How Biden and Putin can work together to limit nuclear arms
The American and Russian presidents can use this week’s summit to start a new era of strategic dialogue.
The American and Russian presidents can use this week’s summit to start a new era of strategic dialogue.
The president is going full speed ahead on beefing up the triad and expensive modernization — despite cries from his own party.
These lawmakers represent states with a direct interest in pouring billions into modernizing and building new weapons.
The panel with no diversity of views was meant to reinforce a forgone conclusion: more money for more weapons.
A new report found that military spending around the world got a boost last year despite floundering economies due to COVID-19.
What’s clear from their overheated rhetoric is they desperately want there to be an arms race. To what end, we can only imagine.
A focus on denuclearization didn’t work with China and it won’t work with North Korea.
A new treaty to ban nuclear weapons directly responds to a previous treaty whose parties have failed to live up to their commitments.
Despite public support, 21 years ago this month, the US Senate failed to ratify the CTBT, making the world more dangerous today than it needs to be.
While the administration withdraws from key treaties, the Pentagon is expediting new missile contracts for their friends Raytheon and Northrop Grumman.
A recent New York Times story hyping a supposed ‘nuclear buildup’ in China sends the wrong messages and ignores what China is actually up to.
As bad as withdrawing from Open Skies is, this moment could yet prove to be an opportunity to confront more directly the misguided ideology of ‘America First.’
It is tempting to think that it would be cheaper and more effective to have U.S. allies get the bomb rather than link their security to U.S. forces, bases, and assurances. But countries do not obtain the bomb in a vacuum.
If a restrained U.S. foreign policy means pulling back on security commitments around the world, might that result in nuclear weapons proliferation? And is that a bad thing?
A new report finds that the Trump administration has increased the global nuclear threat through policy failures and mismanagement.
The United States is about to embark on a plan to spend more than $1 trillion on nuclear weapons when the threats we face are climate change, pandemic, and economic upheaval.
In some ways the COVID-19 pandemic is but a dress rehearsal for climate change, and the world has been granted a golden opportunity to change its ways before the worst is upon us.
Now is probably not the best time for the Defense Secretary to be tweeting about how nuclear weapons development is the Trump administration’s top priority.
With the Trump administration’s ‘maximum pressure’ campaign failing, its next step is to compel the reimposition of UN-mandated sanctions.
The Trump administration should extend New START and engage China on a parallel track regarding strategic stability and risk reduction measures.
Cutting the Pentagon budget requires a multi-pronged approach that includes reform on anti-corruption, democracy, and campaign finance.