NATO can and should reduce its reliance on nuclear weapons. First, President Obama with his April 2009 Prague speech has changed the way in which nuclear deterrence is discussed in many NATO member states.
2010
“NATO’s Deterrence Posture & Turkish Security” Seminar Held at USAK
This roundtable meeting, jointly organized by the Arms Control Association, the British American Security Information Council, the Institute for Peace Research and Security Policy Hamburg, International Strategic Research Organization, aimed to evaluate the role that deterrence and nuclear weapons play in Turkey's security policy and NATO's defense posture.
Read more:
A Progressive Nuclear Policy: Rethinking Continuous-at-sea deterrence
The United Kingdom has maintained unbroken nuclear weapons patrols since 1968. The rationale for this doctrine of continuous deterrence has been based on several pillars that are irrelevant in today’s environment. Rather than an absolute need for continuous deterrent, there is instead a great opportunity for Britain to take the lead as the most progressive of the nuclear weapons states by reducing the readiness and size of its
strategic force. Article originally published in RUSI Journal, Vol. 155, No. 2.
Please select the PDF icon below to read the full article.
Trident expected to be delayed until after next UK general election
Britain's Liberal Democrat armed forces minister, Nick Harvey, indicates that the final decision on the replacement of Trident will be delayed until October 2015 – after the next general election. This would allow the Liberal Democrats and their Conservative coalition partners to do battle over the future of the submarine nuclear missile system in the election campaign.
www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/sep/22/trident-decision-delay-expected-2015.
Nuclear Security after the Washington Summit
The Washington summit on nuclear security delivered some positive outcomes. But it is imperative that states do not now become complacent; there is much still left to do to ensure that nuclear weapons and material do not fall into the wrong hands. The ultimate gauge of the summit’s success will be whether actions now follow words. Published originally in the RUSI Journal, June/July 2010, Vol. 155, No. 3.
To view the entire article, please select “Full article (PDF)” below.
Dropping nuclear submarine policy has benefits
Paul Ingram wrote the lead letter in the Financial Times, arguing that “there are in fact substantial financial benefits” to ending the requirement that the United Kingdom maintain a nuclear submarine at sea at all times. “Not only would the current running costs be reduced, but so too would the total substantial capital costs…”
Read the full letter on the website of the Financial Times:
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/afb28048-c056-11df-8a81-00144feab49a.html
Update on New START in The Cable
Senator John Kerry, Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, has distributed a “discussion draft” of the New START Treaty Resolution of Advice and Consent to Ratification. An article in The Cable reviews reaction to the draft and related political developments in Washington.
To read the article, visit:
Scott Brown and the bombs in the basement
“Unfortunately, the nuclear capability of Israel goes unmentioned in his article, highlighting the Arab contention that the West is guilty of double standards by shielding Israel but punishing Iran.”
Excerpt from article by BASIC Program Director Anne Penketh, written for The Hill’s Congress Blog.
Read the full article: