This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Avey, P. C. (2021, April). MAD and Taboo: US expert views on nuclear deterrence, coercion, and non-use norms. Foreign Policy Analysis, 17(2). doi: 10.1093/fpa/oraa019.AveyP. C.(2021,April).MAD and Taboo: US expert views on nuclear deterrence, coercion, and non-use norms.,17(2). doi:10.1093/fpa/oraa019.Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Beck, D. G. (2021). China’s Low-Yield Battlefield Nuclear Weapons: A Threat Assessment. US Army School for Advanced Military Studies. Defense Technical Information Center AD1160638. Available at https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/citations/AD1160638BeckD. G.(2021)..US Army School for Advanced Military Studies. Defense Technical Information Center AD1160638. Available at https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/citations/AD1160638Search in Google Scholar
Becker, J. D. (2020). Strategy in the new era of tactical nuclear weapons. Strategic Studies Quarterly, 14(1), pp. 117-140. Available at https://www.jstor.org/stable/26891886BeckerJ. D.(2020).Strategy in the new era of tactical nuclear weapons.,14(1), pp.117-140.Available at https://www.jstor.org/stable/26891886Search in Google Scholar
Clemens, J. (2013). An analysis of economic warfare. American Economic Review, 103(3), pp. 523-527.ClemensJ.(2013).An analysis of economic warfare.,103(3), pp.523-527.Search in Google Scholar
Corn, G. S., & Corn, G. P. (2012). The law of operational targeting: viewing the LOAC through an operational lens. Texas International Law Journal, 47, pp. 337-380.CornG. S. & CornG. P.(2012).The law of operational targeting: viewing the LOAC through an operational lens.,47, pp.337-380.Search in Google Scholar
Fedorov, Y. (2002). Russia’s doctrine on the use of nuclear weapons. In: Pugwash Conferences on Science and World Affairs, London, UK, pp. 1-13.FedorovY.(2002).. In:Pugwash Conferences on Science and World Affairs,London, UK, pp.1-13.Search in Google Scholar
Fetter, S., & Glaser, C. (2022). Legal, but Lethal: The law of armed conflict and US nuclear strategy. The Washington Quarterly, 45(1), pp. 25-37. doi: 10.1080/0163660X.2022.2054121.FetterS. & GlaserC.(2022).Legal, but Lethal: The law of armed conflict and US nuclear strategy.,45(1), pp.25-37. doi:10.1080/0163660X.2022.2054121.Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Ford, C. A., Harvey, J. R., Miller, F. C., Payne, K. B., Sagan, S. D., & Weiner, A. S. (2021). Are belligerent reprisals against civilians legal? International Security, 46(2), pp. 166-172. doi: 10.1162/isec_c_00422.FordC. A.HarveyJ. R.MillerF. C.PayneK. B.SaganS. D. & WeinerA. S.(2021).Are belligerent reprisals against civilians legal?,46(2), pp.166-172. doi:10.1162/isec_c_00422.Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Førland, T. E. (1993). The history of economic warfare: International law, effectiveness, strategies. Journal of Peace Research, 30(2), pp. 151-162. doi: 10.1177/0022343393030002003.FørlandT. E.(1993).The history of economic warfare: International law, effectiveness, strategies.,30(2), pp.151-162. doi:10.1177/0022343393030002003.Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Forsyth, J. W., Saltzman, C. B., & Schaub, G. (2010). Remembrance of things past: The enduring value of nuclear weapons. Strategic Studies Quarterly, 4(1), pp. 74-89. Available at chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://www.airuniversity.af.edu/Portals/10/SSQ/documents/Volume-04_Issue-1/ForsythSaltzmanSchaub.pdfForsythJ. W.SaltzmanC. B. & SchaubG.(2010).Remembrance of things past: The enduring value of nuclear weapons.,4(1), pp.74-89.Available at chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://www.airuniversity.af.edu/Portals/10/SSQ/documents/Volume-04_Issue-1/ForsythSaltzmanSchaub.pdfSearch in Google Scholar
