Proposals to significantly reduce or even abolish nuclear weapons are as old as nuclear weapons themselves. Over the past several years, however, they have gained considerable momentum and moved squarely into the mainstream of policy analysis and political debate.
Since the end of the Cold War the world has entered a second nuclear age. Unlike the bipolar standoff between the United States and the Soviet Union, this new era is characterized by the proliferation of nuclear weapons to hostile regional powers and unstable regimes, multipolar nuclear competitions with complex escalation dynamics, the blurring of the conventional precision-strike and nuclear regimes, and a growing debate over the merits of nuclear disarmament. Nevertheless, the United States still confronts many of the same challenges it has in the past: how to deter nuclear use against its territory and its allies, limit the spread of nuclear weapons to other nations, and maintain survivable and flexible nuclear forces.
The Obama administration’s support for major reductions in nuclear forces, along with the planned budget reductions, have brought these issues to the forefront of the public debate on defense. Moreover, with each leg of the U.S. nuclear triad facing the end of their projected service lives in the next decade or so, decisions that are being made now will have an enduring impact on American military strategy, capabilities, security relationships and, most importantly, national security. These issues require deliberate and thorough analysis, particularly because near-term choices will have major long-term (and difficult to reverse) consequences.
Since its inception, CSBA has maintained a strong intellectual focus on nuclear issues, conducting in-depth research on topics such as the dynamics of the second nuclear age, the costs of America’s nuclear arsenal, the consequences of nuclear proliferation, and the importance of a credible nuclear deterrent. In the coming months, CSBA will be releasing additional reports on these and other related issues to enhance and inform the public debate and enable policymakers to make sound decisions on matters of strategy, policy, and resource allocation.
Subscribe to this FeedRelated Research
Nuclear-Conventional Firebreaks and the Nuclear Taboo
This study offers insights into the motivations of countries to acquire nuclear weapons, and how those countries view the role of nuclear weapons in their military and national security strategy.
Recent News & Analysis
Why the U.S. Army Needs Missiles: A New Mission to Save the Service
April 22, 2013 • By Jim Thomas • Analysis, Nuclear Strategy & Forces
Traditionally, the core purpose of the U.S. Army has been to fight and win the United States’ wars. Since World War II, this has meant planning for overseas operations to…
Why Obama Should Take Out Iran’s Nuclear Program
November 9, 2011 • By Eric Edelman and Andrew F. Krepinevich • Analysis, Nuclear Strategy & Forces
The Case for Striking Before It’s Too Late The November 8 International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) report casts further doubt on Iran’s continual claims that its nuclear program is intended…
The Dangers of a Nuclear Iran
December 27, 2010 • By Eric Edelman, Andrew F. Krepinevich, and Evan B. Montgomery • Analysis, Nuclear Strategy & Forces
Although finding a peaceful way to preclude Iran from getting nuclear weapons is obviously desirable, Washington will likely have to decide between two unattractive options: pursuing a military strike to…