Paper
Lora Saalman
{
"authors": [
"Lora Saalman"
],
"type": "other",
"centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"Carnegie China"
],
"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",
"East Asia",
"China"
],
"topics": [
"Nuclear Policy",
"Arms Control"
]
}
Source: Getty
Other
U.S. Nuclear Posture Review
While strategic stability in China has traditionally reflected a concern for maintaining balance, the discussion has broadened in the past years to include concerns over issues such as nuclear terrorism and disarmament.
By Lora Saalman
Published on Jun 16, 2011
Source: Asian Institute for Policy Studies
Carnegie's Beijing-based associate Lora Saalman spoke at The Asian Institute for Policy Studies' panel on the U.S. Nuclear Posture Review. Saalman pointed out that strategic stability in China is a concept that has a lot to do with balance. Between 2000 and 2003, discussions in China focused mostly on the imbalance between China, the United States, and Russia. Today the discussions in China focus less on the strategic imbalance between China and the United States and more on the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, nuclear terrorism, disarmament, as well as extended deterrence.
About the Author
Lora Saalman
Former Nonresident Associate, Nuclear Policy Program
Saalman was a nonresident associate in the Nuclear Policy Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Her research focuses on China’s nuclear and strategic policies toward India, Russia, and arms control.
- Balancing Chinese Interests on North Korea and Iran
- Why Beijing Stands by PyongyangIn The Media
Lora Saalman
Recent Work
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 Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center
- Shockwaves Across the GulfCommentary
The countries in the region are managing the fallout from Iranian strikes in a paradoxical way.
Angie Omar
- The U.S. Risks Much, but Gains Little, with IranCommentary
In an interview, Hassan Mneimneh discusses the ongoing conflict and the myriad miscalculations characterizing it.
Michael Young
- The Greatest Dangers May Lie AheadCommentary
In an interview, Nicole Grajewski discusses the military dimension of the U.S. and Israeli attacks on Iran.
Michael Young
- Firepower Against WillpowerCommentary
In an interview, Naysan Rafati assesses the first week that followed the U.S. and Israeli attack on Iran.
Michael Young
- What Is Israel’s Plan in Lebanon?Commentary
At heart, to impose unconditional surrender on Hezbollah and uproot the party among its coreligionists.
Yezid Sayigh
