Commentary
- +10
James M. Acton, Dan Baer, Mark Baldassare, …
{
"authors": [
"James M. Acton"
],
"type": "other",
"centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
],
"collections": [],
"englishNewsletterAll": "ctw",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"programAffiliation": "NPP",
"programs": [
"Nuclear Policy"
],
"projects": [],
"regions": [],
"topics": [
"Nuclear Policy",
"Foreign Policy"
]
}
Source: Getty
Other
Cyber Warfare and Inadvertent Escalation
The advent of cyber warfare exacerbates the risk that conventional wars could inadvertently lead to the use of nuclear weapons.
Published on Mar 25, 2020
Source: Daedalus
Cyber weapons may be relatively new, but non-nuclear threats to nuclear weapons and their command, control, communication, and intelligence (C3I) systems are not. In fact, before the United States dropped the bomb on Hiroshima in August 1945–before it even conducted the world’s first nuclear test in July of that year–it had started to worry about non-nuclear threats to its nascent nuclear force, in particular, Japanese air defenses. As the Cold War developed, fears multiplied to encompass threats to almost every component of the United States’ nuclear forces and C3I systems. While these threats emanated primarily from Moscow’s nuclear forces, they were exacerbated by its improving non-nuclear capabilities, particularly in the final decade of the Cold War. A two-decade hiatus in worry following the Soviet Union’s collapse is now over; today, non-nuclear threats to U.S. nuclear C3I assets–in particular, the growing capability of Chinese and Russian antisatellite weapons–are a major concern.
The United States’ experience is the norm. All nuclear-armed states have felt, and continue to feel, similar concerns. Indeed, the last few decades have seen the emergence of new potential vulnerabilities–this time in cyberspace–as nuclear weapons and C3I systems have come to rely increasingly on digital technology. To be sure, the networks involved in nuclear operations are almost certainly among the most secure anywhere. Yet there is broad agreement among technical experts that perfect network security is “impossible.” As a result, the possibility of cyber interference with nuclear forces and C3I systems is real.
The full article is published in the Spring 2020 issue of Daedalus.
About the Author
James M. Acton
Jessica T. Mathews Chair, Co-director, Nuclear Policy Program
Acton holds the Jessica T. Mathews Chair and is co-director of the Nuclear Policy Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
- What the New Democratic Congress Can (and Can’t) Do on Foreign Policy
- Nuclear Weapons and the Future of American PowerPaper
James M. Acton, Ankit Panda
Recent Work
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.
More Work from Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center
- What’s Behind South Korea’s Rift With Ukraine and Turn Toward Russia?Commentary
There are limits as to how far the shift in South Korea’s foreign policy will go.
James D.J. Brown
- How Realistic Is a U.S.-Brokered Gas Deal Between Russia and the EU?Commentary
A gas deal would create palpable economic value, but it wouldn’t fundamentally change the position of either Russia or the EU.
Sergey Vakulenko
- Escaping an Escalatory Spiral: Can Europe Avoid a War With Russia?Research
Nobody in the Kremlin fancies a fight with the whole European continent. Instead, the Russian leadership would be likely to opt for a short, targeted strike.
Maksim Samorukov
- By Waging War on Its Sovereignty, Putin Has United UkraineCommentary
The war does threaten Putin’s existence. That is why he does not negotiate.
René Nyberg
- Red Sea Mirage: Why Russia Is Still Waiting on a Military Base in SudanCommentary
Russia’s coveted Red Sea naval base has fallen victim to its erratic foreign policy.
Sergey Konyashin