Gallagher, M. A., & Cevallos, M. A. (2021). Nuclear warfare beyond counterforce. Journal of Military Studies, 1(1), pp. 1-11.GallagherM. A. & CevallosM. A.(2021).Nuclear warfare beyond counterforce.,1(1), pp.1-11.Search in Google Scholar
Gallagher, M. A., & Sorice, J. E. (2014). Considering alternative nuclear targeting strategies. Comparative Strategy, 33(5), pp. 451-465. doi: 10.1080/01495933.2014.962964.GallagherM. A. & SoriceJ. E.(2014).Considering alternative nuclear targeting strategies.,33(5), pp.451-465. doi:10.1080/01495933.2014.962964.Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Goodman, R., & Jinks, D. (2004). International law, U.S. war powers, and the global war on terrorism. Harvard Law Review, 118, pp. 2653-2662.GoodmanR. & JinksD.(2004).International law, U.S. war powers, and the global war on terrorism.,118, pp.2653-2662.Search in Google Scholar
Gray, C. S. (1979). Nuclear strategy: The case for a theory of victory. International Security, 4(1), pp. 54-87. Available at https://muse.jhu.edu/article/446444/pdfGrayC. S.(1979).Nuclear strategy: The case for a theory of victory.,4(1), pp.54-87.Available at https://muse.jhu.edu/article/446444/pdfSearch in Google Scholar
Green, L. C. (1988). Nuclear weapons and the law of armed conflict. Denver Journal of International Law & Policy, 17(1). Available at https://digitalcommons.du.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1895&context=djilpGreenL. C.(1988).Nuclear weapons and the law of armed conflict.,17(1).Available at https://digitalcommons.du.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1895&context=djilpSearch in Google Scholar
Hartley, D. S. (2015). DIME/PMESII models. In: Fellman, P. B.-Y. (ed.), Conflict and Complexity. Understanding Complex Systems. Springer, New York. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4939-1705-1_5.HartleyD. S.(2015).DIME/PMESII models. In:FellmanP. B.-Y.(ed.),.Springer,New York. doi:10.1007/978-1-4939-1705-1_5.Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Hefty, K. E., Dickey, T. M., Gallagher, M. A., & Garcia, F. E. (2016). Modeling a nuclear detonation in a conventional campaign simulation. The Journal of Defense Modeling and Simulation: Applications, Methodology, Technology, 13(1), pp. 109-117. doi: 10.1177/1548512915588571.HeftyK. E.DickeyT. M.GallagherM. A. & GarciaF. E.(2016).Modeling a nuclear detonation in a conventional campaign simulation.,13(1), pp.109-117. doi:10.1177/1548512915588571.Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Hersman, R. K., Rodgers, J., & Farabaugh, B. (2020, December). U.S. Nuclear Warhead Modernization and “New” Nuclear Weapons. Center for Strategic & International Studies, pp. 1-10. Available at WWW.CSIS.ORGHersmanR. K.RodgersJ. & FarabaughB.(2020,December).U.S. Nuclear Warhead Modernization and “New” Nuclear Weapons., pp.1-10.Available at WWW.CSIS.ORGSearch in Google Scholar
Hippel, F. N. (2023). Should nuclear weapons be made less lethal? Arms Control Today, 53(7), pp. 18-23. Available at www.proquest.com/docview/2865590913?pq-origsite=gscholar&-fromopenview=true&sourcetype=Scholarly%20JournalsHippelF. N.(2023).Should nuclear weapons be made less lethal?,53(7), pp.18-23.Available at www.proquest.com/docview/2865590913?pq-origsite=gscholar&-fromopenview=true&sourcetype=Scholarly%20JournalsSearch in Google Scholar
Jamison, B. (2022). Nuclear targeting methods and modern deterrence. A Journal of Strategic Airpower and Spacepower, 1(2), pp. 43-56. Available at https://www.jstor.org/stable/48668554JamisonB.(2022).Nuclear targeting methods and modern deterrence.,1(2), pp.43-56.Available at https://www.jstor.org/stable/48668554Search in Google Scholar
