Two Republican Senators think the United States should protect nuclear weapons outlays at all costs. They're wrong.
The answer is "probably," but prevention via diplomacy is still the best course.
It's good to see further arms control measures on President Obama's agenda.
Why the United States should be realistic about what missile defense can and can't do.
Two common misconceptions about nuclear weapons continue to live on. Here's why they shouldn't.
Assessing Mitt Romney's views on nuclear threat reduction.
Assessing President Obama's first-term record on nuclear threat reduction.
The fallacy of extending deterrence through tactical nuclear weapons.
Despite claiming that nuclear security is its chief concern, the White House is mysteriously scaling back its budget requests for anti-nuclear-terrorism funding.
Fifty years after the Cuban Missile Crisis, new scholarship has put a fresh perspective on how alarmingly close the world came to all-out nuclear war and why the lessons of 1962 are so relevant today.
US congressional Republicans just passed legislation that will hamper implementation of New START as well as the administration's ability to make changes to the US nuclear arsenal. But this isn't a lingering Cold War hangover or an ideological battle. It's pure partisanship.
The National Academy of Sciences just released its exhaustive analysis of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, demonstrating that the treaty would increase security, foster safety, and deter illicit weapons.
As the Obama administration prepares to make critical decisions about the future of the US nuclear arsenal, it would do well to ignore calls to develop new low-yield counterforce options, as they would actually increase the probability of nuclear war and undermine US nonproliferation goals.
With the anniversary of New START's entry into force, it's time for an examination of the treaty's successes, future opportunities, and the hurdles nuclear arms reductions still face.
In a time of economic austerity and national insecurity, US nuclear deterrence must be fundamentally revised.