The affirmative’s attempt to control military weaponry is a manifestation of attempts to maintain a Western order.

How has postcolonial scholarship engaged with the problem of weapons? What are the possibilities and limitations of a postcolonial engagement with acute problems of weapons control? It is impossible for a subaltern scholar to address these broader ques-tions without taking note of the scant existing postcolonial literature on arms control and disarmament (Abraham, 1998; Biswas, 2014; Beier, 2002; Hecht, 2012; Mathur, 2014). This intellectual amnesia is noted by scholars especially with regard to the contri-butions of the Global South in addressing the problems of weapons control. This sense of erasure is reinforced by scholars perturbed by the decline in understanding of the tragedy of Hiroshima and Nagasaki(Taylor & Jacobs, 2015). On the contrary, there exists a growing circulation of civilizational discourses positing a dangerous dynamic of difference between ‘the “West and the Rest” as a civilizational mantra in arms control and disarma-ment’(Mathur, 2014, pp. 332–335). It is in this context that this paper makes an effort to problematize and juxtapose a spiraling ‘dynamic of denial’ and a persistent ‘dynamic of difference’ in the field of International Relations and weapons control. It tries to demon- strate the power of these discourses with reference to the memory and representation of Hiroshima. This paper introduces the concept of ‘techno-racism’ to bring attention to the complex interplay of racial and technological considerations in the everyday practices of arms control and disarmament. In developing the concept of ‘techno racism’ this paper draws upon the writings of scholars such as Michael Adas (1989), Gabrielle Hecht (2012), Roh, Huang, and Niu (2015). The concept of techno-racism has to be his- torically grounded to encourage careful deliberation on practices of racial reductionism and technological determinism with regard to weapons. The deployment of techno- racial discourses for political purposes can be traced from the late nineteenth century to the present with regard to weapons. The differences in weapons technology between different cultures is often reinforced with practices of racial reductionism constituting a contested hierarchy in the international order. The power of these techno- racial discourses emphasizing and de-emphasizing racial reductionism and technologi- cal determinism subject to political considerations respectively has an effect on the outcome of intersecting dynamics of difference and dynamic of denial in practices of arms control and disarmament. A growing intensity of racial reductionism and techno- logical determinism in discourses on difference and denial can generate destructive vio- lence. It is therefore pertinent to pay attention to the growing circulation of these powerful discourses in contemporary practices of security. Thus empowered with this succinct understanding of the concept of techno-racism, this paper begins by first exploring the ‘dynamic of difference’ with help of other scholars in International Relations with particular emphasis on consideration of technology as a significant ‘criteria for comparison’ between the Orient and the Occident (Adas, 1989). This is followed by an exploration of the circulating ‘dynamic of denial’ of the Global South’s contribution towards weapons regulation and prohibition and the responsibility of the West to meet its obligations under the existing Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT). These intersecting dynamics of difference and dynamic of denial then help set the stage for remembering Hiroshima as the ‘techno-racial line’ between the West and the Rest. This helps produce critical reflections on the possibilities and limits of nuclear exceptionalism and nuclear allergy in addressing the problem of weapons.