• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • Non-Nuclear U.S. Means a Bleak Future for World Stability

    “Nuclear weapons will continue to serve critical foreign- and defense-policy objectives,” write Bradley Thayer and Thomas Skypek in their recent op-ed. Since the end of the Cold War, U.S. nuclear weapons have contributed to global stability and prevented attacks on U.S. homeland and its allies. The White House now thinks … More

    Move Toward a Minimal Deterrence Posture Dangerous

    The “Obama proposal for force reduction is foolhardy,” writes Bradley Thayer, professor of political science at Baylor University, in his recent commentary. His post is a reaction to the White House’s effort to unilaterally reduce the number of U.S. operationally deployed nuclear warheads to as low as 300. The decision … More

    Russian Elections Did Not Bring a Surprise--but Now What?

    A recent Heritage event analyzed Russia’s presidential election and Prime Minister Vladimir Putin’s return to the presidency. The election was held in the aftermath of mass protests against Russian leadership’s corruption and disregard for the rule of law. According to David Kramer, President of Freedom House, Putin already lost in … More

    New START’s Fallout Keeps Failing to Make the U.S. Safer

    According to Rebeccah Heinrichs, an adjunct fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, President Obama’s fiscal year 2013 budget request reveals that “that the president has utterly failed to make good on his promises” on nuclear modernization and missile defense. During the ratification debate on the New Strategic Arms … More

    Nuclear Reductions Should Not Be Driven by Numbers

    “There are very solid grounds for re-evaluating our nuclear force structure,” writes Major General Paul Monroe (Ret.) in his recent Politico op-ed. He comes out in support of the recent nuclear reductions announced by the White House, which is contemplating options to go to as low as 300 operationally deployed … More

    Reducing Nuclear Arsenal Would Shift U.S. Target Options

    President Obama wants to reduce the nuclear arsenal to as little as 300 warheads. While this might seem like a lot, the targeting list is evolving more rapidly than at any point in history. The United States has more enemies than ever before and provides nuclear security guarantees to more … More

    Not a Good Time for U.S. Unilateral Reductions

    Does the United States need fewer nuclear weapons? The White House thinks so. According to the recent reports, the Administration directed the Pentagon to develop three force levels for the U.S. arsenal of deployed strategic nuclear warheads. The Pentagon is looking at numbers from 1,100 to 300 operationally deployed warheads. … More

    New START: Been There, Threatened That

    Yet again, the Russians are working to strengthen their position prior to NATO’s Chicago summit coming up in May. Mikhail Ulyanov, director of the Security and Disarmament Department at the Foreign Ministry, stated that Russia’s withdrawal from the New Strategic Reductions Treaty (New START) “cannot be excluded.” Moscow primarily objects … More

    Cutting the Nuclear Arsenal Even Further

    Representative Edward Markey (D–MA) has grave misconceptions regarding contributions that nuclear weapons make to the U.S. and allied national security. On Wednesday, he introduced a bill that would cut $100 billion in nuclear weapons programs. This bill is co-sponsored by 34 other Representatives. Not only would such cuts be disastrous … More

    No Transparency Regarding Russia’s Strategic Buildup

    In the New Strategic Arm Reductions Treaty (New START), the United States agreed to a weak verification regime. An indication of this is that U.S. negotiators agreed to degrade the telemetry regime in the original START from verification to a transparency measure. Under New START, each party is required to … More