The Bush-Putin arms control roller-coaster took another turn for the worse last Thursday when President Bush stated in no uncertain terms that he will continue to press his Russian counterpart on the need to scrap the 1972 ABM Treaty. In one fell swoop, the administration hopes not only to implement its 'new strategic relationship' with Russia sans the ABM Treaty, but also speed development and deployment of its missile defense program at home. Such a move, however, makes achieving the Administration's near term goal of deploying a missile defense with Russia's blessing harder, and could result in long-term damage to the U.S.- Russian relationship.
This book examines the forces—political, strategic, technological, and ideational—that led to India's dramatic nuclear policy shift and describes how New Delhi's force-in-being will be fashioned, particularly in light of the threat India faces from its two most salient adversaries, China, and Pakistan.
An internal government report, obtained by an outside watch-dog group, reveals that America's 10 nuclear weapons research and production facilities are vulnerable to terrorist attack and have failed about half of recent security drills. In several cases, commando squads were able to capture enough nuclear materials to make nuclear weapons. If this report scares you, then just imagine how much worse things are in Russia, with its huge and under-funded nuclear weapons complex.
Ten years after the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the cold war, it is striking how many remnants of that era remain. Partly as a result of Russia's slow progress in becoming a "Western" country, European and American leaders are reconsidering the kind of relationship they wish to cultivate with Russia.
Closer than expected cooperation between Moscow and Washington opens the door to a genuine improvement of the relationship between the two former cold war adversaries in ways not seen since the early days of Russian reform in the 1990s. There is a broad belief in Moscow that a genuine opportunity to build trust, confidence and a true security partnership has developed out of the rubble in New York and Washington.
A stray remark by Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld caused confusion and concern in parts of Europe on Monday, September 24. When he would not explicitly rule out the use of nuclear weapons in the war on terror, headlines and television featured stories on a new "Rischio Atomica," (Atomic Risk) Joseph Cirincione reports from Italy. While support for America is strong, there is concern that the U.S. might go too far in its new war.
Tuesday's terror attacks on New York and Washington DC should bring about a major shift in US nonproliferation policies. Until now, the main goal of US nonproliferation policy has been to prevent the emergence of new nuclear nations. After Tuesday's terror attacks, however, the focus of US efforts is to prevent terrorists from acquiring weapons of mass destruction. In most ways these policies are complementary and not in competition. But making the shift will pose risks and require tradeoffs.
The horrific September 11 attacks will change forever the way we assess threats to the United States. This catastrophe crossed the line from conventional terrorism to terrorism with weapons of mass destruction. The terrorists caused thousands of casualties not with chemical, biological or nuclear agents, but with aviation fuel. As the victims are recovered and remembered, the attacks should force a painful reappraisal of the threats all nations face in the 21st century.