Abstract
It is often remarked that post-Cold War, and particularly after 9/11, a ‘new security environment’ has emerged. This is characterised by transnational threats to the West, numerous failing nation states, the proliferation of armaments along with the know-how to manufacture them, and continuing pressures for societal openness. All of these issues intersect in relation to the threats of ‘weapons of mass destruction’ (WMD). Indeed, the danger posed by such weapons has been identified as ‘the key issue facing the world community’.1 The topics of global terrorism and the proliferation of WMD now dominate many national security forums. With these developments a number of questions are being posed with a renewed vigour in policy, academic, and popular discussions: How easy is it to produce and proliferate WMD capabilities? What would count as compelling evidence of their acquisition? What initiatives — such as the imposition of further secrecy restrictions — are likely to limit the spread of WMD? What negative consequences might follow from any such responsive measures?
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
T. Blair, ‘Britain in the World’ Speech to UK Foreign Office Conference 7 January (2003).
D. MacKenzie, Inventing Accuracy (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1990).
See, for example, M. Armacost, The Politics of Weapons Innovation (New York: Columbia University Press, 1969).
H. Collins and T. Pinch, ‘A Clean Kill?’, in The Golem at Large (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998): 7–29.
M. Polanyi, Personal Knowledge (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1958).
H. Collins, ‘The TEA Set’ Science Studies 4 (1974): 165–186.
D. MacKenzie and G. Spinardi, ‘Tacit Knowledge and the Uninvention of Nuclear Weapons’, in Knowing Machines (London: MIT Press, 1996); 44–99.
K. Vogel, ‘Bioweapons Proliferation’ Social Studies of Science 36 (2006): 659–690.
W. Bijker, Of Bicycles, Bakelites, and Bulb (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1997)
W. Bijker and J. Law (eds) Shaping Technology/Building Society (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1995).
B. Buzan and E. Herring, The Arms Dynamic in World Politics (London: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 1998): 9.
D. MacKenzie and J. Wajcman (eds) The Social Shaping of Technology (Maidenhead: Open University Press, 1999).
J. Abbate, ‘Cold War and White Heat’, in D. MacKenzie and J. Wajcman (eds) The Social Shaping of Technology (Maidenhead: Open University Press, 1999): 351–371.
D. MacKenzie, ‘Theories of Technology and the Abolition of Nuclear Weapons’, in D. MacKenzie and J. Wajcman (eds) The Social Shaping of Technology (Maidenhead: Open University Press, 1999): 173–98.
G. Spinardi, ‘Aldermaston and British Nuclear Weapons Development’ Social Studies of Science 27 (1997): 547–582.
B. Balmer, Britain and Biological Warfare (Basingstoke: Palgrave, 2001).
O. Bosch, ‘Dark Period Ending’ The World Today May (2003): 12–13.
J. Borger, ‘Revelation Casts Doubt on Iraq Find’ The Guardian (7 October 2003).
D. Vaughan, The Challenger Launch Decision (Chicago,IL: University of Chicago Press, 1996) 62.
B. Rappert, Non-Lethal Weapons as Legitimizing Forces? (London: Frank Cass, 2003).
B. Rappert, Controlling the Weapons of War: Politics, Persuasion, and the Prohibition of Inhumanity (London: Routledge, 2006).
B. Rappert, ‘National Security, Terrorism & the Control of Life Science Research’, in A. D. James (ed.) Science and Technology Policies for the Anti-Terrorism Era (Oxford: IOS Press, 2006): 172–184.
K. Knorr-Cetina, ‘Laboratory Studies’, in S. Jasanoff, G. E. Markle, J. C. Petersen and T. Pinch (eds) Handbook of Science and Technology Studies (London: Sage, 1995): 140–166.
H. Gusterson, Nuclear Rite (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1998);
J. Reppy (ed.) Secrecy and Knowledge Production (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Peace Studies, 1999);
S. Hilgartner, Science on Stage (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2000).
P. Westwick, ‘Secret Science’ Minerva 38 (2000): 363–391.
H. Gusterson, ‘The Death of the Authors of Death’, in M. Biagioli and P. Galison (eds) Scientific Authorship (New York: Routledge, 2003): 281–307.
H. Gusterson, Nuclear Rites (Berkeley,CA: University of California Press, 1998): 98.
R. Kohler, Lords of the Fly (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 1994): 11.
R. Merton, ‘The Normative Structure of Science’, in N. Storer (ed.) The Sociology of Science (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 1973): 267–278.
D. Edge and M. Mulkay, Astronomy Transformed (New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1976).
M. Mulkay, ‘Norms and Ideology in Science’ Social Science Information 15 (1975): 637–656.
C. Thorpe, ‘Against Time’ Journal of Historical Sociology 17 (2004): 31–55.
H. Gusterson, Nuclear Rites, op cit.; B. Balmer. Gusterson, Nuclear Rites, op cit.; B. Balmer, ‘Killing “Without the Distressing Preliminaries”’ Minerva 40 (2002): 57–75.
C. Fraser and M. Dando, ‘Genomics and Future Biological Weapons’ Nature Genetics 22 October (2001).
G. Knezo, ‘Sensitive but Unclassified’ and Other Federal Security Controls on Scientific and Technical Information (Washington, DC.: Congressional Research Service, 2003).
A. Salyers, ‘Science, Censorship, and Public Health’ Science 26 April (2001): 617.
See, for example, D. Blumenthal, ‘Ethics Issues in Academic-Industry Relationships in the Life Sciences’ Academic Medicine 71 (12) (1996): 1291–1296.
S. Hilgartner, ‘Data Access Policy in Genome Research’, in Thackray, A. (ed.) Private Science (Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania, 1998): 202–18.
S. Traweek, Beamtimes and Lifetimes (Boston, MA: Harvard University Press, 1998)
and H. Collins, Gravity’s Shadow (Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press, 2004).
D. Chubin and E. Hackett, Peerless Science (Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 1990).
P. Medawar, ‘Is the Scientific Paper a Fraud?’, in P. Medawar The Threat and the Glory (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991): 228–233.
H. Collins, ‘The Meaning of Data’ American Journal of Sociology 104 (1998): 293–338.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2007 Brian Rappert and Brian Balmer
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Rappert, B., Balmer, B. (2007). Rethinking ‘Secrecy’ and ‘Disclosure’: What Science and Technology Studies Can Offer Attempts to Govern WMD Threats. In: Rappert, B. (eds) Technology and Security. New Security Challenges Series. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230591882_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230591882_3
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-28584-6
Online ISBN: 978-0-230-59188-2
eBook Packages: Palgrave Political & Intern. Studies CollectionPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)