Revision Library

revisionlibrary.co.uk

GCSE · Theme D: Peace and Conflict - Nuclear deterrence and disarmament

RS.TD9 Nuclear Deterrence and the Disarmament Debate

AQA 8062 · Calculators not allowed · about 50 minutes

Total Marks

Name: _______________________________ Date: ____ / ____ / ______

Answer ALL questions. Show all your working.

Which one of the following best describes the purpose of nuclear deterrence in international relations, as discussed in Theme D: Peace and Conflict?

A: To immediately use nuclear weapons when a minor border incident occurs
B: To possess nuclear weapons so that other states are discouraged from attacking
C: To provide nuclear weapons to smaller states for their defense
D: To remove all nuclear weapons by threat of force

(Total for Question 1 is 1 mark)

Give two characteristics of the idea of Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) as it applies to nuclear strategy in the Cold War and after.

(Total for Question 2 is 2 marks)

Explain two reasons why some religious believers might support nuclear deterrence as a way to preserve peace, referring to religious ethical concerns about protecting life.

(Total for Question 3 is 4 marks)

Explain two contrasting religious objections and religious arguments in favour of nuclear deterrence. Refer to a sacred writing or another source of religious belief or teaching in your answer, and give the source.

(Total for Question 4 is 5 marks)

State briefly what is meant by the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and its two main aims in global security.

(Total for Question 5 is 1 mark)

Give two differences between unilateral disarmament and multilateral disarmament as debated in Theme D, stating one clear distinguishing feature for each.

(Total for Question 6 is 2 marks)

Explain two reasons why some religious believers argue against unilateral disarmament, referring to concerns about security and justice.

(Total for Question 7 is 4 marks)

Give three potential consequences of nuclear proliferation for international security and for civilian populations, as discussed in Theme D.

(Total for Question 8 is 3 marks)

Explain two ways Just War proportionality concerns apply to the possession or threat of use of nuclear weapons, with reference to the likely effects on civilians.

(Total for Question 9 is 4 marks)

State two international organisations or treaties, other than the NPT, that work on nuclear disarmament or arms control and briefly identify their role.

(Total for Question 10 is 2 marks)

Explain two Christian responses in favour of disarmament, each supported by a named scriptural or doctrinal source of authority, and give the source.

(Total for Question 11 is 5 marks)

Evaluate the view that nuclear weapons can never be justified. In your answer you should give reasoned arguments to support this statement, give reasoned arguments to support a different point of view, refer to religious arguments, and reach a justified conclusion. This question carries up to 3 marks for Spelling, Punctuation and Grammar (SPaG).

(Total for Question 12 is 15 marks)

Mark scheme · RS.TD9 Nuclear Deterrence and the Disarmament Debate

Question 1

B1 selecting option B, possession of nuclear weapons to discourage attack by others, cao
Answer: B

Question 2

B1 it assumes both sides can inflict unacceptable damage on the other in retaliation, oe
B1 it relies on the certainty of devastating second strike capability to deter a first strike, oe
Answer: Both sides can inflict unacceptable damage in retaliation; it relies on a credible second strike to deter a first strike.

Question 3

B1 point 1: deterrence is argued to prevent large scale war and so protect many innocent lives, oe
B1 development: this links to the religious priority of preserving life and the lesser-evil reasoning that keeping weapons may avoid a greater catastrophe, oe
B1 point 2: deterrence can be seen as maintaining a stable balance of power that prevents aggression, oe
B1 development: some believers adopt a pragmatic ethic where an evil means is tolerated to prevent a worse evil, citing duty to protect the innocent, oe
Answer: E.g. deterrence prevents large scale war and protects innocent lives; deterrence maintains balance of power and stability, a pragmatic toleration of a bad means to avoid a worse outcome.

Question 4

B1 objection 1: sanctity of life argument, that nuclear weapons risk mass civilian death and are therefore intrinsically wrong, oe
B1 development: linked to religious teachings valuing human life such as Matthew 5:9 on peacemakers or Surah 5:32 on the value of a life, oe
B1 argument 2: pragmatic protection argument, that deterrence prevents greater loss of life and so can be morally permissible, oe
B1 development: some Christians appeal to the duty to protect the innocent and some Muslim scholars may use maslahah, public interest, to justify deterrence in extreme cases, oe
B1 the scriptural or source reference is given accurately and linked to the point made, oe
Answer: Contrast example: sanctity of life objection citing Matthew 5:9 or Surah 5:32 against mass killing; pragmatic protection argument that deterrence prevents worse loss of life, linked to protecting the innocent or the Islamic principle of maslahah.

Question 5

B1 an international agreement to prevent spread of nuclear weapons and promote disarmament and peaceful use of nuclear energy, oe
Answer: An international agreement to prevent spread of nuclear weapons, promote disarmament and encourage peaceful nuclear cooperation.

