Number of results to display per page
Search Results
92. U.S. Nuclear Excess: Understanding the Costs, Risks, and Alternatives
- Author:
- Kingston Reif and Alicia Sanders-Zakre
- Publication Date:
- 04-2019
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Arms Control Association
- Abstract:
- In a little-noticed comment before his controversial July 2018 summit meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Helsinki, U.S. President Donald Trump characterized his government’s multi-hundred billion dollar plans to replace the aging U.S. nuclear arsenal as “a very, very bad policy.” He seemed to express some hope that Russia and the United States, which together possess over 90 percent of the planet’s nuclear warheads, could chart a different path and avert renewed military and nuclear competition. The Helsinki meeting, however, did not produce any agreement on nuclear weapons and Trump has so far shown little interest in a different nuclear spending path. Quite the opposite, in fact.“We have far more money than anybody else by far,” Trump said last October. “We’ll build [the U.S. nuclear arsenal] up until” other nuclear-armed states such as Russia and China “come to their senses.” Citing a deteriorating international security environment, the Trump administration is pursuing a significant expansion of the role and capability of the U.S. nuclear arsenal. In addition to continuing full speed ahead with its predecessor’s plans to replace the nuclear triad and its associated warheads on largely a like-for-like basis, the administration is proposing to broaden the circumstances under which the United States would consider the first use of nuclear weapons, develop two new sea-based, lowyield nuclear options, and lay the groundwork to grow the size of the arsenal. At the same time, key U.S.-Russian nuclear arms control agreements, which serve to regulate the nuclear balance and prevent unconstrained nuclear competition, are now in serious doubt. The Trump administration has announced the United States will leave the landmark 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty in August 2019 unless Russia returns to compliance with the pact, and expressed hostility towards extending the 2010 New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START). New START expires in 2021 but can be extended by up to five years subject to the agreement of Washington and Moscow. In short, the Trump administration is preparing to compete in a new nuclear arms race while simultaneously increasing the likelihood of such a contest. The projected cost of the proposed nuclear spending spree is staggering and it is growing. The United States currently plans to spend nearly $500 billion, after including the effects of inflation, to maintain and replace its nuclear arsenal over the next decade, according to a January 2019 Congressional Budget Office (CBO) report. This is an increase of nearly $100 billion, or about 23 percent, above the already enormous projected cost as of the end of the Obama administration. Over the next 30 years, the price tag is likely to top $1.5 trillion and could even approach $2 trillion. These big nuclear bills are coming due as the Defense Department is seeking to replace large portions of its conventional forces and internal and external fiscal pressures are likely to limit the growth of—and perhaps reduce—military spending. “We’re going to have enormous pressure on reducing the debt which means that defense spending—I’d like to tell you it’s going to keep going up—[but] I’m not terribly optimistic,” Alan Shaffer, deputy under secretary of defense for acquisition and sustainment, said in February 2019. This report outlines the ways in which the Trump administration’s nuclear strategy is unnecessary, unsustainable, and unsafe. It describes three realistic options to reduce spending on nuclear weapons while still maintaining a devastating nuclear deterrent. Scores of billions of dollars could be saved or redirected to higher priorities by eliminating, delaying, or scaling back the administration’s proposals for new delivery systems, warheads, and infrastructure.
- Topic:
- Nuclear Weapons, Treaties and Agreements, International Security, Nonproliferation, Denuclearization, and Arms Race
- Political Geography:
- Russia and United States
93. All the World is Staged
- Author:
- Jack O Nassetta and Ethan P. Fecht
- Publication Date:
- 09-2018
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies
- Abstract:
- Though much of the scrutiny into foreign interference in US political debates focuses on long-term election operations, foreign actors have now turned to social media to conduct short-term tactical operations. These operations aim to affect American attitudes toward specific US foreign and military policy, and ultimately affect the policy itself. In recent years, state actors and loosely affiliated patriotic operators have inorganically inserted themselves into the political discussion surrounding US intervention in Syria following the use of chemical weapons. Through continually evolving techniques, these “synthetic actors” are likely the main driving force behind shaping the character of the counternarrative discussion surrounding the use of chemical weapons in Syria. “All the World is Staged: An Analysis of Social Media Influence Operations against US Counterproliferation Efforts in Syria,” CNS Occasional Paper #37, seeks to analyze the tradecraft, trends, themes, and possible effects of disinformation produced by suspected synthetic actors (i.e., bots, trolls, and cyborgs) on Twitter concerning chemical weapons use in Syria. Although it is highly likely these synthetic actors exist on other social media platforms as well, this analysis focuses exclusively on Twitter, since the open nature of the platform allows for study without special access. Furthermore, we aim to improve public and academic awareness of foreign, inorganic disinformation efforts against our domestic decision-making processes. We hope that this text contributes to the efforts to prevent the erosion of the integrity of the political conversations that matter most. It concludes with salient recommendations for both policy makers and social network companies, focusing on how they can prevent synthetic actors from abusing their platforms for influence operations.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Arms Control and Proliferation, Military Strategy, and Nonproliferation
- Political Geography:
