ABSTRACT
Professor Quester starts with the hypothesis that some weapons systems are more conducive to international stability than others, and surveys the history of warfare in the West to see whether any general conclusions can be drawn from this which could provide a basis for arms control in the contemporary world. He stresses quite properly the incentive to pre-emption which the military systems of the pre-1914 era gave to their governments, and the way in which this undermined traditional ‘balance of power’ policies. Professor Quester shyly confesses that he shares the prevailing prejudice in favour of defence against offence. But he points out not only that there are many occasions when the enhancement of a defensive capability can be destabilizing, but that, taken to extremes, defences can make it impossible to create any effective political system at all.