Question 6

B1 unilateral disarmament: one state gives up weapons on its own, regardless of what others do, oe
B1 multilateral disarmament: multiple states agree together to reduce or eliminate weapons, often via treaty, oe
Answer: Unilateral: one state gives up weapons alone; multilateral: several states agree together, often by treaty, to reduce or eliminate weapons.

Question 7

B1 point 1: unilateral disarmament may leave a state vulnerable if other states keep weapons, risking injustice to its citizens, oe
B1 development: religious duty to protect the innocent could be cited to justify keeping weapons until others disarm, oe
B1 point 2: unilateral action might weaken deterrent stability and provoke hostile behaviour, increasing the chance of conflict, oe
B1 development: some believers argue justice includes maintaining order and preventing aggression, so unilateral disarmament could be irresponsible, oe
Answer: E.g. vulnerability if others remain armed risking citizens; weakening deterrence and possibly provoking hostility, contrary to duty to protect and maintain justice.

Question 8

B1 increased risk of nuclear war or regional conflict, oe
B1 risk of nuclear weapons or materials falling into hands of non-state actors/terrorists, oe
B1 greater potential for humanitarian catastrophe and long term environmental damage to civilian populations, oe
Answer: Any three: increased risk of war; risk of weapons/materials reaching terrorists; potential humanitarian catastrophe and long term environmental harm.

Question 9

B1 point 1: proportionality requires that harm caused by force is not excessive compared with the good aimed for, and nuclear weapons cause massive, indiscriminate harm, oe
B1 development: therefore threat or use of nuclear weapons is hard to justify proportionally because civilian casualties and environmental damage would vastly outweigh most aims, oe
B1 point 2: even deterrent threats may fail proportionality because they accept the possibility of unacceptable civilian suffering, oe
B1 development: Just War theorists and religious critics argue that the scale of destruction makes nuclear deterrence morally problematic under proportionality, oe
Answer: E.g. proportionality is breached because nuclear weapons cause massive civilian and environmental harm that outweighs aims; even threat of use accepts potential unacceptable suffering so may be unjustifiable.

Question 10

B1 example 1: Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty Organisation (CTBTO), monitors nuclear test bans through seismology and verification, oe
B1 example 2: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), promotes peaceful nuclear energy and safeguards to prevent diversion to weapons, oe
Answer: CTBTO which monitors compliance with a test ban via verification systems; IAEA which promotes peaceful nuclear use and safeguards against diversion to weapons.

Question 11

B1 response 1: pacifist Christian view that weapons should be renounced because followers of Jesus must not kill, oe
B1 development: supported by scripture such as Matthew 5:9 'Blessed are the peacemakers' or Matthew 5:21-22 on refraining from killing, oe
B1 response 2: moral argument that disarmament upholds sanctity of life and prevents mass civilian suffering, oe
B1 development: linked to Genesis 1:27 about the value of humans made in God's image and Catholic teaching emphasising protection of life, oe
B1 the scriptural or doctrinal sources are named accurately and linked to the responses, oe
Answer: E.g. pacifist Christian view using Matthew 5:9 or Matthew 5:21-22 to support renouncing weapons; sanctity of life argument linked to Genesis 1:27 and Catholic teaching about protecting life.

Question 12

Level 4 (10-12): A well-developed, balanced evaluation that analyses strong reasons for and against the view, includes relevant religious arguments and sources, and reaches a clear, justified conclusion.
Level 3 (7-9): A clear evaluation with several relevant points on both sides, some use of religious arguments or sources, and a supported conclusion.
Level 2 (4-6): Some evaluation with points for and against, but limited development or limited reference to religious arguments; a simple conclusion is given.
Level 1 (1-3): A few simple, relevant points, likely one-sided or descriptive, with little or no conclusion.
Level 0 (0): No relevant content.
Indicative content:
- Arguments supporting the statement: Sanctity of life and the scale of civilian casualties mean nuclear weapons are intrinsically immoral; religious teachings that value human life such as Surah 5:32 and Matthew 5:9 can be used to argue for absolute rejection.
- The indiscriminate nature and long term environmental and humanitarian damage make proportionality impossible, so Just War principles rule out nuclear weapons.
- Arguments against the statement: Deterrence may have prevented major wars since 1945, saving many lives; some religious thinkers argue a pragmatic duty to protect innocent citizens could allow possession as a last resort.
- Multilateral disarmament may be unrealistic without security guarantees; some argue nuclear weapons as a temporary measure until effective global treaties and verification systems are in place, citing maslahah or stewardship responsibilities.
- Religious responses are diverse: pacifist and sanctity of life positions reject nuclear weapons unconditionally; other religious voices accept limited deterrence to prevent greater evils, so the moral judgement depends on weighing outcomes and intentions.
- Conclusion: a justified conclusion should weigh the strength of the sanctity of life and proportionality arguments against pragmatic protection arguments and consider whether credible, enforceable alternatives to deterrence exist.

Nuclear Deterrence and the Disarmament Debate - Worksheets, Questions and Revision