The way that the United States behaves regarding nuclear deterrence is vital to sustaining morale in the U.S. army and winning public support in the United States and among allied states.
It is tempting for Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates to turn to nuclear technology as part of a larger strategy to counter Iranian influence in the region.
While NATO can extend the status quo in the short term, it cannot postpone resolving its defense and deterrence dilemmas without undermining Alliance confidence and cohesion.
A referendum on Scottish independence scheduled for autumn 2014 could have profound ramifications for the United Kingdom's nuclear deterrent and for U.S.-U.K. relations.
Though most states that want a nuclear weapon can get one through determined effort, the fact remains that most choose not to proliferate. Turkey is no exception.
The nuclear order is under pressure as the distance between nonaligned states and nuclear weapon states grows.
No issue in the area of European military security is more important or more vexed than that of nonstrategic nuclear weapons.
While security conditions in Europe remain relatively benign, NATO states should recapitalize their security commitments and clarify their crisis decisionmaking procedures.
Recent developments in international security that narrow the utility of nuclear weapons in deterring war may alter the role nuclear weapons play in the dialogue between the imperatives of war prevention and justness.
When examining Beijing’s concerns about U.S. nuclear capabilities, it is important to understand the strategic challenges facing China and the ways the country’s leadership might try to resolve those challenges.