North Korea

48164732141 a6a994984e k e1653552606950

Is it a dead-end for US-North Korea talks?

After a lull, will it be a storm again? With the many rounds of formal talks between US officials and their counterparts from the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) remaining fruitless, there are portends of the Korean Peninsula heading back to the pre-Panmunjom days of hostilities and a potential re-run of the Kim Jong-Un regime’s uninhibited display of its military hardware.

Brandenburg Gate

What comes next for U.S. nuclear weapons policy?

This Wednesday, President Obama is slated to give his next big foreign policy speech at the historically significant Brandenburg Gate in Berlin. It was at this Gate – an enduring symbol of both the division and subsequent unity of East and West Berlin – that Ronald Reagan urged then-General Secretary of the Soviet Union, Mikhail Gorbachev, to “tear down this wall” in 1987, and President Clinton spoke of a free and unified Berlin in 1994, following the end of the Cold War.

The P5 discuss disarmament in Geneva

This week, the NPT nuclear weapon states—also the five permanent members of the UN Security Council (P5: United Kingdom, United States, China, France, and Russia) meet in Geneva to reaffirm their commitments to nuclear disarmament and implementing the 2010 NPT Action Plan. The group will meet privately on Thursday, and on Friday will present a statement that will be carried through to the NPT Preparatory Committee meeting (PrepCom), which commences the following Monday, April 22nd.

Op-Ed: David Cameron’s nuclear fantasy land

David Cameron insists we must replace the Trident nuclear weapon system because the future is uncertain. None of us has a crystal ball so we had better keep Trident just in case. He points to the dangerous escalation of tension by the Kim regime in North Korea and Iran’s suspected nuclear weapons programme as justification. All well and good, until you scratch beneath the surface and realise what a highly contingent argument this is for the economic, political, opportunity, and moral costs at stake (yes, moral, because the practice of ‘nuclear deterrence’ rests inescapably on the threat of use – the threat of indiscriminate and catastrophic nuclear violence).