Number of results to display per page
Search Results
32. 65 Years After the Russell-Einstein Manifesto: Where Are We Now?
- Author:
- Pugwash Conferences on Science and World Affairs
- Publication Date:
- 07-2020
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Pugwash Conferences on Science and World Affairs
- Abstract:
- On July 9, 1955, two of the most eminent intellectuals of the 20th century, Bertrand Russell and Albert Einstein, issued an appeal to humanity, urging that the immense peril associated with nuclear weapons be recognized by governments and publics alike. The Russell-Einstein Manifesto warned that nuclear weapons pose a threat to the survival of the human species and called for major efforts to address and contain nuclear dangers. One of the consequences of the Manifesto was the holding of the first Pugwash conference in 1957. The origins and goals of Pugwash are contained in the Russell-Einstein Manifesto: to highlight the dangers of nuclear weapons, to call for the elimination of nuclear weapons, and to promote peaceful resolution of conflicts. Today, July 9, 2020, is the 65th anniversary of the Russell-Einstein Manifesto. We ask, how is the situation now, 65 years later?
- Topic:
- Arms Control and Proliferation, Human Rights, Nuclear Weapons, Conflict, and Peace
- Political Geography:
- Global Focus
33. The Significant Political Declaration and the Forthcoming 10th NPT Review Conference
- Author:
- Miroslav Tuma
- Publication Date:
- 04-2020
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Institute of International Relations Prague
- Abstract:
- The political declaration with an annex entitled Advancing Nuclear Disarmament, Securing Our Future was adopted on 25 February 2020 in Berlin by the Foreign Ministers of the fifteen countries associated in the prestigious Stockholm Initiative for Nuclear Disarmament. They call on all NPT participating countries to discuss and adopt the proposed stepping stones. According to the authors of the declaration, the implementation could contribute to averting the dangerous development of the security situation and to the gradual realization of the generally supported vision of creating a world without nuclear weapons. Due to the global pandemic caused by COVID-19, the 10th NPT Review Conference was postponed indefinitely.
- Topic:
- Arms Control and Proliferation, Nuclear Weapons, and Nonproliferation
- Political Geography:
- Global Focus
34. The Future of Nuclear Arms Control: Time for an Update
- Author:
- Angela Kane and Noah Mayhew
- Publication Date:
- 01-2020
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Institute for Development and Peace
- Abstract:
- Many consider the Reagan-Gorbachev prin- ciple that “nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought” (Joint Soviet-United States Statement 1985) to be the clarion call for arms control. With this, US and Soviet leaders put words to the fundamental under- standing that arms control was sacrosanct in the context of other, unrelated issues in inter- national security. In 2020, we live in a different reality where arms control by some experts has been reduced to “nuclear identity politics” (Ford 2020) while others claim that it is “practical- ly exhausted” (Yermakov 2020). Disconcert- ing as these sentiments may be, they contain a kernel of truth. Arms control in 2020 is still oriented to realities of the past. But if the arms race spirals into full force, it is humans who will be the losers. Hence, it is unhelp- ful to dismiss arms control as an obsolete manifestation of Cold War nightmares. But it is time for an update to address new global challenges, in particular quickly evolving geo- political realities and emerging technologies. Furthermore, the silos in the debate on arms control need to be overcome.
- Topic:
- Arms Control and Proliferation, Diplomacy, Nuclear Weapons, Military Strategy, and Military Affairs
- Political Geography:
- Global Focus
35. Toward Accountable Nuclear Deterrents: How Much is Too Much?
- Author:
- George Perkovich
- Publication Date:
- 02-2020
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
- Abstract:
- For decades, policy debates in nuclear-armed states and alliances have centered on the question, “How much is enough?” What size and type of arsenal, and what doctrine, are enough to credibly deter given adversaries? This paper argues that the more urgent question today is, “How much is too much?” What size and type of arsenal, and what doctrine, are too likely to produce humanitarian and environmental catastrophe that would be strategically and legally indefensible? Two international initiatives could help answer this question. One would involve nuclear-armed states, perhaps with others, commissioning suitable scientific experts to conduct new studies on the probable climatic and environmental consequences of nuclear war. Such studies would benefit from recent advances in modeling, data, and computing power. They should explore what changes in numbers, yields, and targets of nuclear weapons would significantly reduce the probability of nuclear winter. If some nuclear arsenals and operational plans are especially likely to threaten the global environment and food supply, nuclear-armed states as well as non-nuclear-weapon states would benefit from actions to physically reduce such risks. The paper suggests possible modalities for international debate on these issues. The second initiative would query all nuclear-armed states whether they plan to adhere to international humanitarian law in deciding if and when to detonate nuclear weapons, and if so, how their arsenals and operational plans affirm their intentions (or not). The United Kingdom and the United States have committed, in the words of the 2018 U.S. Nuclear Posture Review, to “adhere to the law of armed conflict” in any “initiation and conduct of nuclear operations.” But other nuclear-armed states have been more reticent, and the practical meaning of such declarations needs to be clarified through international discussion. The two proposed initiatives would help states and civil society experts to better reconcile the (perceived) need for nuclear deterrence with the strategic, legal, and physical imperatives of reducing the probability that a war escalates to catastrophic proportions. The concern is not only for the well-being of belligerent populations, but also for those in nations not involved in the posited conflict. Traditional security studies and the policies of some nuclear-armed states have ignored these imperatives. Accountable deterrents—in terms of international law and human survival—would be those that met the security and moral needs of all nations, not just one or two. These purposes may be too modest for states and activists that prefer the immediate prohibition and abolition of nuclear weapons. Conversely, advocates of escalation dominance in the United States and Russia—and perhaps in Pakistan and India—will find the force reductions and doctrinal changes implied by them too demanding. Yet, the positions of both of these polarized groups are unrealistic and/or unacceptable to a plurality of attentive states and experts. To blunt efforts to stifle further analysis and debate of these issues, the appendix of this paper heuristically rebuts leading arguments against accountable deterrents. Middle powers and civil society have successfully put new issues on the global agenda and created political pressure on major powers to change policies. Yet, cooperation from at least one major nuclear power is necessary to achieve the changes in nuclear deterrent postures and policies explored here. In today’s circumstances, China may be the pivotal player. The conclusion suggests ways in which China could extend the traditional restraint in its nuclear force posture and doctrine into a new approach to nuclear arms control and disarmament with the United States and Russia that could win the support of middle powers and international civil society. If the looming breakdown in the global nuclear order is to be averted, and the dangers of nuclear war to be lessened, new ideas and political coalitions need to gain ascendance. The initiatives proposed here intended to stimulate the sort of analysis and debate from which such ideas and coalitions can emerge.
- Topic:
- Arms Control and Proliferation, Environment, Nuclear Power, Weapons, and Deterrence
- Political Geography:
- Pakistan, Russia, China, India, Global Focus, and United States of America
36. The NPT turns 50: Will it get to 60?
- Author:
- Henry Sokolski
- Publication Date:
- 02-2020
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Nonproliferation Policy Education Center
- Abstract:
- In the next decade, it is all too likely that the past success of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) in preventing the further spread of nuclear weapons among the world’s nations will be reversed. Three trends make more proliferation likely. First is the decay of nuclear taboos. Second, and arguably worse, is renewed vertical proliferation—the increase in size and sophistication of nuclear arsenals by states that already have them. Third, the technical information to fuel nuclear breakouts and ramp-ups is more available now than in the past. These trends toward increased proliferation are not yet facts. The author describes three steps the international community could take to save the NPT: making further withdrawals from the NPT unattractive; clamping down on the uneconomical stockpiling and civilian use of nuclear weapons materials (plutonium and highly enriched uranium); and giving real meaning to efforts to limit the threats that existing nuclear weapons pose.