- Middle East, Syria, North America, and United States of America
94. Is the World on the Road to Peace or War?
- Author:
- Hans Blix
- Publication Date:
- 10-2018
- Content Type:
- Commentary and Analysis
- Institution:
- Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI)
- Abstract:
- The SIPRI Lecture is an annual event focusing on major themes in peace and security. The event provides a platform for prominent global thought leaders sharing the values underpinning SIPRI, its research and other activities. The inaugural SIPRI Lecture was held in May 2018 on the theme ‘Is the world on the road to peace or war?’ in the presence of His Majesty Carl XVI Gustaf and Her Majesty Queen Silvia of Sweden. The lecture honoured HE Dr Hans Blix and his lifelong career of distinguished public service dedicated to peace, disarmament, non-proliferation and conflict resolution and was followed by a distinguished panel discussion.
- Topic:
- Arms Control and Proliferation, War, Nuclear Power, Disarmament, Nonproliferation, and Peace
- Political Geography:
- Europe and Sweden
95. Reducing Nuclear Weapons Risks: A Menu of 11 Policy Options
- Author:
- Sico van der Meer
- Publication Date:
- 06-2018
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Clingendael Netherlands Institute of International Relations
- Abstract:
- As long as nuclear weapons exist, efforts should be made to prevent them from being used. Especially during the Cold War much thought was given to measures to prevent a nuclear war – on purpose or by accident. Considering the recent increase in the status of nuclear weapons in strategic communications, military spending, and political rhetoric in many of the nine states possessing nuclear weapons, it is worth reviewing the possibilities of such risk-reduction options. In this policy brief author Sico van der Meer identifies eleven categories of policy options which might be implemented by any of the nuclear weapon states to further reduce the risks of nuclear weapons being used. It also offers a brief exploration of the venues that could be used to discuss and implement any of the risk reduction policies identified here.
- Topic:
- Conflict Prevention, Cold War, Nuclear Weapons, and Nonproliferation
- Political Geography:
- Global Focus
96. Perils of Lethal Autonomous Weapons Systems Proliferation: Preventing Non-State Acquisition
- Author:
- Philip Chartoff
- Publication Date:
- 10-2018
- Content Type:
- Commentary and Analysis
- Institution:
- The Geneva Centre for Security Policy
- Abstract:
- Throughout the late 90s, Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda allegedly made numerous attempts to acquire nuclear material from illicit actors. Starting in 2004, Hezbollah has been deploying Iranian-made, military-grade drones for surveillance and engagement. Terrorist groups, illicit organisations, and other non-state actors have a long fascination with advanced weapons technologies. In the early 90s, the Japanese death cult Aum Shinrikyo pursued multiple avenues to develop chemical, nuclear and biological weapons, eventually succeeding in the creation and deployment of Sarin gas. Throughout the late 90s, Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda allegedly made numerous attempts to acquire nuclear material from illicit actors. Starting in 2004, Hezbollah has been deploying Iranian-made, military-grade drones for surveillance and engagement. Despite the relative success of less sophisticated weapons, and the substantial expense and difficulty of acquisition for more advanced systems, non-state actors continue to pursue advanced weapons for two significant reasons. For less funded, less powerful non-state actors, advanced weapons substantially increase the scale of the force they can wield against enemies—they promise to “level the playing field”. Advanced weapon systems also offer a significant reputational and symbolic benefit to non-state actors, as the ownership of such weapons confer a status limited to only a handful of powerful nations. States have long recognized these risks, and established numerous arms and export controls to restrict and regulate the transfer of massively destructive weapons. However, international efforts to restrict proliferation of such weapons are currently lagging behind the emergence of new, possibly as-destructive, technologies. In particular, the last few years have marked the rapid development of lethal autonomous weapons systems (LAWS). Considering their potential to escalate conflicts and inflict massive collateral damage, the international community has long been debating necessary restrictions on the implementation of autonomy in weapons systems, even considering a ban on fully-autonomous systems. However, such conversations have largely been limited to state use. The international community has been painfully slow to address the possible acquisition and use of LAWS by non-state actors.
