроль над вооружениями // Полис. Политические исследования. 2021. № 6. С. 26–41. https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2021.06.03.Oznobishchev, Sergey K. “Policy and Arms Control.” Polis. Political Studies, no. 6 (2021): 26–41 [In Russian].Орлов, В.А., Семенов, С.Д. Постамериканский мир и ядерное нераспространение // Россия в глобальной политике. 2023. Т. 21. № 1. С. 72–87. https://doi.org/10.31278/1810-6439-2023-21-1-72-87.Orlov, Vladimir A., and Sergey D. Semyonov. “Post-American World and Nuclear Non-Proliferation.” Russia in Global Politics 21, no. 1 (2023): 72–87 [In Russian].Победаш, Д.И. Международный режим нераспространения ядерного оружия – новые риски и вызовы // Ядерный мир: новые вызовы режиму ядерного нераспространения / под ред. Е.Б. Михайленко. Екатеринбург: Издательство Уральского университета, 2017. С. 17–43.Pobedash, Dmitry I. “Mezhdunarodnyj rezhim nerasprostraneniya yadernogo oruzhiya – novye riski i vyzovy.” In Yadernyj mir: novye vyzovy rezhimu yadernogo nerasprostraneniya, edited by Ekaterina B. Mikhaylenko. Yekaterinburg: Ural University Press, 17–43 [In Russian].Рогов, С.М. Глобальная и региональная стабильность в ядерном мире // Вестник Российской академии наук. 2021. Т. 91. № 6. С. 571–584. https://doi.org/10.31857/S0869587321050212.Rogov, Sergey M. “Global’naya i regional’naya stabil’nost’ v yadernom mire.” Herald of the Russian Academy of Sciences 91, no. 6 (2021): 571–584 [In Russian].Селезнева, Д.А. Разногласия вокруг Договора о нераспространении ядерного оружия // Россия и Америка в XXI веке. 2024. № 11. https://doi.org/10.18254/S207054760033263-6.Selezneva, Darya A. “Issues and Debates Surrounding the NPT’s Implementation.” Russia and America in the XXI century, no. 11 (2024) [In Russian].Стефанович, Д.В. Гиперзвуковые системы наступательных вооружений // Международная безопасность: новый миропорядок и технологическая революция / отв. ред: А.Г. Арбатов, К.В. Богданов, О.В. Гусарова, М.Г. Евтодьева. М.: Весь мир, 2023. C. 52–64.Stefanovich, Dmitry V. “Giperzvukovye sistemy nastupatel’nyh vooruzhenij.” In Mezhdunarodnaya bezopasnost: novy mirovoy poryadok i tekhnologicheskaya revolutsiya, edited by Alexey G. Arbatov, Konstantin V. Bogdanov, Olga V. Gusarova, and Marianna G. Evtodieva, 52–64. Moscow: Ves’ Mir, 2023 [In Russian].Торопчин, Г.В. Алармизм и десекьюритизация: ядерная программа Мьянмы // Вестник Томского государственного университета. История. 2023. № 81. С. 112–120. https://doi.org/10.17223/19988613/81/13.Toropchin, Gleb V. “Alarmism and Desecuritization: Myanmar’s Nuclear Programme.” Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Istoriya – Tomsk State University Journal of History, no. 81 (2023): 112–120 [In Russian].Хлопков, А.В., Шаврова, А.С. Продление ДСНВ: есть ли шанс успеть? // Россия в глобальной политике. 2020. Т. 18. № 4. С. 216–225.Khlopkov, Anton V., and Anastasia S. Shavrova. “START Extension: Is There a Chance to Be in Time?” Russia in Global Politics 18, no. 4 (2020): 216–225.Acheson, Ray. “Impact of the Nuclear Ban: How Outlawing Nuclear Weapons Is Changing the World.” Global Change, Peace and Security, no. 30 (2018): 243–250. https://doi.org/10.1080/14781158.2018.1465907.Acheson, Ray. “Impact of the Nuclear Ban: How Outlawing Nuclear Weapons Is Changing the World.” Global Change, Peace and Security, no. 30 (2018): 243–250. https://doi.org/10.1080/14781158.2018.1465907.Bell, Mark S. “The Russia-Ukraine War and Nuclear Weapons: Evaluating Familiar Insights.” Journal for Peace and Nuclear Disarmament 7, no. 2 (2024): 494–508. https://doi.org/10.1080/25751654.2024.2425379.Bell, Mark S. “The Russia-Ukraine War and Nuclear Weapons: Evaluating Familiar Insights.” Journal for Peace and Nuclear Disarmament 7, no. 2 (2024): 494–508. https://doi.org/10.1080/25751654.2024.2425379.Bolton, Matthew, and Elizabeth Minor. “The Discursive Turn Arrives in Turtle