Is nucleaire afschrikking te verdedigen?

Is nuclear deterrence defensible? Sometimes it has good consequences to threaten to do something while it would be disastrous to carry out the threat. Nuclear deterrence is a case in point. It has arguably prevented war between the superpowers, but dropping a bomb would cause unacceptable damage to civilians and nature. Can’t you argue that, if the threat is credible enough, it is still better on the whole to make the threat and carry it out, if necessary, than not to make it? That is the question I briefly discuss in this column.