• Research
  • Diwan
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie Middle East logoCarnegie lettermark logo
PalestineSyria
{
  "authors": [
    "George Perkovich"
  ],
  "type": "other",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
  ],
  "collections": [
    "Renovating the Nuclear Order"
  ],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
  "programAffiliation": "NPP",
  "programs": [
    "Nuclear Policy"
  ],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [],
  "topics": [
    "Nuclear Policy",
    "Arms Control"
  ]
}

Source: Getty

Other

Accountability After Nuclear War: Why Not Plan Ahead?

States and experts preoccupied with winning (or at least not losing) wars that could go nuclear have largely ignored questions of post facto accountability.

Link Copied
By George Perkovich
Published on Nov 17, 2020

Source: Journal of Peace and Nuclear Disarmament

If nuclear war occurs, non-belligerents want the conductors to take responsibility for providing assistance to deal with harm imposed on them. This harm could take the form of radioactive fallout, climatic change that causes global food shortages and refugee crises. But states and experts preoccupied with winning (or at least not losing) wars that could go nuclear have largely ignored questions of post facto accountability. Nuclear-armed states claim to be responsible, defensive actors; therefore, they should not object if others demand processes to adjudicate the conduct of nuclear war after the fact and provide reparations and remedies to victims in non-belligerent nations. Indeed, international efforts to establish such accountability could strengthen deterrence against aggression and use of nuclear weapons.

Read Full Text

George Perkovich
Japan Chair for a World Without Nuclear Weapons, Senior Fellow
George Perkovich
Nuclear PolicyArms Control

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

  • Commentary
    How Tehran Is Connecting the Ukraine Invasion to the Iran Deal

    Both events also could force Washington to rethink or revive its Middle East partnerships.

      Karim Sadjadpour

  • Commentary
    Diwan
    A Ticking Time-Bomb?

    Disagreement between the United States and Iran over a revived nuclear accord may anchor volatile competition.

      George Perkovich

  • Commentary
    Diwan
    What Does It Mean that European States Have Triggered the Dispute Resolution Mechanism in the Nuclear Deal With Iran?

    A regular survey of experts on matters relating to Middle Eastern and North African politics and security.

      Michael Young

  • Commentary
    What Europe’s Dispute about Iran’s Nuclear Program Means

    The British, French, and German foreign ministers have formally accused Iran of breaking the terms of the 2015 Iran nuclear deal, a step that could lead to sanctions. Are the Europeans preparing to pull the plug?

      Jarrett Blanc

  • Commentary
    Scratching Erdogan’s Nuclear Itch

    Although Turkey is not likely to pursue a nuclear weapons program, it is expanding its nuclear industry by partnering with Russia.

      Mark Hibbs

Get more news and analysis from
Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center
Carnegie Middle East logo, white
  • Research
  • Diwan
  • About
  • Experts
  • Projects
  • Events
  • Contact
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
Get more news and analysis from
Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.