IN DEFENSE OF ARMS-CONTROL

Arms control has been strongly attacked from two quarters since the en d of the Cold War. Some argue that it is flawed in essence, elaboratin g a conservative critique developed over 25 years. Others argue that a rms control was a Cold War institution, and therefore its time has pas sed. Both are wrong, fundamentally because arms control is defined too narrowly. A typology of arms control is proposed with five distinct f orms: the traditional interpretation, focusing on strategic stability; arms control at the end of major conflicts; arms control to develop t he laws of war; controls on proliferation; and arms control by interna tional organization. Arms control has a long history, and when seen in this broader perspective, it is clear that it has a future.