Search

The article reports on the adjustment of the "Doomsday Clock," which symbolically counts minutes to nuclear doomsday, hosted by "The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists" in the U.S. in 2010. The setting back of the time by a minute was assigned largely to the wise leadership of President Barack Obama in the arena of nuclear-arms-control. The journal boasts that the alteration of "Doomsday Clock" is made in consultation with many Nobel laureates.

The article criticizes Barack Obama's No First Use (NFU) nuclear-weapons policy and opines that U.S. nuclear ambiguity helps in determent of war and escalation of conflicts and that such a policy would remove the fear of U.S. nuclear retaliation from the minds of would-be aggressors.

The article suggests complementary steps for Russian President Vladimir Putin's nuclear intimidation campaign which includes studying Russia's nuclear developments, effects of nuclear weapons on Moscow, and rebuilding nuclear forces.

The article informs about the debate revolved around the US nuclear modernization against nuclear deterrence involving nuclear reductions, rejection of new US nuclear capabilities and removing modernization programs. This has however become essential owing to Russia and China's reliance on nuclear weapons to support expansionist foreign policies, coercive nuclear threats in Russia's nuclear policy and change in deterrence requirements according to the threat.

The article presents the author's views on a nuclear agreement between the United States and the Soviet Union called Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD), adding that Russian president Vladimir Putin's nuclear moves are becoming more dangerous and that the U.S. should change its policies accordingly.

The article focuses on the violation of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty concluded under the administration of the former U.S. President Ronald Reagan by Russia. It mentions that Russian tested ground-launched cruise missile, called the R-500, or the Iskander-K, which is in the prohibited range. It mentions that the treaty prohibits the development testing, possession, and deployment of INF-range missiles and presents views of several U.S. Senators including Sam Nunn.

The article discusses the debate on the prospective role of deterrence in the issue regarding Iran's plan to pursue a nuclear-weapons capability and develop and deploy long-range ballistic missiles. One side of the debate asserts the rationality of Iranian leaders while the other side believes that these leaders are not rational when it comes to the use of nuclear weapons. The article hopes that Iran will be reliably deterrable or that they will decide to forgo nuclear weapons.

The author comments on the immediacy of Iranian nuclear and missile proliferation and the looming security crisis in the Middle East. He cites a November 2011 report from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) which confirmed Iran's nuclear weapons program including a nuclear warhead for its Shahab-3 ballistic missile. He discusses the threat posed by Iran's growing missile arsenal on the international community.

The article discusses the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT), which was first presented by then President Bill Clinton to the U.S. Senate in 1999. The administration of President Barack Obama is beginning to promote the ratification of CTBT, which it supporters say would be instrumental in convincing the international community to support the U.S. in its campaign for nuclear nonproliferation. Since the U.S. halted nuclear testing in 1992, China, France and India continued doing nuclear tests.

The author alleges that under the new Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START), only the U.S. will be required to actually reduce nuclear weapons. He calculates that Russia could actually increase its strategic launchers from 521 to the New START's ceiling of 700 while the U.S. needs to reduce its 1,537 warheads. The author also mentions that U.S. President Barack Obama promised that the new START will reduce U.S. and Russian strategic nuclear warheads by 30 percent.

The article ponders on an issue related to the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) between the U.S. and Russia in January 2011. The U.S. Senate passed the treaty while the Russian Duma is still in the process of approving it. In line with the New START Treaty, the administration of U.S. President Barack Obama has started to discuss to the public its arms-control agenda.

The article discusses the legitimate concerns regarding the New nuclear arms reduction treaty (START) of the U.S. with Russia. Resistance to the New START Treaty is seeing some opposition from the misdirection and mischaracterization to the treaty by senior administration members and commentators. The White House fact sheet on New START assured that the Treaty does not have any constraints on testing, development or deployment of U.S. long-range conventional strike capabilities.

The article reports on the proposal of the administration of U.S. President Barack Obama to rush the ratification of the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START), before the ten Democrats who lost their seats give way to their successors in January 2011. According to the author, the claim that the New START needs to begin the procedure for verification, contradicts the administration's statement that Russia is not a military threat. The author cites that the verification process does not cover the monitoring of Russian missiles.

The article comments on the efforts of U.S. President Barack Obama to ban nuclear weapons called "nuclear zero." The author thinks that such decision will not work because not all nations are wiling to give up their nuclear weapons. He adds that it will also degrade the country's ability to protect its allies thus causing them to seek nuclear weapons themselves.