A world without nuclear weapons would be, in the long term, a better world than today’s. But, with treaty negotiations about to start at the UN, it is time to be blunt about the practical implications of a ban, as opposed to its principled ambitions.
North Korea has nuclear weapons, something that won’t change anytime soon. As bad as this is, recognizing that status in a way that paves the road for South Korea to follow suit would be even worse.
Washington must present a credible threat to Pyongyang, while leaving the door open to talks.
Talk of a European nuclear deterrent might be welcome in Washington, but such a scheme would do very little to help Europe tackle the biggest challenges it faces.
President Trump’s “grand bargain” with Putin is setting expectations too high for what can be achieved under the current circumstances.
What can be learned about China’s hypersonic boost-glide weapon program from flight tests, and the implications of the program for the security of the United States and our allies.
South Korea’s ongoing political crisis is making it difficult to respond effectively to North Korean provocations.
Territorial conflicts in Southeastern Europe have hampered the implementation of international agreements on arms control and confidence- and security-building measures (CSBMs) in disputed territories under the effective control of de facto regimes.
President Trump’s only realistic option for stopping North Korea’s nuclear march is reinvigorated diplomacy, followed by significantly ratcheting up the pressure if it fails.
The incoming Trump administration doesn’t seem to be in thrall of the do-something mentality. But this might change when dealing with the realities of governance.