Edition

The U.S. Nuclear Arsenal Can Deter Both China and Russia

IN THIS ISSUE: The U.S. Nuclear Arsenal Can Deter Both China and Russia, North Korea Halts Nuclear Reactor, Likely to Extract Bomb Fuel - Report, Air Force Successfully Tested Secret New Stealth Missile With Mock Nuke, Reports Reveal, North Korea Vows Strong Response to Pentagon Report that Calls it a 'Persistent' Threat, Aukus Could Weaken China Deterrence, US Congress Research Paper Suggests, On

Published on October 5, 2023

The U.S. Nuclear Arsenal Can Deter Both China and Russia

Charles L. Glaser, James M. Acton, and Steve Fetter | Foreign Affairs

The dangers posed by the existence of two nuclear peers are being greatly exaggerated. Although the United States’ efforts to modernize its nuclear forces are a sensible investment, augmenting the total size of its nuclear arsenal or developing new nuclear capabilities would not be. Such moves would not enhance the country’s ability to deter both Russia and China under even the most demanding scenarios. 
There is no paywall for this article. 

North Korea Halts Nuclear Reactor, Likely to Extract Bomb Fuel - Report

Reuters

North Korea has halted the nuclear reactor at its main atomic complex, probably to extract plutonium that could be used for weapons by reprocessing spent fuel rods, a South Korean news report said on Thursday, citing a government source. The operation of the 5 megawatt nuclear reactor at the Yongbyon nuclear complex has been suspended since late September, according to intelligence assessment by U.S. and South Korean authorities, the report said.

Air Force Successfully Tested Secret New Stealth Missile With Mock Nuke, Reports Reveal

Matthew Gault | VICE

America's nuclear weapons are aging and the Pentagon plans to spend more than $600 billion to keep the potentially world-ending weapons in fighting shape. One of these massive investments paid off in 2022 when the Air Force successfully tested a new secret stealth missile armed with a dummy version of a novel nuclear warhead, government reports have revealed.

North Korea Vows Strong Response to Pentagon Report that Calls it a 'Persistent' Threat

HYUNG-JIN KIM | Associated Press

North Korea slammed the United States over a recent Pentagon report that labeled it a “persistent” threat because of weapons of mass destruction, saying Wednesday that it will counter any U.S. aggression or provocations with “the most overwhelming and sustained response strategy.” Last week, the Pentagon released the unclassified version of its “2023 Strategy for Countering Weapons of Mass Destruction” describing WMD challenges and methods to address them. The report stated that while China and Russia present “the principal WMD challenges,” North Korea, Iran and violent extremist organizations remain “persistent regional threats” that must also be addressed.

Aukus Could Weaken China Deterrence, US Congress Research Paper Suggests

Daniel Hurst | The Guardian 

The paper, prepared by the Congressional Research Service, aims to provide members of the US congress with a neutral summary of key arguments likely to be raised by supporters and sceptics of the plan…It lists six “potential arguments from sceptics”, including that the sale could weaken deterrence “if China were to find reason to believe, correctly or not, that Australia might use its Virginia-class boats less effectively than the US Navy would use them”.

On The Future of Nuclear Testing in America

Dylan Spaulding | Union of Concerned Scientists 

It is undeniably difficult for proponents of nuclear disarmament to find silver linings in the current environment; however the possible demise of nuclear testing is one area where there is reason for hope. Although nuclear tests played a key role in nuclear weapons development throughout the Cold War, one way in which the nuclear landscape has shifted is that the costs of explosive nuclear testing now outweigh the benefits for the United States and the majority of its nuclear peers.

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.