Realpolitik and its terminology have dominated the discourse on the conduct and behaviour of states in ‘anarchical’ international environment. Concepts like balance of power (BoP) and security dilemma continue to draw the attention of students of international politics. It has been argued, or presumed, that in the security-driven environment of the international system, foreign policies of individual states are externally driven.

While contending the prevailing realists’ explanation of war happening because of power struggle, John Vasquez argues in his book, The War Puzzle Revisited, that a majority of wars are fought over territory, either to defend or occupy it. According to Vasquez, territorial disputes between two countries are ‘much more war-prone’ than others.

ince the time of their invention and the first-and-only use on 6 and 9 August 1945 on two Japanese cities, Hiroshima and Nagasaki respectively, nuclear weapons have been seen by the states that possess them, or the ones that seek them, as the ultimate guarantors of their security.1 It is believed that these weapons are key to achieving victory in a war that otherwise may go on for a long time or may end in defeat if fought in conventional ways by a weaker country; in other words, nuclear weapons are believed to act as instruments of deterrence.