Edition

China’s Approach to Arms Control Verification

IN THIS ISSUE: China’s Approach to Arms Control Verification, The Rise of the Autocratic Nuclear Marketplace, Russia Threatens to Move Nukes to Baltic Region if Finland, Sweden Join NATO, UN Watchdog Installs New Cameras at Iran Centrifuge Workshop, NATO Planners Put the F-35 Front and Center in European Nuclear Deterrence, Why the Ukraine War Does Not Mean More Countries Should Seek Nuclear Weapo

Published on April 14, 2022

China’s Approach to Arms Control Verification

Tong Zhao | Sandia National Laboratories

China’s consideration of verification issues affects the country’s overall attitude toward arms control. Based on a comprehensive review of publicly available sources, this paper examines China’s mainstream thinking and general practice on arms control verification. China’s approach to arms control verification is driven by three primary factors: political incentives, technical considerations, and mutual trust. . . . Despite the difficult geopolitical conditions, the United States and other countries should seek to find concrete areas to start practical cooperation with China.

The Rise of the Autocratic Nuclear Marketplace

Nicholas L. Miller and Tristan A. Volpe | Journal of Strategic Studies

The United States established itself as the dominant supplier of civil nuclear technology in the 1960s. But Moscow soon caught up, supplanting Washington after the Cold War. What led to the rise of this autocratic nuclear marketplace? We identify two factors. First, polarity shapes the motives for states to pursue civil nuclear exports. The superpowers faced strong motivations under bipolarity, but unipolarity put greater pressure on Russia to compete for influence with nuclear exports. Second, regime type affects state capacity to execute this strategy. We find that Moscow enjoyed an autocratic advantage, which insulated its nuclear industry from domestic opposition.

Russia Threatens to Move Nukes to Baltic Region if Finland, Sweden Join NATO

Emily Rauhala and Adela Suliman | Washington Post

Russia warned Finland and Sweden on Thursday that if they join NATO, Moscow will reinforce the Baltic Sea region, including with nuclear weapons. The threat came a day after Finnish officials suggested the country could request to join the 30-member military alliance within weeks and as Sweden mulled making a similar move. Helsinki and Stockholm are officially nonaligned militarily, but they are reconsidering their status in light of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine — escalating warnings from Russia. Dmitry Medvedev, a Putin ally who serves as deputy chairman of Russia’s Security Council, said Thursday that NATO expansion would lead Russia to strengthen air, land and naval forces to “balance” military capability in the region.

UN Watchdog Installs New Cameras at Iran Centrifuge Workshop

Jon Gambrell | Associated Press

The United Nations atomic watchdog said Thursday it installed surveillance cameras to monitor a new centrifuge workshop at Iran’s underground Natanz site after a request from Tehran, even as diplomatic efforts to restore Iran’s tattered nuclear deal appear stalled. The start of work at the new workshop comes after Iran’s centrifuge facility in Karaj found itself targeted in what Iran described as a sabotage attack in June. Natanz itself has twice been targeted in sabotage attacks amid uncertainty over the nuclear deal, assaults that Tehran has blamed on Israel. Iran has previously said it would be moving the plant at Karaj to Natanz.

NATO Planners Put the F-35 Front and Center in European Nuclear Deterrence

Sebastian Sprenger | Defense News

Following Germany’s decision to buy a fleet of F-35s, NATO planners have begun updating the alliance’s nuclear sharing mechanics to account for the jet’s next-gen capabilities, a key NATO official said this week. “We’re moving fast and furiously towards F-35 modernization and incorporating those into our planning and into our exercising and things like that as those capabilities come online,” said Jessica Cox, director of the NATO nuclear policy directorate in Brussels. “By the end of the decade, most if not all of our allies will have transitioned,” she added, speaking during an online discussion of the Advanced Nuclear Weapons Alliance Deterrence Center, a Washington-based think tank.

Why the Ukraine War Does Not Mean More Countries Should Seek Nuclear Weapons

Jeffrey W. Knopf | Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists

Following the Russian invasion of Ukraine, many observers have concluded that the war offers a clear demonstration of the benefits of possessing a nuclear arsenal. An article in Foreign Policy described the war’s number one lesson as being “it is good to have nuclear weapons.” Two senior scholars at the Brookings Institution labeled the Russia-Ukraine war “bad news for nuclear nonproliferation,” while the authors of the piece in Foreign Policy went even further, declaring the war a “death blow to nuclear nonproliferation.”  We should not be so quick to embrace this lesson. The war in Ukraine does not make as persuasive a case for nuclear proliferation as many suggest.

Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.