- Topic:
- Arms Control and Proliferation, Nuclear Weapons, Treaties and Agreements, Nuclear Power, Disarmament, and Nonproliferation
- Political Geography:
- Russia, North Korea, Global Focus, and United States of America
37. Gender Counts: Assessing Global Armed Violence Datasets for Gender Relevance
- Author:
- Anna Alvazzi del Frate, Gergely Hideg, and Emile LeBrun
- Publication Date:
- 03-2020
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Small Arms Survey
- Abstract:
- Sound and timely gender-relevant data is key for adequately and comprehensively addressing armed violence. Global databases have the potential to highlight relevant gendered dynamics, but currently lack crucial information related to the sex and gender of victims as well as the context of the violent events monitored. Gender Counts: Assessing Global Armed Violence Datasets, a Briefing Paper from the Small Arms Survey, highlights these knowledge gaps and indicates ways towards filling them. Reviewing global, regional, and national datasets on lethal violence—including on homicides, and conflict-related fatalities—the study finds that gender relevance of the available data across the board is still low. However, recent developments in the 'Data Revolution' connected to efforts to implement the 2030 Agenda have demonstrated that it is possible to move in the direction of better data on the gendered dimensions of violence. Increasing political support and civil society commitments have started producing more gender-relevant data for a range of related lethal violence, small arms, and gender indicators. The study therefore sees room for optimism, and data for gender analyses will likely be more inclusive and gender-relevant in the near future.
- Topic:
- Arms Control and Proliferation, Gender Issues, Violence, and Survey
- Political Geography:
- Global Focus
38. Emerging Suppliers in the Global Arms Trade
- Author:
- Diego Lopes da Silva, Alexandra Kuimova, Pieter D. Wezeman, and Lucie béraud-Sudreau
- Publication Date:
- 12-2020
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI)
- Abstract:
- Even though the volumes of arms exported by emerging suppliers are lower than those of the established exporters, they can nonetheless have a direct impact on international and regional security. The diversification in global arms transfers caused by the emergence of new suppliers therefore deserves scrutiny. Brazil, South Korea, Turkey and the United Arab Emirates are examples of emerging suppliers. Despite a continuous reliance on foreign technologies, they have managed to establish themselves in several niche categories of armaments or, in the case of South Korea, to widen the types of arms that they export. Exports of these emerging suppliers tend to go primarily to Africa, Asia and the Middle East, where most active armed conflicts are located, and also to Latin America. However, the drivers of the four countries’ arms exports differ: some have supplied with the intent to gain political influence, while others have primarily focused on the economic benefits.
- Topic:
- Arms Control and Proliferation, Economics, Politics, Arms Trade, Disarmament, and Supply
- Political Geography:
- Global Focus
39. Trends in International Arms Transfers, 2020
- Author:
- Pieter D. Wezeman, Alexandra Kuimova, and Siemon T. Wezeman
- Publication Date:
- 03-2020
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI)
- Abstract:
- The volume of international transfers of major arms in 2016–20 was 0.5 per cent lower than in 2011–15 and 12 per cent higher than in 2006–10. The five largest arms exporters in 2016–20 were the United States, Russia, France, Germany and China. The five largest arms importers were Saudi Arabia, India, Egypt, Australia and China. Between 2011–15 and 2016–20 there were increases in arms transfers to the Middle East and to Europe, while there were decreases in the transfers to Africa, the Americas, and Asia and Oceania. From 15 March 2021 SIPRI’s open-access Arms Transfers Database includes updated data on transfers of major arms for 1950–2020, which replaces all previous data on arms transfers published by SIPRI. Based on the new data, this Fact Sheet presents global trends in arms exports and arms imports, and highlights selected issues related to transfers of major arms.
- Topic:
- Arms Control and Proliferation, Military Spending, Disarmament, and Exports
- Political Geography:
- Global Focus
40. Mapping the International Presence of the World’s Largest Arms Companies
- Author:
- Lucie béraud-Sudreau, Alexandra Marksteiner, Diego Lopes da Silva, Nan Tian, Alexandra Kuimova, Pieter D. Wezeman, and Siemon T. Wezeman
- Publication Date:
- 12-2020
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI)
- Abstract:
- Arms companies have a presence that reaches far beyond the countries in which they are headquartered. This is the result of the internationalization of the arms industry. This paper uses a new data set to examine the results of this internationalization in terms of the international presence of major arms companies. It presents a mapping comprising 400 foreign entities linked to the world’s largest arms companies. The mapping shows that the international presence of major arms companies continues to be influenced by geopolitical divisions and ties, and generally mirrors the geographical locations of the world’s biggest arms import markets. It also reveals that the international presence of major Chinese arms companies and the one Russian company included in the study remains limited.
- Topic:
- Arms Control and Proliferation and Military Spending
- Political Geography:
- Russia, China, and Global Focus