The Trump administration should use its leverage to address Japan’s growing piles of unused plutonium.
When countries employ the threat of proliferation as a bargaining chip, there is a sweet spot between having too little and too much nuclear latency to extract concessions from Washington.
The dangers of nuclear proliferation and the policy responses to it should be assessed differently if nuclear weapons do not significantly augment a possessor’s coercive power.
Where North Korea is concerned, neither China nor the United States will achieve security acting separately.
The Trump administration should take time to determine whether ICBMs fit into America’s nuclear deterrent strategy, and to consider options such as reducing or even eliminating them.
The Trump administration’s willingness to speak out on the North Korea nuclear issue and pressure Beijing on the same topic privately represents a break from the approach of past administrations.
As North Korea develops an array of missiles that could deliver a nuclear weapon to the continental United States, that further complicates the tension over defending U.S. allies in the region.
The White House must overcome internal divisions to come up with a comprehensive North Korea policy that incorporates both China and America’s regional allies.
What are the practical implications of a nuclear ban treaty?
What is the future of the INF Treaty, why is Russia violating it, and how should the U.S. respond?