Calls for Seoul to seek deployment of U.S. tactical nuclear weapons in South Korea have become frequent in recent months, spurred in great measure by North Korea's shelling of Yeonpyeong Island in 2010.
Congressman Michael Turner spoke on the House defense act and its relation to the New START agreement, further nuclear reductions, U.S. nuclear targeting strategy, missile defense, and non-strategic nuclear weapons in Europe.
After two decades of stagnation, Russia and the United States have pledged their support for reductions in nuclear warheads. But the vision of mutual disarmament remains plagued by doubts on all sides.
As NATO debates its future nuclear policy, it should focus on concrete measures to maintain a credible nuclear deterrent in the medium term and avoid abstract debates over complete disarmament or the need to keep nuclear weapons indefinitely.
The 2011 conference focused on new actors and new agendas, reflecting the need to develop cooperative responses to challenges being posed by changing technology, distributions of political power, interest in nuclear energy, and security conditions in key regions.
As U.S. policy seeks to create the conditions that would allow for deep reductions in nuclear arsenals, the United States and Russia can undertake a practical approach to their stockpiles to 500 nuclear warheads each and those of other nuclear-armed states to no more than about half that number.
Although Russia, the United States, and American allies have been loath to downsize their nuclear arsenals, deep reductions would not undermine a nation’s security since arsenal size has little bearing on effectiveness of deterrence.
The Russian Duma’s likely ratification of New START Agreement this month will open a new debate over the strategic arms threats and emergent arms control opportunities that might be usefully added to the President's current arms control agenda.
The Lisbon NATO summit is a critical event for making the Alliance between Europe and North America fit the security challenges of the twenty-first century.
As NATO grapples with the future of its deterrence posture, it faces the contentious question of whether reducing or withdrawing forward-based U.S. nuclear weapons in Europe would unacceptably reduce the security of its member states.