Joint Chiefs of Staff. (2011). Joint Publication 3.0 Joint Operations. United States Department of Defense, Pentagon, Washington, DC, USA. Available at https://www.moore.army.mil/mssp/security%20topics/Potential%20Adversaries/content/pdf/JP%203-0.pdfJoint Chiefs of Staff. (2011)..United States Department of Defense,Pentagon, Washington, DC, USA.Available at https://www.moore.army.mil/mssp/security%20topics/Potential%20Adversaries/content/pdf/JP%203-0.pdfSearch in Google Scholar
Kalshoven, F., & Zegveld, L. (2011). Constraints on the Waging of War: An Introduction to International Humanitarian Law, 4th edn. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.KalshovenF. & ZegveldL.(2011).,4th edn.Cambridge University Press,Cambridge.Search in Google Scholar
Kang, K., & Kugler, J. (2023a). Beyond deterrence: Uncertain stability in the nuclear ear. Conflict Management and Peace Science, 40(6), pp. 655-674. doi: 10.1177/07388942221149670.KangK. & KuglerJ.(2023a).Beyond deterrence: Uncertain stability in the nuclear ear.,40(6), pp.655-674. doi:10.1177/07388942221149670.Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Kang, K., & Kugler, J. (2023b). Conditional deterrence: modeling nuclear stability. In: Averting Nuclear War. Advanced Sciences and Technologies for Security Applications. Springer, Cham. doi: 10.1007/978-3-031-38688-6_5.KangK. & KuglerJ.(2023b).Conditional deterrence: modeling nuclear stability. In:.Springer,Cham. doi:10.1007/978-3-031-38688-6_5.Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Kang, K., & Kugler, J. (2023c). Deterrence. In: Averting Nuclear War. Advanced Sciences and Technologies for Security Applications. Springer, Cham. doi: 10.1007/978-3-031-38688-6_2.KangK. & KuglerJ.(2023c).Deterrence. In:.Springer,Cham. doi:10.1007/978-3-031-38688-6_2.Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Karam, P. A. (2021). Additional considerations when responding to a nuclear attack. In: Radiological and Nuclear Terrorism. Advanced Sciences and Technologies for Security Applications. Springer, Cham, pp. 233-244. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-69162-2_19.KaramP. A.(2021).Additional considerations when responding to a nuclear attack. In:.Springer,Cham, pp.233-244. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-69162-2_19.Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Kawai, K. (2022). Japan’s reliance on US extended nuclear deterrence: Legality of use matters today. Journal for Peace and Nuclear Disarmament, 5(1), pp. 162-184. doi: 10.1080/25751654.2022.2071053.KawaiK.(2022).Japan’s reliance on US extended nuclear deterrence: Legality of use matters today.,5(1), pp.162-184. doi:10.1080/25751654.2022.2071053.Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Kelsey, D. (2021, October 11). Nuclear Weapons: Who Has what at a Glance: Available at https://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/NuclearweaponswhohaswhatKelseyD.(2021,October11).: Available at https://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/NuclearweaponswhohaswhatSearch in Google Scholar
Kofman, M., Fink, A., & Edmonds, J. (2020). Russian Strategy for Escalation Management. Center for Naval Analysis, Arlington, VA. Available at https://www.cna.org/reports/2020/04/DRM-2019-U-022455-1Rev.pdfKofmanM.FinkA. & EdmondsJ.(2020)..Center for Naval Analysis,Arlington, VA. Available at https://www.cna.org/reports/2020/04/DRM-2019-U-022455-1Rev.pdfSearch in Google Scholar
Krasny, J., & Kawano, N. (2019). Use of nuclear weapons and the law of armed conflict. Hiroshima peace science, 41, pp. 73-84. Available at https://d1wqtxts1xzle7.cloudfront.net/76258280/hps_41_73-libre.pdf?1639479535=&response-content-disposition=inline%3B+-filename%3DUse_of_Nuclear_Weapons_and_the_Law_of_Ar.pdf&Expires=1703803983&Signature=HFG5ltJbejQN-mRQ52bK-TIcrjenu0iqGBzSOfUyyySR7sA6WMF~aKrasnyJ. & KawanoN.(2019).Use of nuclear weapons and the law of armed conflict.,41, pp.73-84.Available at https://d1wqtxts1xzle7.cloudfront.net/76258280/hps_41_73-libre.pdf?1639479535=&response-content-disposition=inline%3B+-filename%3DUse_of_Nuclear_Weapons_and_the_Law_of_Ar.pdf&Expires=1703803983&Signature=HFG5ltJbejQN-mRQ52bK-TIcrjenu0iqGBzSOfUyyySR7sA6WMF~aSearch in Google Scholar
