Sign in for registered users
... for conflict. Timofeev then discussed the notion of a second-strike capability, giving a few scenarios of a localized use of nuclear weapons. Following the presentations, audience members were given an opportunity to ask questions to and engage in informal ... ..., experts went beyond the theoretical framework by illustrating their concepts of warfare with contemporary cases. Video, In Russian
... step toward the elimination of nuclear weaponry? And should French, UK, Chinese, Indian, Pakistani, and undeclared Israeli nuclear weapons systems be taken into account? How will these countries, plus North Korea and others, respond to the U.S. and Russian conventional and nuclear weapons buildup? And would they necessarily respond positively to U.S-Russian nuclear reductions? Missile Defenses Pavel Sharikov: How to Make Russia-U.S. Relations Great Again? In 2002, the George W. Bush administration unilaterally dropped ...
Authors: Des Browne, Wolfgang Ischinger, Igor S. Ivanov, Sam Nunn Dear President Putin and President Trump, The chasm between Russia and the West appears to be wider now than at any point since the Cold War. In the absence of new initiatives, the knot of distrust is being tightened, choking off the ability of governments to discuss, let alone advance, steps essential for improving ...
... hand in the field of missile defense, where the U.S. holds the lead. Diametrically opposite views on nuclear deterrence is a sign of general confusion—not only among U.S. strategists but also world elites. Another reason to think about a new role of nuclear weapons is the hubbub over Russia’s “nuclear threats,” which has become an important part of the political propaganda war that has been underway since the end of the last decade and has intensified after Russia had moved to halt the expansion of Western alliances in Crimea ...
... transformation of the post-war system of international relations, with its main pillars being destroyed and new ones being erected. In this sense, the INF Treaty may no longer be necessary or relevant. Cons Dmitry Stefanovich: Global Development and Nuclear Weapons No matter how reasonable the abolition of the INF Treaty might seem, it may lead to some negative consequences. First, it is unlikely that the U.S.A. will stay committed to the Treaty if Russia quits it. In this case, there will be no bars for the U.S.A. from developing and deploying new intermediate-range missiles in Europe. As a result, we will find ourselves in a situation similar to that of 1983, when the need for the INF Treaty emerged....
... force based on armaments which we would like to reduce but can’t throw away for one reason or another, impresses with its boldness and deserves a discussion, despite the obvious (next to impossible) complexity of its implementation. The pacifying of Russian-U.S. relations and the interest of third countries in being included in such a system, indeed, can lead to a subsequent "U-turn" in the proliferation of nuclear weapons. It seems useful to try to identify specific nuclear weapons systems that may be put under joint command without serious damage to the existing strategic stability. Based on the original idea, we can distinguish two characteristics of ...
... offered was the need to decommission the older B53 bomb), and it is how they will end up getting the B61-12 guided nuclear bomb in the near future. The primary danger of the aforementioned munitions is that they increase the probability of tactical nuclear weapons being used in a local conflict; the W76 modernization effort, for its part, is certainly aimed at boosting the capability of U.S. strategic nuclear forces in a potential conflict with Russia or China. Indeed, it would be surprising if the United States was not taking measures in this field, too. On the other hand, there is no reason to succumb to panic. It is true that Kristensen is one of the world’s leading experts on nuclear weapons....
... thinking, and to a legitimate realist reticence about big ideas: they could be dangerous delusions and diversions. Piecemeal detente thinking became once again the status quo. EPA/MIKE NELSON/Vostock Photo Dmitry Stefanovich: Global Development and Nuclear Weapons Now we have Trump. Which means the danger now is not from large ideas, but that we will remain stuck again in piecemeal detente thinking. In the course of rightly cautioning against expectations of an easy Russia-America reconciliation under Trump, experts have reverted to counseling a focus on detente. The cautionary diagnosis is right; the cure wrong. Otherwise put, it is right to continue working on detente, wrong to focus on it primarily or exclusively....
The U.S.-based Nuclear Threat Initiative (NTI) and the Moscow-based Center for Energy and Security Studies (CENESS) launched a new joint report on the future of U.S.-Russian nuclear cooperation The U.S.-based Nuclear Threat Initiative ( NTI ) and the Moscow-based Center for Energy and Security Studies ( CENESS ) launched a new joint report on the future of U.S.-Russian nuclear cooperation. The report includes 51 ...
NTI Report Russia and the West are at a dangerous crossroads. During the past several years, we have been in a state of escalating tension, trapped in a downward spiral of antagonism and distrust. With our militaries moving closer—in the skies over the Baltic ...
| U.S. wants to establish partnership relations with Russia on condition that it meets the U.S. requirements |
|
| U.S. wants to deter Russia’s military and political activity |
|
| U.S. wants to dissolve Russia |
|
| U.S. wants to establish alliance relations with Russia under the US conditions to rival China |
|
