The Pentagon’s plans to acquire a new nuclear air-launched cruise missile (ALCM), known so far as the Long-Range Standoff Weapon (LRSO), remain live. On 16th June, the House of Representatives rejected an amendment to reduce funding for the development of the LRSO. If adopted, the cut would have slowed the development of the new weapon by three years, perhaps buying enough time to reconsider the wisdom behind the programme.
Report: Beyond the Ban: The humanitarian initiative of nuclear disarmament and advocacy of no-first-use nuclear doctrines
Deep dissatisfaction with the lack of progress in multilateral nuclear disarmament has led a large number of states within the international community to participate in a process to highlight the humanitarian impacts of nuclear weapons.
Understanding the New Arms Race
The stand-off between Russia and the West has prompted triggered fears of a renewed East-West. Amidst this climate of confrontation, nuclear weapons have regained some relevance for strategists on both sides, and political leaders have implied veiled nuclear threats.
2016 OEWG: Polarisation in Perspective
Discussions about the feasibility and necessity of a legal ban on nuclear weapons took centre stage at the first session of the United Nation’s Open-Ended Working Group on taking forward multilateral nuclear disarmament.
From Munich to Warsaw: NATO rethinks deterrence
The Munich Security Conference is possibly the biggest annual event in the calendar for global elites talking strategic security and stability. This year’s shindig confirmed that the myriad of challenges facing the world is as complex as ever. One issue in particular was vexing delegates: the confrontation between the West and Russia and its implications for NATO’s eastern flank.
America needs the LRSO… just in case
Lord Salisbury said once that if generals were left to their own devices, they might well decide to put garrisons on the Moon to defend us from Mars. Envisioning worst-case scenarios and drawing up contingency plans for them is part of what the military does to get its job right. The problem with this professional reflex is that it often fails to assess comparative risk effectively, and in particular fully account for the risks of unintended consequences or the impacts on others. When it comes to nuclear policy and procurement decisions, the temptation for overkill is high.