Lackey, D. P. (1984). Moral Principles and Nuclear Weapons. Rowman & Littlefield, Lanham, Maryland.LackeyD. P.(1984)..Rowman & Littlefield,Lanham, Maryland.Search in Google Scholar
Lieber, K. A., & Press, D. G. (2009). The nukes we need-preserving the American deterrent. Foreign Affairs, 88(6), pp. 39-51.LieberK. A. & PressD. G.(2009).The nukes we need-preserving the American deterrent.,88(6), pp.39-51.Search in Google Scholar
Lieber, K. A., & Press, D. G. (2017). The new era of counterforce: Technological change and the future of nuclear deterrence. International Security, 41(9), pp. 9-49.LieberK. A. & PressD. G.(2017).The new era of counterforce: Technological change and the future of nuclear deterrence.,41(9), pp.9-49.Search in Google Scholar
Lowe, V., & Tzanakopoulos, A. (2012). Economic warfare. In: Wolfrum, R. (ed.), Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law. Available at https://ssrn.comabstract=1701590LoweV. & TzanakopoulosA.(2012).. In:WolfrumR.(ed.),Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law.Available at https://ssrn.comabstract=1701590Search in Google Scholar
McCarron, P. B., & Holt, C. A. (2001). A Faustain bargain? Nuclear weapons, negative security assurances, and belligerent reprisal. In: The Fletcher Forum of World Affairs. The Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Medford, Massachusetts. pp. 203-237.McCarronP. B. & HoltC. A.(2001).A Faustain bargain? Nuclear weapons, negative security assurances, and belligerent reprisal. In:.The Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy,Medford, Massachusetts. pp.203-237.Search in Google Scholar
McKinney, K. E., Sagan, S. D., & Weiner, A. S. (2020). Why the atomic bombing of Hiroshima would be illegal today. Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, 76(4), pp. 157-165. doi: 10.1080/00963402.2020.1778344.McKinneyK. E.SaganS. D. & WeinerA. S.(2020).Why the atomic bombing of Hiroshima would be illegal today.,76(4), pp.157-165. doi:10.1080/00963402.2020.1778344.Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Mueller, K. P., Castillo, J. J., Morgan, F. E., Pegahi, N., & Rosen, B. (2007). Striking first: Preemptive and preventive attack in U.S. National Security Policy. Political Science Quarterly, 122(4), pp. 666-667.MuellerK. P.CastilloJ. J.MorganF. E.PegahiN. & RosenB.(2007).Striking first: Preemptive and preventive attack in U.S. National Security Policy.,122(4), pp.666-667.Search in Google Scholar
Mount, A. (2023, November). A not-so-strategic posture commission. Arms Control Today, 53(9), pp. 23-26. Available at https://www.proquest.com/docview/2886668188?pq-orig-site=gscholar&fromopenview=true&sourcetype=Scholarly%20JournalsMountA.(2023,November).A not-so-strategic posture commission.,53(9), pp.23-26.Available at https://www.proquest.com/docview/2886668188?pq-orig-site=gscholar&fromopenview=true&sourcetype=Scholarly%20JournalsSearch in Google Scholar
Ny, D. (2023). Assess the proposition that india will become the next superpower. Journal of Asian and African Studies, 58(7), pp. 1307-1324. doi: 10.1177/00219096221084255.NyD.(2023).Assess the proposition that india will become the next superpower.,58(7), pp.1307-1324. doi:10.1177/00219096221084255.Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Nye, J. S. (2023). Nuclear ethics revisited. Ethics & International Affairs, 37(1), pp. 5-17. doi: 10.1017/S0892679423000047.NyeJ. S.(2023).Nuclear ethics revisited.,37(1), pp.5-17. doi:10.1017/S0892679423000047.Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Oermann, N. O., & Wolff, H.-J. (2022). Sanctions’, ‘Trade War’, and ‘Economic Warfare. Oxford Academic. doi: 10.1093/oso/9780192848901.003.0002.OermannN. O. & WolffH.-J.(2022)..Oxford Academic. doi:10.1093/oso/9780192848901.003.0002.Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Office of the Secretary of Defense. (2018). Nuclear Posture Review. Department of Defense.Office of the Secretary of Defense. (2018)..Department of Defense.Search in Google Scholar
