text: different for different States. The notion of "mininum deterrence" is therefore difficult to define since no one c arl define with certainty what constitutes intolerable reprisal. In any case, lhe order of dama€e likely in a nucl'ear nnrf linf i< herrnnrl al l hicf ^Ti^'-l avnAFian.a ?91-. Xloreover, it is probabfe that States make different assessments of the refationship betrteen stakes and risk. hile the risk depends on the cost of attack, on the one hand, and the reprisals or punishment which it wifl invite on the other', the assessment by a poLential attacking State vill al-so depend on the im^nrl enn- i! rt+a.l--q +- 'rL^r 'i+ *.'-r-+ -^i- n. Lradilional- view has been that rL uft!! Sdrrr,the more desira.ble the stakes, the more inclined the challenging State will be to take risks. In a conflict situation between two nuclear-weapon States ' hovever, Lhe risks are so high l.hal 'nany fjnd -iL dilficult to see whst gains could possibly r.akn .rn rr.r- r.l.F lc\/el of deslrri.tior hv a. reorisal. This raises the fundamenlal issue as to whether there are any stakes which rnay justify risking a nuclear war' 292. ahe realization of the enormous risk 1eveIs inherent in deterrence vith F,^raan nn tl-c nne hAnd. A-,1 f.he evolrrtion and d.ivers ifi cat i on of nucl-ear weapons on the other hand, were the essential factors leading to the introduction of the theory of ffexibte rcslonsc, Accordingly, depending on the seriousness of the situation" a State nay respcnd to an attack l\rith vhat it regard-s as appropriate means, which may be conventional weapons, tacticaf nucleal weapons, or varjous modes of enploynent of stTategic nuclea.r lreapons. Thus an effort wauld be 'rF;tF in nl'pqcrvd qs v:do :.c ..cqilla F r.anda .. meang in order to avoid having Lo choose betveen ';a11 or nothing"' It is in this context that d.eterrence by denial
analysis: The text appears to be discussing the concept of deterrence in the context of international relations and nuclear warfare. It touches on the idea of assessing risks and stakes, and the potential consequences of a nuclear war. The text seems to be focused on the strategic and political aspects of deterrence, rather than any economic, social, or environmental issues.