• Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie Global logoCarnegie lettermark logo
DemocracyIran
  • Donate
{
  "authors": [],
  "type": "pressRelease",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
  ],
  "collections": [
    "U.S. Nuclear Policy"
  ],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "ctw",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
  "programAffiliation": "NPP",
  "programs": [
    "Nuclear Policy"
  ],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [
    "North America",
    "United States",
    "Caucasus",
    "Russia"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Nuclear Policy"
  ]
}
REQUIRED IMAGE

REQUIRED IMAGE

Press Release

A practical path to deep nuclear reductions

President Obama has identified the goal of creating the conditions that would allow for deep reductions in nuclear arsenals. In a report released at the 2011 Carnegie International Nuclear Policy Conference, James M. Acton lays out a detailed policy agenda to reduce U.S. and Russian stockpiles.

Link Copied
Published on Mar 28, 2011
Program mobile hero image

Program

Nuclear Policy

The Nuclear Policy Program aims to reduce the risk of nuclear war. Our experts diagnose acute risks stemming from technical and geopolitical developments, generate pragmatic solutions, and use our global network to advance risk-reduction policies. Our work covers deterrence, disarmament, arms control, nonproliferation, and nuclear energy.

Learn More

WASHINGTON—President Obama has identified the goal of creating the conditions that would allow for deep reductions in nuclear arsenals. In a report released today at the 2011 Carnegie International Nuclear Policy Conference, James M. Acton lays out a detailed policy agenda to reduce U.S. and Russian stockpiles by a factor of ten—to 500 nuclear warheads each—and those of other nuclear-armed states to no more than half that number. To do so, Washington must follow a practical and multi-pronged approach.

 Policy recommendations:

  • Take a comprehensive approach on arms control. U.S. arms control policy must be geared towards three key goals: verifiable elimination of warheads, deterrence of rearmament, and reduction of the incentives to strike first in a crisis.
  • Engage with U.S. allies to review security threats and responses. Washington must convince its allies in Europe and East Asia to support deep reductions by identifying security threats and appropriate non-nuclear responses, and by demonstrating that reducing the size of its arsenal does not represent a reduced commitment to their continued security.
  • Address conventional imbalances. In the short term, the United States should pursue conventional arms control efforts in Europe to reduce the chance that Russia will link them into the next round of nuclear negotiations. In the long term, deep reductions will only be possible if Washington and Beijing can accept rough equality of capability in the West Pacific.
  • Push for a transparent and multilateral process. Enhanced transparency from France, the United Kingdom, and especially China will advance a multilateral arms control process. But, before that is possible, Washington and Beijing must engage in a program of mutual strategic reassurance.

"While cutting the number of nuclear weapons so significantly is a formidable challenge, the United States, Russia, and other nations can do much in the short term to advance this goal," Acton writes. "Washington should lead this process to ensure that it at least gets started."

###

NOTES

Click here to read the full report.

James M. Acton is an associate in the Nuclear Policy Program at the Carnegie Endowment. A physicist by training, Acton specializes in nonproliferation, deterrence, and disarmament.

The Carnegie Nuclear Policy Program is an internationally acclaimed source of expertise and policy thinking on nuclear industry, nonproliferation, security, and disarmament. Its multinational staff stays at the forefront of nuclear policy issues in the United States, Russia, China, Northeast Asia, South Asia, and the Middle East.

Press Contact: Karly Schledwitz, +1 202 939 2233, pressoffice@ceip.org

Nuclear PolicyNorth AmericaUnited StatesCaucasusRussia

Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    What Does Central Europe’s Post-Orban Russia Policy Look Like?

    Though Orban is gone, Putin can still count on some like-minded individuals in Central and Eastern Europe. However, they will seek to avoid open confrontation with EU institutions over Ukraine and their ties with Moscow.


      Dimitar Bechev

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    Are Russia-Japan Relations Really Warming Up?

    The truth is that Japan’s government is seeking a degree of reengagement but at a vastly reduced level than under Abe. Most significantly, Japan has shown no willingness to ease sanctions.

      James D.J. Brown

  • Commentary
    Strategic Europe
    Trump Turns NATO into a Tool of Coercion

    The full list of humiliations Europe has endured since Donald Trump returned to the White House makes for grim reading. But Washington’s adversarial approach to its allies undermines its own power base.

      • Rym Momtaz

      Rym Momtaz

  • Commentary
    Diwan
    Pushing Beirut into an Armed Conflict With Hezbollah Is Insane

    The party’s domestic and regional roles have changed, so Lebanon should devise a disarmament strategy that encompasses this.

      Michael Young

  • Article
    Continental Asia and the Rise of Portfolio Politics

    “Central Asia” as an analytical category is itself part of the problem. The term is a Soviet administrative inheritance, drawn along lines that served the convenience of Moscow. The Central Asian states the Soviets named no longer see themselves through this category alone and are not aligning across political blocs but are instead building external partnerships sector by sector, assigning different partners to different functions.

      Jennifer B. Murtazashvili

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Carnegie global logo, stacked
1779 Massachusetts Avenue NWWashington, DC, 20036-2103Phone: 202 483 7600
  • Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
  • Donate
  • Programs
  • Events
  • Blogs
  • Podcasts
  • Contact
  • Annual Reports
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
  • Government Resources
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.