Commentary
Baku may allow radical nationalists to publicly discuss “reunification” with Azeri Iranians, but the president and key officials prefer not to comment publicly on the protests in Iran.
Bashir Kitachaev
{
"authors": [
"Tong Zhao"
],
"type": "other",
"centerAffiliationAll": "",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"Carnegie China"
],
"collections": [],
"englishNewsletterAll": "",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie China",
"programAffiliation": "",
"programs": [],
"projects": [],
"regions": [],
"topics": [
"Arms Control",
"Security"
]
}
Source: Getty
Other
What the Five Nuclear Weapon States Can Do to Contain Nuclear Risks
The international debate about nuclear risk has catalogued many different kinds of risk and danger. But two stand out as especially salient: the risk of the nuclear arms race and the risk of employment of nuclear weapons arising out of a conventional conflict.
By Tong Zhao
Published on May 22, 2020
Source: Center for Global Security Research, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
The international debate about nuclear risk has catalogued many different kinds of risk and danger. But two stand out as especially salient: the risk of the nuclear arms race and the risk of employment of nuclear weapons arising out of a conventional conflict. The five nuclear weapon states (NWS) have a special responsibility to contain these risks. They also have a responsibility to try to manage the risk posed by nuclear proliferation. Constructive action by the five is both necessary and possible. But they face many challenges to such action, including the limits on their ability to cooperate given their wariness of each other.
This essay explores four areas to focus improved NWS cooperation to reduce nuclear risk. These include efforts to:
Prevent decoupling of NWS nuclear policy communities
Frame principles for cooperative nuclear risk reduction
Address areas of concern about future strategic military balances
Elevate and deepen existing dialogues
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
- Baku Proceeds With Caution as Ethnic Azeris Join Protests in Neighboring Iran
- Beirut Can Do More on Tom Barrack’s ProposalCommentary
In addressing Hezbollah’s disarmament, the Lebanese state must start by increasing its own leverage.
Michael Young
- Iran After the BattleCommentary
The country’s political and military establishment is still debating how to interpret the recent war’s outcome.
Nicole Grajewski
- The United States Has Attacked Iran’s Nuclear FacilitiesCommentary
Spot analysis from Carnegie scholars on events relating to the Middle East and North Africa.
Mohanad Hage Ali
- Hezbollah’s Israeli-Iranian QuandaryCommentary
Will the party remain bound to Iran or prioritize its organizational survival and the needs of Lebanon’s Shiite population?
Mohanad Hage Ali
