An upcoming meeting will decide whether India will be allowed to join the Nuclear Suppliers Group. Member states should think carefully.
The nuclear agreement with Iran includes innovations that could bolster confidence that other countries’ nuclear programs will be exclusively peaceful.
The global nuclear order appears increasingly tense, primarily because many states feel that the structure and distribution of benefits is unjust. Among the states that will determine how the nuclear order will adapt, Argentina, Brazil, China, India, and Pakistan are particularly important.
Tensions in the nuclear order are on the rise. What role can ‘middle ground,’ or emerging, nuclear states play in shaping the global debate on nuclear issues?
It is important that scholars and practitioners from the region think about the evolution of deterrence between India and Pakistan and how nuclear confidence building measures can contribute to stability.
The regime for managing dual-use nuclear technology has proved remarkably successful to date, but it is becoming increasingly stressed and the prospects for buttressing it are bleak.
The growing prominence of nuclear weapons in Pakistan’s national security strategy casts a shadow of nuclear use over any potential military strategy India might consider to strike this balance. However, augmenting its nuclear options with tactical nuclear weapons is unlikely to bolster Indian deterrence in convincing ways.
The Nuclear Suppliers Group would be well advised to answer some critical questions before it decides to admit India and Pakistan.
While Japan is not a party to the Iran nuclear deal, it played an important role in its conclusion and could prove influential in its implementation.
On an issue that should evoke broad support from Washington to Warsaw, the transatlantic partners have utterly failed to come up with a joint strategy.