To quickly lower the risk of nuclear escalation, manage arms racing, and avoid a breakdown in future treaty negotiations, the United States, Russia, and China should consider five politically binding proposals to build transparency and confidence.
For decades, policy debates in nuclear-armed states have centered on the question of ‘how much is enough,’ but on the cusp of a new arms race, the urgent question has shifted to: how much is too much?
Why does President Obama—who was deeply engaged in nuclear policy issues throughout his presidency—devote so little to the topic in his memoir?
A discussion of China’s growing conventional missile arsenal and the associated implications for military strategy and security in the Indo-Pacific region.
The United States now bases its war plans around using its exquisite conventional forces to sever the connections between an adversary’s leadership and its military forces.
More than an effort to prevent nuclear proliferation, the killing of Iran’s top nuclear scientist was sanctioned to foment trouble between Washington’s incoming administration and Tehran.
Preventing an inadvertent nuclear disaster on the Korean Peninsula will depend not only on Kim Jong Un upgrading his nuclear software but on the United States better understanding the choices and circumstances that have driven North Korea’s nuclear posture.
The concerns that motivate interest in and demand for nuclear disarmament are formidable and deserve fuller and deeper address than they have received thus far in the policy deliberations of many States and international bodies.
70 years into its conflict prevention mission, can NATO still contend with the defense challenges of today and tomorrow, both internally and as an actor on the world stage?
A November 2020 U.S. missile defense test stands to upend strategic stability and complicate future arms control. The test marks a crossing of the Rubicon, with irreversible implications.