This book analyzes the evolution and implementation of the US doctrine on the use of military means against new nuclear adversaries

This book analyzes the evolution and implementation of the US doctrine on the use of military means against new nuclear adversaries

The Pentagon's ongoing review of U.S. nuclear strategy has raised significant concerns among experts, particularly regarding the potential blurring of lines between conventional and nuclear forces. Joe Cirincione, a prominent nuclear policy expert, has warned that the Department of Defense's current strategy review, led by Undersecretary of Defense (Policy) Elbridge Colby, could lower the threshold for nuclear conflict and increase the likelihood of nuclear escalation. The review aims to expand military options for President Donald Trump, including the development and deployment of lower-yield tactical nuclear weapons designed for regional use rather than strategic attacks on entire nations. Critics argue that such weapons would not remain localized in conflict, as demonstrated by numerous war games where tactical nuclear use rapidly escalated into global nuclear war. Cirincione highlighted that AI-driven war simulations show a 95% escalation rate to global conflict when tactical nuclear weapons are involved. He also questioned the rationale behind expanding nuclear options, noting that U.S. allies' concerns stem more from the behavior of an 'erratic, authoritarian president' than from a lack of weapons. The Trump administration's push for tactical nuclear weapons aligns with similar moves by Russia under Vladimir Putin, who has already lowered the nuclear threshold and frequently threatened Western nations since the Ukraine invasion. Analysts warn that the convergence of these policies from the world's two largest nuclear powers creates a dangerously precarious global security environment. The debate underscores the ongoing tension between military strategists advocating for expanded nuclear options and experts warning of the catastrophic consequences of any nuclear engagement. With the Pentagon's strategy review still underway, the implications for global stability remain a critical concern for international security experts.

Russia’s Poseidon weapon challenges traditional nuclear deterrence by moving strategic warfare into the deep ocean beyond missile defenses.

Buy Print

Promising to “unlock (Canada’s) full potential as an energy superpower,” the federal government unveiled its new Nuclear Energy Strategy on Monday.

YouTube video by #DogShirtTV

Cognitive biases can systematically distort judgments about the use of nuclear weapons, potentially undermining nuclear stability and increasing the risk of nuclear war. In survey experiments with…

The Roundtable essay discussed is “What Good Is a Nuclear Threshold Capability? Lessons from Iran’s Nuclear Program and Recent Regional Conflict.” YouTube · Spotify · Apple Podcasts · Amazon Music  …

Buy Print

Many of the leaders of new nuclear powers sit atop regimes that are personalistic in nature, and thus less constrained by institutions or public opinion than more democratic regimes. Such…

Emerging technologies possess the potential to transform military competition and the international system in an uncertain, potentially destabilizing fashion. Are there ways to capture the benefits…

Can conventional military success lead to coercive success in a nuclear crisis? Some scholars argue that achieving limited conventional success can be used to coerce nuclear adversaries. Others argue ...

India's evolving counterforce capabilities are reshaping nuclear deterrence and raising new concerns for South Asian stability.

India’s expanding nuclear arsenal and modernization challenge its minimum deterrence doctrine, raising regional concerns.

Nuclear deterrence remains central to strategic stability despite emerging technologies reshaping modern warfare dynamics.