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 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
- What We Lost When Washington Walked Away From Climate-Health EffortsCommentary
Our new report offers a path forward for local officials and future policymakers.
- +2
Joe McCannon, Jenny Keroack, Lauren Jensen, …
- Advancing Climate Health for Vulnerable Groups in the United States: Looking Back and Looking AheadPaper
Present and future policymakers seeking to address climate-related health challenges can draw lessons from the successes and failures of the Biden administration.
- +1
Joe McCannon, Jenny Keroack, Lauren Jensen, …
- Lebanon Needs a New Negotiating Strategy with IsraelCommentary
Unless Beirut lowers expectations, any setbacks will end up bolstering Hezbollah’s narrative.
Mohanad Hage Ali
- The U.S. Export-Import Bank Was Built for a Different Era. Here's How to Fix It.Commentary
Five problems—and solutions—to make it actually work as a tool of great power competition.
Afreen Akhter
- Russia Is Meddling for Meddling’s Sake in the Middle EastCommentary
The Russian leadership wants to avoid a dangerous precedent in which it is squeezed out of Iran by the United States and Israel—and left powerless to respond in any meaningful way.
Nikita Smagin
