Commentary
How is AI reshaping space security, creating governance challenges, and where does international diplomacy stand today?
Tejas Bharadwaj, Almudena Azcárate Ortega
{
"authors": [
"James M. Acton",
"Elizabeth Turpen"
],
"type": "legacyinthemedia",
"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": [
"Security",
"Foreign Policy",
"Nuclear Policy"
]
}
REQUIRED IMAGE
In The Media
Worldwise: No Nukes Is Good Nukes
Russia will not agree to the kind of deep cuts in nuclear weapons envisioned by President Obama without a concrete deal on missile defense.
Published on Jul 13, 2009
Source: Bloggingheads.tv
At a recent U.S.-Russia summit, Presidents Barack Obama and Dmitry Medvedev reached a framework agreement to cut each country's nuclear stockpiles by about a third by year's end. James M. Acton discussed with Elizabeth Turpen of the Henry L. Stimson Center, the challenges to reaching that goal. In grading U.S.-Russian discussions, Acton said:
"The Obama administration played it very savvily today—they have committed to doing the joint threat assessment on ballistic missiles with the Russians and that appears to have been enough...to satisfy Russian concerns for the time being. Obama has been very clear that the current treaty they are negotiating is an interim treaty; he wants something much bigger—much deeper cuts—to follow on very shortly on this treaty and the Russians are not going to do that without a concrete deal on missile defense, but that then is going require [Obama] opening himself up to much more criticism domestically."
About the Authors
James M. Acton
Jessica T. Mathews Chair, Co-director, Nuclear Policy Program
Acton holds the Jessica T. Mathews Chair and is co-director of the Nuclear Policy Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
Elizabeth Turpen
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.
More Work from Carnegie India
- AI in Outer Space: Opportunities, Risks, and the Governance Gap
- Threading the Needle: India’s Path Forward with ChinaPaper
After the chill in ties between 2020 and 2024 that brought India–China relations to their lowest point in several decades, the two countries have engaged each other afresh. This paper argues that there are predominantly four imperatives guiding India’s approach to China, and they exist in an order of priority.
Saheb Singh Chadha
- Managing Divergence: India’s BRICS Presidency in 2026Article
This piece argues that India’s central challenge is not managing a single flashpoint but resolving the underlying tension between expansion and institutional coherency of the BRICS grouping.
Vrinda Sahai
- India–Africa Strategic Partnership: Challenges, Potential, and Possible PathwaysArticle
A partnership between India, a country of subcontinental size, and Africa, a continent of fifty-four countries, may seem asymmetric until one notes that both are home to nearly the same number of people—1.4 billion. This essay spells out the existing challenges to the partnership, its optimal potential, and the possible pathways to realize it over the next quarter-century.
Rajiv Bhatia
- The Unresolved Challenges in U.S.–India Semiconductor CooperationCommentary
The U.S.–India semiconductor cooperation story is well-stocked with top-level strategic intent. What remains unresolved, however, are some underlying challenges that will determine whether the cooperation actually functions. Three such friction points stand out.
Shruti Mittal
