As tensions between the United States and North Korea continue to simmer, questions arise concerning what war with a nuclear-powered North Korea would look like.
The dangers of nuclear proliferation and the policy responses to it should be assessed differently if nuclear weapons do not significantly augment a possessor’s coercive power.
Increased risk-taking concerning North Korea’s nuclear ambitions could potentially pay off, but there’s a catch.
What are the realistic implications of North Korea's nuclear capability?
The Trump administration should take time to determine whether ICBMs fit into America’s nuclear deterrent strategy, and to consider options such as reducing or even eliminating them.
What is the future of the INF Treaty, why is Russia violating it, and how should the U.S. respond?
Russia presents significant security challenges to the United States and its allies for which the Trump administration has yet to indicate a policy direction, particularly in regard to Russia’s stance on the INF Treaty.
Since 2014, the United States has publicly accused Russia of violating the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty. In light of reports that Russia has already deployed a significant number of prohibited missiles, the Trump administration will face the tough decision about whether or not to remain committed to the treaty.
U.S.-Russian relations under Trump might largely stay the same as before, which would make arms control solutions for Europe more urgently needed but at the same time much harder to achieve.
President-Elect Donald Trump appears to have drawn a red line against North Korea’s acquiring the capability to threaten the United States with a nuclear-armed ballistic missile. Can he enforce it?