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
- 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
- Israel’s Security Means Insecurity in the Middle EastCommentary
As negotiations with Iran and Lebanon continue, chaos is at the heart of the Netanyahu government’s calculations.
Michael Young
- Taking the Pulse: Are Western Democracies Failing Free Speech?Commentary
The battle over free speech has taken center stage since U.S. Vice President JD Vance accused Europe of censorship. From travel bans to social media regulation, especially around the Israel-Palestine conflict, are liberal democratic governments weaponizing free speech?
Rym Momtaz, ed.
- Trump’s AI Order Won’t Stymie U.S. Competition with ChinaCommentary
Beijing regulated AI—and then Chinese AI companies took off.
Matt Sheehan
- Are Data Centers the Villains in the Battle Over Electricity?Commentary
Examples from Virginia and Lake Tahoe reveal complex situations that governments could use to fund critical grid upgrades.
Kate Gordon, Noah Gordon
