Unless India’s conventional and nuclear commands closely coordinate their operations planning, an Indian nuclear response threatens either to be unsuccessful or to escalate out of control.
In the current environment, the introduction of tactical nuclear weapons by Pakistan in response to India’s limited war strategy is only a means of reinforcing deterrence and enhancing stability at the higher level of conflict by inducing instability at the lower levels.
Pakistan’s nuclear posture and the size of Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal have been subjects of considerable speculation and debate since Pakistan first tested nuclear weapons, and increasingly so in recent years.
A close look at official statements, interviews, and developments related to nuclear weapons provide substantive clues about the contours of Pakistan’s nuclear doctrine in practice
At present, there are ongoing debates in China about the future of China’s nuclear doctrine. The way these debates are eventually resolved will have important consequences for the future of China’s doctrine and arsenal.
Limited ballistic missile defense remains vital for India’s effort to maintain strategic stability.
Should the United States do more to reduce the role of nuclear weapons in its security strategy and the number of weapons in its arsenal?
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?