Arms Control and Deterrence

{
  "authors": [
    "James M. Acton",
    "Edward Ifft",
    "John McLaughlin"
  ],
  "type": "other",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
  ],
  "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"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Nuclear Policy",
    "Nuclear Energy"
  ]
}

Other

Arms Control and Deterrence

Even after the world reaches the long-for goal of zero nuclear weapons, nuclear deterrence will continue to have a vital policy role for some time to come.

By James M. Acton, Edward Ifft, John McLaughlin

Published on Oct 2, 2011

Source: Deterrence: Its Past and Future

Deterrence as applied during the cold war loomed larger than other tools of statecraft and was identified more closely with the possible use of devastating military force than should be the case today. The current international environment is radically different from that which it was during the cold war. Threats of very different types, from cyber warfare to terrorist attacks, have become the major dangers to world order. Current and future threats to international security will present relatively fewer situations in which deterrence, least of all nuclear deterrence, will be the most effective tool of statecraft. A new approach is clearly necessary.

This book is a collection of the papers prepared for and presented at the November 2010 Hoover Nuclear Threat Initiative Conference by an expert group of analysts, all of whom have studied deterrence issues for many years. The authors highlight ways deterrence has been shaped by surrounding conditions and circumstances. They look at the prospective reliability of deterrence as a tool of statecraft in the emerging international environment. And they examine the challenges of “weaponless deterrence”: developing approaches to nuclear deterrence that rely not on the actua, but rather on the potential existence of nuclear weapons. In addition, they look at the ongoing debates over “de-alerting” (slowing down the capability for immediate launch and rapid nuclear escalation), the role of arms control, and the practical considerations related to verification and compliance.

As long as nuclear weapons continue to exist, the United States should ensure that its nuclear forces are safe, reliable, and capable of launching a devastating nuclear strike on any nation that attacks it with nuclear weapons. Even after the world reaches the long-for goal of zero nuclear weapons, nuclear deterrence will continue to have a vital role for some time to come. As George Shultz says in his foreword to this report, “One thing is clear: no analysis of a world without nuclear weapons can proceed very far without considering the issue of deterrence.”

About the Authors

James M. Acton

Jessica T. Mathews Chair, Co-director, Nuclear Policy Program

Acton holds the Jessica T. Mathews Chair and is co-director of the Nuclear Policy Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

Edward Ifft

John McLaughlin

Nuclear Policy Nuclear Energy North America United States

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

Paper
From Trade Dependence to Geopolitical Leverage: The EU in an Era of Weaponized Interdependence
As geopolitical rivalry weaponizes global supply chains, the EU’s true vulnerability lies in emerging-risk imports. For these goods, suppliers are growing more concentrated, substitution more difficult, and political risk is looming.
Sinan Ülgen
Article
Reimagining Disaster Response in the Age of Chaotic Austerity
It’s the early days of a new architecture for disaster recovery. Now is the time to build a better, more adaptive funding ecosystem.
Sarah Labowitz, Katie Mears
Commentary
Next Steps Toward Peace After the Armenian Elections
It’s time to build momentum, and Ankara is the venue of the next opportune diplomatic window to do this.
Alper Coşkun, Garo Paylan
Commentary
Emissary
Washington and Tehran’s Very Dangerous Moment
The Islamic Republic’s words and actions suggest that it has changed its approach to both diplomacy and war.
Mohammad Ayatollahi Tabaar
Commentary
Diwan
Looking Past the Wall on Palestine-Israel
Policy discussion is ignoring that the Palestinian national project is hollowed out and apartheid is a present danger.
Nathan J. Brown

More Work from Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

Europe trade economy container supply chains

Paper

From Trade Dependence to Geopolitical Leverage: The EU in an Era of Weaponized Interdependence

As geopolitical rivalry weaponizes global supply chains, the EU’s true vulnerability lies in emerging-risk imports. For these goods, suppliers are growing more concentrated, substitution more difficult, and political risk is looming.

Sinan Ülgen

Photo of flames behind palm trees in a residential neighborhood in Altadena, California.

Article

Reimagining Disaster Response in the Age of Chaotic Austerity

It’s the early days of a new architecture for disaster recovery. Now is the time to build a better, more adaptive funding ecosystem.

Sarah Labowitz, Katie Mears

Pashinyan surrounded by supporters while speaking to reporters

Commentary

Next Steps Toward Peace After the Armenian Elections

It’s time to build momentum, and Ankara is the venue of the next opportune diplomatic window to do this.

Alper Coşkun, Garo Paylan

Commentary

Emissary

Washington and Tehran’s Very Dangerous Moment

The Islamic Republic’s words and actions suggest that it has changed its approach to both diplomacy and war.

Mohammad Ayatollahi Tabaar

Commentary

Diwan

Looking Past the Wall on Palestine-Israel

Policy discussion is ignoring that the Palestinian national project is hollowed out and apartheid is a present danger.

Nathan J. Brown