Asia’s two largest nuclear powers have never threatened each other with nuclear weapons. How much will the recent deadly border clashes between China and India change the security landscape?
Toby Dalton, Tong Zhao, Rukmani Gupta
{
"authors": [],
"type": "pressRelease",
"centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
],
"collections": [],
"englishNewsletterAll": "ctw",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"programAffiliation": "NPP",
"programs": [
"Nuclear Policy"
],
"projects": [],
"regions": [],
"topics": [
"Nuclear Policy"
]
}REQUIRED IMAGE
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: June 21, 2007
- NEWS RELEASE -
WASHINGTON, June 21--The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace released a report card today on the nuclear nonproliferation policies of key world powers—and the overall score is a D+.
“Since 2005, governments have devoted too little attention, leadership, and resources to taking the steps necessary to prevent the spread and use of nuclear weapons,” said George Perkovich, vice president for studies—Global Security and Development, at the Carnegie Endowment, announcing the release of Toward Universal Compliance: A 2007 Report Card. “The solutions to most proliferation problems are not hard to identify, what’s lacking is the determination by key leaders to learn and apply them.”
The study evaluated the nonproliferation progress of the United States, Russia, France, the United Kingdom, China, India, Pakistan, and Israel, as well as key non-nuclear states, from 2005 through mid-2007. The authors note that the actions of the United States strongly affected the poor results as it is the most powerful actor in the international system.
“By rejecting the give and take of diplomacy and the legitimacy of other people’s need for security—including the demand for greater equity in the international system—the United States lost power to achieve what it wants other than through brute force, whose limits became clear in Iraq,” concludes the report.
Yet the United States alone cannot implement the policies needed to achieve a better result—it needs the active cooperation of the international community. Responsibility for the dismal performance assessed in the report is therefore widely shared.
A 2007 Report Card is a special follow-up to Universal Compliance: A Strategy for Nuclear Security, a blueprint for rethinking the international nuclear nonproliferation regime by dealing with states and terrorists, nuclear weapons, and missile materials through a twenty step, priority action agenda.
The D+ grade is an average of grades assigned for each of six criteria laid out in the 2005 edition of Universal Compliance upon which the governments were evaluated. They are:
The Report Card will be distributed publicly at the 2007 Carnegie International Nonproliferation Conference on June 25 and 26. The conference is the premier event in the nonproliferation field, attracting over 800 U.S. and foreign government officials, policy and technical experts, academics, and journalists from around the world.
Notes:
###
Carnegie India 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.
Asia’s two largest nuclear powers have never threatened each other with nuclear weapons. How much will the recent deadly border clashes between China and India change the security landscape?
Toby Dalton, Tong Zhao, Rukmani Gupta
In the course of one morning in Singapore, U.S. President Donald Trump and the North Korean leader Kim Jong-un have begun to loosen a deeply entrenched and hostile relationship.
C. Raja Mohan
U.S. President Donald Trump’s decision to pull out of the Iran nuclear deal appears to have put regime change at the very center of the new American power play against Tehran.
C. Raja Mohan
The South Asian stalemate is likely to endure even as South and North Korea appear poised to turn the page.
C. Raja Mohan
While the Trump administration’s efforts to get tough on Pakistan face challenges and potential dangers, the change in stance signals a new political will to pursue previously untried measures which offer some hope of success.
C. Raja Mohan