Bay: The International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons’ Operationalization of Critical IR Theories.” Global Policy 7, no. 3 (2016): 385–395. https://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.12343.Bolton, Matthew, and Elizabeth Minor. “The Discursive Turn Arrives in Turtle Bay: The International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons’ Operationalization of Critical IR Theories.” Global Policy 7, no. 3 (2016): 385–395. https://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.12343.Borrie, John and Tim Caughley. Viewing Nuclear Weapons through a Humanitarian Lens. New York; Geneva: UNIDIR, 2013.Borrie, John and Tim Caughley. Viewing Nuclear Weapons through a Humanitarian Lens. New York; Geneva: UNIDIR, 2013.Bowen, Wyn Q. “Deterrence and Asymmetry: Non-State Actors and Mass Casualty Terrorism.” Contemporary Security Policy 25, no. 1 (2004): 54–70. https://doi.org/10.1080/1352326042000290506.Bowen, Wyn Q. “Deterrence and Asymmetry: Non-State Actors and Mass Casualty Terrorism.” Contemporary Security Policy 25, no. 1 (2004): 54–70. https://doi.org/10.1080/1352326042000290506.Buzan, Barry, and Lene Hansen. The Evolution of International Security Studies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009.Buzan, Barry, and Lene Hansen. The Evolution of International Security Studies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009.Cimbala, Stephen J. “Cyber War and Deterrence Stability: Post-START Nuclear Arms Control.” Comparative Strategy 33, no. 3 (2014): 279–286. https://doi.org/10.1080/01495933.2014.926727.Cimbala, Stephen J. “Cyber War and Deterrence Stability: Post-START Nuclear Arms Control.” Comparative Strategy 33, no. 3 (2014): 279–286. https://doi.org/10.1080/01495933.2014.926727.Considine, Laura. “The Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons and the Question of Nuclear Meaning.” Critical Studies on Security, no. 7 (2019): 87–90. https://doi.org/10.1080/21624887.2018.1468131.Considine, Laura. “The Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons and the Question of Nuclear Meaning.” Critical Studies on Security, no. 7 (2019): 87–90. https://doi.org/10.1080/21624887.2018.1468131.Deriglazova, Larisa, and Nina Rozhanovskaya. “Building Nuclear Consensus in Contemporary Russia: Factors and Perceptions.” In Nuclear Russia: International and Domestic Agendas, edited by Andrei Pavlov, and Larisa Deriglazova, 131–162. Tomsk: Tomsk University Press, 2020.Deriglazova, Larisa, and Nina Rozhanovskaya. “Building Nuclear Consensus in Contemporary Russia: Factors and Perceptions.” In Nuclear Russia: International and Domestic Agendas, edited by Andrei Pavlov, and Larisa Deriglazova, 131–162. Tomsk: Tomsk University Press, 2020.Efstathopoulos, Charalampos. “Reinterpreting India’s Rise Through the Middle Power Prism.” Asian Journal of Political Science 19, no. 1 (2011): 74–95. https://doi.org/10.1080/02185377.2011.568246.Efstathopoulos, Charalampos. “Reinterpreting India’s Rise Through the Middle Power Prism.” Asian Journal of Political Science 19, no. 1 (2011): 74–95. https://doi.org/10.1080/02185377.2011.568246.Egeland, Kjolv. “Introduction: The Nuclear Ban Treaty as Negation of Negation.” Critical Studies on Security 7, no. 1 (2018): 69–72. https://doi.org/10.1080/21624887.2018.1468102.Egeland, Kjolv. “Introduction: The Nuclear Ban Treaty as Negation of Negation.” Critical Studies on Security 7, no. 1 (2018): 69–72. https://doi.org/10.1080/21624887.2018.1468102.Elbahtimy, Hassan, and Ross Peel. “Nuclear Weapons Production Complexes in a Disarmed World.” Journal for Peace and Nuclear Disarmament 6, no. 2 (2023): 263–291. https://doi.org/10.1080/25751654.2023.2292348.Elbahtimy, Hassan, and Ross Peel. “Nuclear Weapons Production Complexes in a Disarmed World.” Journal for Peace and Nuclear Disarmament 6, no. 2 (2023): 263–291. https://doi.org/10.1080/25751654.2023.2292348.Fitzpatrick, Mark. Asia’s Latent Nuclear Powers. Japan, South Korea and Taiwan. London: Routledge, 2016. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351223744.Fitzpatrick, Mark. Asia’s Latent Nuclear Powers. Japan, South Korea and Taiwan. London: Routledge, 2016. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351223744.Frost, Robin M. “Terrorism and Nuclear Deterrence.” The Adelphi Papers 45, no. 378 (2005): 63–68. https://doi.org/10.1080/05679320500519047.Frost, Robin M. “Terrorism and Nuclear Deterrence.” The Adelphi Papers 45, no. 378 (2005): 63–68. https://doi.org/10.1080/05679320500519047.Gibbons, Rebecca D. “The Humanitarian Turn in Nuclear Disarmament and the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons.” The Nonproliferation Review 25, no. 1–2 (2018): 11–36. https://doi.org/10.1080/10736700.2018.1486960.Gibbons, Rebecca D. “The Humanitarian Turn in Nuclear Disarmament and the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons.” The Nonproliferation Review 25, no. 1–2 (2018): 11–36. https://doi.org/10.1080/10736700.2018.1486960.Horsburgh, Nicola. China and Global Nuclear Order: From Estrangement to Active Engagement. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015.Horsburgh, Nicola. China and Global Nuclear Order: From Estrangement to Active Engagement. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015.Ifft, Edward. “Preventing Nuclear War.” Survival 66, no. 3 (2024): 129–144. https://doi.org/10.1080/00396338.2024.2357486.Ifft, Edward. “Preventing Nuclear War.” Survival 66, no. 3 (2024): 129–144. https://doi.org/10.1080/00396338.2024.2357486.Istomin, Igor A., and Ann Crowley-Vigneau. “International Norms in the Face of Technological Change: Challenges for Constructivist Theory of Arms Control.” Polis. Political Studies, no. 4 (2023): 7–22. https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2023.04.02.Istomin, Igor A., and Ann Crowley-Vigneau. “International Norms in the Face of Technological Change: Challenges for Constructivist Theory of Arms Control.” Polis. Political Studies, no. 4 (2023): 7–22. https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2023.04.02.Joshi, Sharad. “How Terrorist Actors in Pakistan Use Nuclear Weapons for Political Influence.” Asian Security 16, no. 2 (2019): 221–242. https://doi.org/10.1080/14799855.2019.1582522.Joshi, Sharad. “How Terrorist Actors in Pakistan Use Nuclear Weapons for Political Influence.” Asian Security 16, no. 2 (2019): 221–242. https://doi.org/10.1080/14799855.2019.1582522.Ken, Berry, Patricia Lewis, Benoît Pélopidas, Nikolai Sokov, and Ward Wilson. Delegitimizing Nuclear Weapons: Examining the Validity of Nuclear Deterrence. Monterey: Monterey Institute of International Studies, 2010.Ken, Berry, Patricia Lewis, Benoît Pélopidas, Nikolai Sokov, and Ward Wilson. Delegitimizing Nuclear Weapons: Examining the Validity of Nuclear Deterrence. Monterey: Monterey Institute of International Studies, 2010.Kuhn, Thomas S. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 1996. Kühn, Ulrich. “The Fall Crisis of 2022: Why Did Russia Not Use Nuclear Arms?” Defense & Security Analysis 41, no. 2 (2025): 280–300 https://doi.org/10.1080/14751798.2024.2442794.Kuhn, Thomas S. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 1996. Kühn, Ulrich. “The Fall Crisis of 2022: Why Did Russia Not Use Nuclear Arms?” Defense & Security Analysis 41, no. 2 (2025): 280–300 https://doi.org/10.1080/14751798.2024.2442794.Lundgren, Carl. “What Are the Odds? Assessing the Probability of a Nuclear War.” The Nonproliferation Review 20, no. 2 (2013): 361–374. https://doi.org/10.1080/10736700.2013.799828.Lundgren, Carl. “What Are the Odds? Assessing the Probability of a Nuclear War.” The Nonproliferation Review 20, no. 2 (2013): 361–374. https://doi.org/10.1080/10736700.2013.799828.Malygina, Anastasia A. “International Arms Control Regimes.” In Russia and the World: Understanding International Relations, edited by Natalia A. Tsvetkova, 145–160. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 2017.Malygina, Anastasia A. “International Arms Control Regimes.” In Russia and the World: Understanding International Relations, edited by Natalia A. Tsvetkova, 145–160. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 2017.Müller, Harald. “The Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty in Jeopardy? Internal Divisions and the Impact of World Politics.” The International Spectator 52, no. 1 (2017): 12–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/03932729.2017.1270088.Müller, Harald. “The Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty in Jeopardy? Internal Divisions and the Impact of World Politics.” The International Spectator 52, no. 1 (2017): 12–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/03932729.2017.1270088.Nicolini Gabriel, João, and Tom Sauer. “The Struggle for Influence by Emerging Powers in Nuclear Global Governance.” Global Change, Peace & Security 36, no. 2 (2025): 121–138. https://doi.org/10.1080/14781158.2025.2517613.Nicolini Gabriel, João, and Tom Sauer. “The Struggle for Influence by Emerging Powers in Nuclear Global Governance.” Global Change, Peace & Security 36, no. 2 (2025): 121–138. https://doi.org/10.1080/14781158.2025.2517613.Pavlov, Andrei. “Nuclear Weapons in the Russian Military Strategy.” In Nuclear Russia: International and Domestic Agendas, edited by Andrei Pavlov, and Larisa Deriglazova, 13–36. Tomsk: Tomsk University Press, 2020.Pavlov, Andrei. “Nuclear Weapons in the Russian Military Strategy.” In Nuclear Russia: International and Domestic Agendas, edited by Andrei Pavlov, and Larisa Deriglazova, 13–36. Tomsk: Tomsk University Press, 2020.Pobedash, Dmitry. “The Russian Nonproliferation Research: State of the Field.” In Nuclear Russia: International and Domestic Agendas, edited by Andrei Pavlov and Larisa Deriglazova, 191–206. Tomsk: Tomsk University Press, 2020.Pobedash, Dmitry. “The Russian Nonproliferation Research: State of the Field.” In Nuclear Russia: International and Domestic Agendas, edited by Andrei Pavlov and Larisa Deriglazova, 191–206. Tomsk: Tomsk University Press, 2020.Ritchie, Nick. “A Hegemonic Nuclear Order: Understanding the Ban Treaty and the Power Politics of Nuclear Weapons.” Contemporary Security Policy 40, no. 4 (2019): 409–434. https://doi.org/10.1080/13523260.2019.1571852.Ritchie, Nick. “A Hegemonic Nuclear Order: Understanding the Ban Treaty and the Power Politics of Nuclear Weapons.” Contemporary Security Policy 40, no. 4 (2019): 409–434. https://doi.org/10.1080/13523260.2019.1571852.Sauer, Tom. “A Second Nuclear Revolution: From Nuclear Primacy to Post-Existential Deterrence.” Journal of Strategic Studies 32, no. 5 (2009): 745–767. https://doi.org/10.1080/01402390903189402.Sauer, Tom. “A Second Nuclear Revolution: From Nuclear Primacy to Post-Existential Deterrence.” Journal of Strategic Studies 32, no. 5 (2009): 745–767. https://doi.org/10.1080/01402390903189402.Van Wyk, Jo-Ansie. “South Africa’s Nuclear Diplomacy Since The Termination Of Its Nuclear Weapons Programme.” Scientia Militaria – South African Journal of Military Studies 42, no. 1 (2014): 80–101. https://doi.org/10.5787/42-1-1082.Van Wyk, Jo-Ansie. “South Africa’s Nuclear Diplomacy Since The Termination Of Its Nuclear Weapons Programme.” Scientia Militaria – South African Journal of Military Studies 42, no. 1 (2014): 80–101. https://doi.org/10.5787/42-1-1082.Walker, William. A Perpetual Menace: Nuclear Weapons and International Order. London: Routledge, 2012. https://doi.org/10.4324/978020323912.Walker, William. A Perpetual Menace: Nuclear Weapons and International Order. London: Routledge, 2012. https://doi.org/10.4324/978020323912.

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest present.