Payne, K. B., Harvey, J. R., Miller, F. C., & Soofer, R. (2023). The Rejection of Intentional Population Targeting for ‘Tripolar’ Deterrence. National Institute for Public Policy Information Series, (563).PayneK. B.HarveyJ. R.MillerF. C. & SooferR.(2023).The Rejection of Intentional Population Targeting for ‘Tripolar’ Deterrence., (563).Search in Google Scholar
Perkovich, G., & Vaddi, P. (2021). Proportionate Deterrence: A Model Nuclear Posture Review. Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Washington, DC. Available at https://carnegieen-dowment.org/files/Perkovich_Vaddi_NPR_full2.pdfPerkovichG. & VaddiP.(2021)..Carnegie Endowment for International Peace,Washington, DC. Available at https://carnegieen-dowment.org/files/Perkovich_Vaddi_NPR_full2.pdfSearch in Google Scholar
Quackenbush, S. L. (2011). Deterrence theory: Where do we stand? Review of International Studies, 37(2), pp. 741-762. doi: 10.1017/S0260210510000896.QuackenbushS. L.(2011).Deterrence theory: Where do we stand?,37(2), pp.741-762. doi:10.1017/S0260210510000896.Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Rathbun, B. C., & Stein, R. (2020). Greater goods: Morality and attitudes toward the use of nuclear weapons. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 64(5), pp. 787-816. doi: 10.1177/0022002719879994.RathbunB. C. & SteinR.(2020).Greater goods: Morality and attitudes toward the use of nuclear weapons.,64(5), pp.787-816. doi:10.1177/0022002719879994.Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Redmon, S. G. (2021). A Threat Analysis on Russian Use of Low Yield Battlefield Nuclear Weapons. Army Command and General Staff College. Fort Leavenworth, Kansas: Defense Technical Information Center AD116129. Available at https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/citations/trecms/AD1161629RedmonS. G.(2021)..Army Command and General Staff College.Fort Leavenworth, Kansas: Defense Technical Information Center AD116129. Available at https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/citations/trecms/AD1161629Search in Google Scholar
Richardson, E. (2021). Tactical nuclear weapons cannot comply with the law of armed conflict. Fordham International Law Journal, 45, p. 429.RichardsonE.(2021).Tactical nuclear weapons cannot comply with the law of armed conflict.,45, p.429.Search in Google Scholar
Sagan, S. D. (2023). Just and unjust nuclear deterrence. Ethics & International Affairs, 37(1), pp. 19-28.SaganS. D.(2023).Just and unjust nuclear deterrence.,37(1), pp.19-28.Search in Google Scholar
Sagan, S. D., & Weiner, A. S. (2021). The rule of law and the role of strategy in U.S. Nuclear doctrine. International Security, 45(4), pp. 126-166. doi: 10.1162/isec_a_00407.SaganS. D. & WeinerA. S.(2021).The rule of law and the role of strategy in U.S. Nuclear doctrine.,45(4), pp.126-166. doi:10.1162/isec_a_00407.Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Sisson, T. (2023). Low-yield nuclear parity in great power competition. Doctoral dissertation, National American University. Available at https://www.proquest.com/docview/2821216761?pq-origsite=gscholar&fromopen-view=true&sourcetype=Dissertations%20&%20ThesesSissonT.(2023)..Doctoral dissertation, National American University.Available at https://www.proquest.com/docview/2821216761?pq-origsite=gscholar&fromopen-view=true&sourcetype=Dissertations%20&%20ThesesSearch in Google Scholar
