Well, it was kind of an unavoidable discussion topic. The entire basis for the Partial Test Ban Treaty was a fear of extreme warfare (nuclear war) that was being nurtured in a climate of preparation for warfare (nuclear testing) that was born out of warfare (World War II). The world of the 1950s and 1960s found itself in a unique position. It was still recovering from the worst conflict in history, and it was positioned to possibly witness another conflict of unprecedented dimensions.
Just because the Cold War was "cold" doesn't mean it wasn't going to switch to scorching hot at the flick of a switch...literally. The PTBT is a coming to terms with the diplomatic conflict that threatened unimaginable warfare, and it attempted to divert the potential destruction into a progressive de-escalation of tensions between the West and the Soviet world.
Questions About Warfare
- Agree or disagree: by the 1960s, the world had become so used to warfare of some kind that it was accepted as the norm of 20th-century life. Explain your answer.
- Does the PTBT suggest that even the most powerful nations in the world realized warfare has its limitations?
- From a military defense standpoint, what are the pros and cons of a bomb as large as Castle Bravo or Tsar Bomba?
- What does the development of nuclear weapons during the Cold War say about the Soviet view of American capitalism? What does it say about the American view of Soviet communism?
Chew on This
The PTBT is an elaborate truce that keeps nuclear power in check while still recognizing the agreeing parties possess such power.
By the 1960s, warfare was a standard part of everyday life for most of the world. Although the PTBT attempts to ease this situation, it actually just permits moderate-level "cold" warfare to continue on like business as usual.