The Power of Reprisal

A History of Bombing by Sven Lindqvist, traces the political, economic, and social political rises and consequences of the development of bombing. What I found extremely interesting through Lindqvist's works is how the fear of nuclear warfare has allowed for the increase in nuclear weaponry in order to defend against possible attacks. In section 93, Lindqvist quotes British mathematician, Lanchester, as stating, "The threat of reprisal will always...have a much stronger deterrent effect than some "pseudo-legal"regulation in international law"(39). This is interesting in the idea that the underlying fear of being attacked will fuel policies on nuclear development more than any written law possibly could. This understanding of the power of reprisal can be, and often is, manipulated by the nations with such power in order to use such power for their own personal gain. Lindqvist continued, "But when you have the power of reprisal- won't you be tempted to use it, not only to deter attacks...but also to conquer and enemy who cannot yet, or no longer can, carry out reprisals?"(39). This question seems to get at the heart of the issue. Is this not what happened when US dropped the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki? This seems to be a perfect example of a nation with the power of reprisal using their power over a nation who lacks that same power. It then becomes apparent the way the power dynamics inhabit the way that nuclear weaponry is both dealt with and developed. The power dynamics of Western/European patriarchy have been able to encompass nuclear warfare and re-assert those power dynamics through large scale bombing. Lindqvist's work attempts at pointing towards the hegemonic power of Western powerhouses and their monopolies and influence on nuclear warfare.