Smith, Z. L. (2023). The buzz about electromagnetic pulse weapons. Orbis, 67(3), pp. 347-369. doi: 10.1016/j.orbis.2023.06.002.SmithZ. L.(2023).The buzz about electromagnetic pulse weapons.,67(3), pp.347-369. doi:10.1016/j.orbis.2023.06.002.Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Song, S. H., & Weiss, G. (2023). Is nuclear deterrence superior to conventional deterrence? Journal of Student Research, 11(3). doi: 10.47611/jsr.v11i3.1801.SongS. H. & WeissG.(2023).Is nuclear deterrence superior to conventional deterrence?,11(3). doi:10.47611/jsr.v11i3.1801.Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
The White House. (2022). National Security Strategy. United States Government, Washington. Available at https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/Biden-Harris-Administrations-National-Security-Strategy-10.2022.pdfThe White House. (2022)..United States Government,Washington. Available at https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/Biden-Harris-Administrations-National-Security-Strategy-10.2022.pdfSearch in Google Scholar
Tucker, J. E. Jr. (2017). The targeting of non-state-affiliated civilians in cyberspace: Lagging LOAC principles cause uncertainty on both sides. North Carolina Journal of International Law, 42(4), pp. 1013-1060.TuckerJ. E.Jr.(2017).The targeting of non-state-affiliated civilians in cyberspace: Lagging LOAC principles cause uncertainty on both sides.,42(4), pp.1013-1060.Search in Google Scholar
U.S. Department of Defense. (2022a). 2022 National Defense Strategy. US Department of Defense, Washington, DC.U.S. Department of Defense. (2022a)..US Department of Defense,Washington, DC.Search in Google Scholar
U.S. Department of Defense. (2022b). 2022 Nuclear Posture Review. U.S. Department of Defense, Washington, DC.U.S. Department of Defense. (2022b)..U.S. Department of Defense,Washington, DC.Search in Google Scholar
United States Strategic Command. (2006). Deterrence Operations Joint Operating Concept. Offutt Air Force Base, NE. Available at www.dtic.mil/futurejointwarfareUnited States Strategic Command. (2006)..Offutt Air Force Base,NE.Available at www.dtic.mil/futurejointwarfareSearch in Google Scholar
Wiitala, J. D. (2016). Challenging Minimum Deterrence: Articulating the contemporary relevance of nuclear weapons. Maxwell AFB United States: Air Force Research Institute.WiitalaJ. D.(2016)..Maxwell AFB United States: Air Force Research Institute.Search in Google Scholar
Wirtz, J. J. (2018). How does nuclear deterrence differ from conventional deterrence? Strategic Studies Quarterly, 12(4), pp. 58-75. Available at https://www.jstor.org/stable/26533615WirtzJ. J.(2018).How does nuclear deterrence differ from conventional deterrence?,12(4), pp.58-75.Available at https://www.jstor.org/stable/26533615Search in Google Scholar
Worley, R. D. (2012). Orchestrating the Instruments of Power. Lulu.com, Morrisville, North Carolina.WorleyR. D.(2012)..Lulu.com,Morrisville, North Carolina.Search in Google Scholar
Yeaw, C. (2023). The escalatory attraction of limited nuclear employment. Journal of Indo-Pacific Affairs, 6(1). Available at https://nsri.nebraska.edu/-/media/projects/nsri/docs/academic-publications/2023/the-escalatory-attraction-of-limited-nuclear-employment.pdf.YeawC.(2023).The escalatory attraction of limited nuclear employment.,6(1).Available at https://nsri.nebraska.edu/-/media/projects/nsri/docs/academic-publications/2023/the-escalatory-attraction-of-limited-nuclear-employment.pdf.Search in Google Scholar
Zagare, F. C., & Kilgour, M. D. (2000). Perfect Deterrence. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.ZagareF. C. & KilgourM. D.(2000)..Cambridge University Press,Cambridge.Search in Google Scholar
Zarare, F. C. (2004). Reconciling rationality with deterrence. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 16(2), pp. 107-141. doi: 10.1177/0951629804041117.ZarareF. C.(2004).Reconciling rationality with deterrence.,16(2), pp.107-141. doi:10.1177/0951629804041117.Open DOISearch in Google Scholar