More sanctions could undermine the Iran deal

The following weeks are likely to be challenging ones, domestically and internationally, for the Obama administration. While the interim deal over the Iranian nuclear programme has been welcomed as a positive first step by many in the international community and in arms control circles, US congressional support has been less full-throated.

Making progress with Iran

After three decades of broken or faltering diplomatic ties between Iran and the West, and a decade of tension over the Iranian nuclear programme, the E3+3 (UK, France, Germany, US, Russia and China – also referred to as the P5+1) and Iran finally made a historic step forward over the weekend.

Gambling with our security?

Our calculations about risk are not always rational. Many people are more afraid of a shark attack or plane crash than they are about driving a car or crossing the street. Statistically, the latter two are far more dangerous but, somehow, the familiarity of driving and a sense of control make the risks feel lower.

UN General Assembly

Repairing and refocusing a fractured nuclear discussion

Saying that nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament are interlinked may seem like a spectacular statement of the obvious. Non-proliferation – that is, preventing the further spread of nuclear weapons – relies heavily on our ability to simultaneously deliver results on disarmament – that is, getting rid of the nuclear weapons that currently exist around the world.

Why diversity matters to the nuclear debate

The public discourse around nuclear weapons policy can be deceptively binary: countries should retain nuclear capabilities or they shouldn’t; nuclear weapons provide security and strategic stability or they don’t. However, it is generally only the tip of the iceberg that makes its way into mainstream debate. In reality, a web of incredibly technical, expert discussion takes place below the surface which defines how substantive nuclear policy decisions are taken.

Syria: lessons for the nuclear debate

The threat of military intervention in Syria in response to alleged chemical weapons use by Bashar Al-Assad’s government was put on hold this past week as U.S. and Russian Foreign Ministers, John Kerry and Sergei Lavrov, negotiated a deal that would see Syria sign up to the U.N. Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) and hand their chemical weapons stockpile over to the international community. As we edge towards a decision, it may be valuable to reflect on the core arguments that have been driving the debate.