Brakeman or booster? Presidents, ideological polarization, reciprocity, and the politics of US arms control

12Citations
Citations of this article
9Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

US 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.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Böller, F. (2022). Brakeman or booster? Presidents, ideological polarization, reciprocity, and the politics of US arms control. International Politics, 59(4), 725–748. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41311-021-00330-3

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free