The New START Treaty continues to provide benefits to both Russia and the United States, despite Russia’s interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election.
In this article, Tristan Volpe reviews Rachel Whitlark’s article, “Nuclear Beliefs: A Leader-Focused Theory of Counter-Proliferation.”
For all if its complications, direct arms reduction engagement offers the best hope of heading off another disastrous cycle of nuclear one-upmanship between Washington and Moscow.
The reason why the false ballistic missile alert in Hawaii was such an issue is precisely because it took place against a background of very high tensions.
In the 55 years since unseen nuclear bullets were dodged in the Cuban Missile Crisis, the United States’ technical capabilities to gather intelligence have improved breathtakingly. Still, it is extremely difficult to know how foreign adversaries perceive their situation and calculate their moves.
The president’s unilateral nuclear authority comes from decisions made at the start of the Atomic Age.
The world is vastly different from when the nuclear order was built: proliferation risks and interest in nuclear energy are much lower, but regional insecurities raise danger of escalatory warfare. Meanwhile, the have/have not inequities impair cooperation to restore the foundation of order.
Tensions with North Korea have grown under the administration of President Donald Trump, and the danger of nuclear confrontation is now higher than at any time since the Cuban missile crisis.
On the North Korea nuclear threat, global leaders have an obligation not to avoid reality.
With North Korea’s testing of what appears to be a more advanced intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM), China is under great pressure to impose crippling economic sanctions against Pyongyang, including cutting off its oil supply.