Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
- Follow Carnegie
- Search
- Global Resources
Global Centers
Languages
Increased interest in nuclear power has fueled talk of a "nuclear renaissance." But the reality of nuclear energy’s future is more complicated. Without major changes in government policies and aggressive financial support, nuclear power is actually likely to account for a declining percentage of global electricity generation.
The nuclear non-proliferation regime, so vital to maintaining international peace and security, is under increasing threat, particularly from countries that deliberately violate their non-proliferation obligations. Clarifying the technical and statutory basis by which the IAEA exposes non-compliance is one immediate way the non-proliferation regime can be strengthened.
On February 4 the United States will join France, Germany, the United Kingdom, Russia and China to talk about Iran. This meeting will also be the first attended by the Obama administration. In the days following, the U.S. will need to resolve both substantive and procedural issues if diplomacy is to have a chance of stopping Iran short of acquiring nuclear weapon capabilities.
James M. Acton and George Perkovich respond to a review essay by Elbridge Colby on Abolishing Nuclear Weapons.
Depicting Iran as a military threat obscures the real political threat it poses in the Middle East. It is precisely Iran's political behaviour and goals that underlay concerns about its nuclear ambitions.
The IAEA places importance on a state's intentions, something which its investigatory arm does not and cannot assess. The effect of emphasizing intent is to cause discussions about enforcement that descend into irresolvable arguments about ambiguous activities, thus reducing the chances of decisive action and, in turn, reducing the credibility and effectiveness of the nonproliferation regime.
The roots of the nuclear order's unraveling can be traced to four distinct factors that have evolved over the last six decades: weaknesses in the original NPT formula, changes in the global distribution of power, nuclear weapons technology proliferation, and complacency with the current regime.
The first public examination of open-source data shows that the U.S. spent at least $52.4 billion on nuclear weapons and programs in 2008; yet despite growing concern about the prospect of a nuclear 9/11 only 10 percent of that went toward proliferation prevention. The U.S. must devote less funding to upgrading its arsenal and more to securing and preventing the spread of nuclear weapons.
The United States spent over $52 billion on nuclear weapons and related programs in fiscal year 2008, but only 10 percent of that went toward preventing a nuclear attack through slowing and reversing the proliferation of nuclear weapons and technology.
The vision of a world without nuclear weapons has taken shape outside of governments, but is increasingly creeping inside governments.