- Topic:
- Non State Actors, Weapons, and Nonproliferation
- Political Geography:
- Global Focus
97. Why We Need New Communication & Conference Processes and How They Could Come About: the Classical Role of this Track-II Initiative
- Author:
- Marc Finaud and Bernd W. Kubbig
- Publication Date:
- 05-2018
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- The Geneva Centre for Security Policy
- Abstract:
- This New Publication Series POLICY FORUM is in addition to the Two Expert Panels conducted at the First NPT PrepCom in Vienna on May 8 and 10, 2017 our second Track II tool. Both aim at presenting, discussing, and disseminating the jointly developed Cooperative Ideas as potential rallying points for the most important actors in the entire Middle East/Gulf. The main goal is to help achieving what is most needed: relaunching New Communication & Conference Processes in the disarmament & non-proliferation area; this is seen as the core element of, ultimately all-inclusive, security arrangements for the region consisting of two centers of gravity relevant for our new, comprehensive approach for the entire Middle East/Gulf.
- Topic:
- Security, Weapons, Disarmament, Nonproliferation, Trade, and Conference
- Political Geography:
- Middle East and Gulf Nations
98. The Future of Nuclear Power in China
- Author:
- Mark Hibbs
- Publication Date:
- 05-2018
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
- Abstract:
- China is on course to lead the world in the deployment of nuclear power technology by 2030. Should it succeed, China will assume global leadership in nuclear technology development, industrial capacity, and nuclear energy governance. The impacts will be strategic and broad, affecting nuclear safety, nuclear security, nonproliferation, energy production, international trade, and climate mitigation. Especially critical is whether China achieves an industrial-scale transition from current nuclear technologies to advanced systems led by fast neutron reactors that recycle large amounts of plutonium fuel.
- Topic:
- Climate Change, Energy Policy, Science and Technology, Governance, Nuclear Power, Nonproliferation, and Industry
- Political Geography:
- China and Asia
99. Avoiding a Nuclear Wild, Wild West in the Middle East
- Author:
- Henry Sokolski
- Publication Date:
- 03-2018
- Content Type:
- Video
- Institution:
- James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies
- Abstract:
- With the recent visit of Saudi Crown Prince, Mohammad bin Salman, there is keen interest in finalizing a civil nuclear cooperative agreement. Trump officials have also said they intend to renew or strike additional civil nuclear deals with Jordan, Egypt, and Turkey. How necessary and economically competitive is nuclear power in the Middle East for desalination and producing electricity compared to non-nuclear alternatives? In the Saudi case, is a Russian, Chinese, or French reactor sale likely? What are the nonproliferation implications of allowing Riyadh to enrich and reprocess, either now or in the future? Speaker: Henry Sokolski, Executive Director of the Nonproliferation Policy Education Center, and Former Deputy for Nonproliferation Policy in the Cheney Pentagon.
- Topic:
- Arms Control and Proliferation, Nuclear Weapons, Nuclear Power, and Nonproliferation
- Political Geography:
- United States and Global Focus
100. Alternative East Asian Nuclear Futures, Volume I: Military Scenarios
- Author:
- Henry D. Sokolski
- Publication Date:
- 06-2018
- Content Type:
- Book
- Institution:
- Nonproliferation Policy Education Center
- Abstract:
- The 13 chapters contained in this book’s two volumes were prompt-ed by a single inquiry in 2012 from the MacArthur Foundation. Was there any way, I was asked, to further clarify the economic and nonproliferation downsides if further production of civilian pluto-nium proceeded in East Asia? My initial reply was no. So much already had been done.But the more I thought about it, two things that had yet to be at-tempted emerged. The first was any serious analysis of just how bad things could get militarily if Japan and South Korea acquired nuclear weapons and North Korea and Mainland China ramped up their own production of such arms. Such nuclear proliferation had long been assumed to be undesirable but nobody had specified how such proliferation might play out militarily. Second, no serious consideration had yet been given to how East Asia might be able to prosper economically without a massive buildup of civilian nucle-ar power. Since each of the key nations in East Asia—China, the Koreas, and Japan—all would likely exploit their civilian nuclear energy infrastructure to acquire their first bombs or to make more, such inattention seemed odd.
- Topic:
- Arms Control and Proliferation, Nuclear Weapons, Science and Technology, Military Affairs, Nuclear Power, and Nonproliferation
- Political Geography:
- United States, Japan, China, North Korea, and Global Focus