{
"authors": [
"Stephen I. Schwartz",
"Deepti Choubey"
],
"type": "other",
"centerAffiliationAll": "",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
],
"collections": [],
"englishNewsletterAll": "",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"programAffiliation": "",
"programs": [],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"North America",
"United States"
],
"topics": [
"Security",
"Military",
"Nuclear Policy"
]
}
REQUIRED IMAGE
Total appropriations for nuclear weapons and related programs in fiscal year 2008 were at least $52.4 billion. Of which, only $5.2 billion is spent on preventing the spread of nuclear weapons, weapons materials, technology, and expertise.
What is nuclear security spending?
Nuclear security spending is how much the United States spends to operate, maintain, and upgrade its nuclear arsenal; defend against nuclear attack; prevent the further spread of nuclear weapons, weapons materials, technology, and expertise; manage and clean up the radioactive and toxic waste left over from decades of nuclear weapons production and compensate victims of past production and testing activities; and prepare for the consequences of a nuclear or radiological attack.
How much does the United States spend on nuclear security?
Total appropriations for nuclear weapons and related programs in fiscal year 2008 were at least $52.4 billion. That’s not counting related costs for classified programs, air defense, antisubmarine warfare, and most nuclear weapons-related intelligence programs. Of which, only $5.2 billion is spent on preventing the spread of nuclear weapons, weapons materials, technology, and expertise.
How is the $52.4 billion spent?
Which agencies receive nuclear security dollars and how much?
Stephen I. Schwartz
Former Deputy Director, Nuclear Policy Program
Choubey was previously the director of the Peace and Security Initiative for the Ploughshares Fund. She also worked for Ambassador Nancy Soderberg in the New York office of the International Crisis Group.
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.
Troubled by the growing salience of nuclear debates in East Asia, Moscow has responded in its usual way: with condemnation and threats. But by exacerbating insecurity, Russia is forcing South Korea and Japan to consider radical security options.
James D.J. Brown
After four years of war, there is no one who can stand up to the security establishment, and President Vladimir Putin is increasingly passive.
Tatiana Stanovaya
The Russian leadership wants to avoid a dangerous precedent in which it is squeezed out of Iran by the United States and Israel—and left powerless to respond in any meaningful way.
Nikita Smagin
Not only does the fighting jeopardize regional security, it undermines Russian attempts to promote alternatives to the Western-dominated world order.
Ruslan Suleymanov
Lukashenko is willing to make big sacrifices for an invitation to Mar-a-Lago or the White House. He also knows that the clock is ticking: he must squeeze as much out of the Trump administration as he can before congressional elections in November leave Trump hamstrung or distracted.
Artyom Shraibman