Monday 1 February 2016

RUSSIA

Between them, the United States and Russia still hold over 95% of the world's nuclear weapons. Reducing these stockpiles helps increase global stability, builds the international non-proliferation regime and reduces the chances that nuclear materials will fall into the hands of terrorists. Following is analysis and opinion from Ploughshares Fund staff, grantees and guests on the ongoing efforts to reduce nuclear weapons stockpiles in the US and Russia.
Russia, US and Nuclear
“The horror and reactions to the Paris massacre have overshadowed a troubling new twist in the US-Russian rivalry that could prove even more terrifying,” warns Joe Cirincione in the Huffington Post. “Russian state media recently ‘accidentally’ revealed plans for a bizarre new nuclear...

On Nuclear Disarmament, White House Disappoints

U.S.-Russia Arms Control More Important During Times of Crisis

Browsing the headlines, the world looks a dangerous place. Boko Haram is bombing its way across Nigeria, civil war in Syria, transnational terrorism and more. But the biggest danger is conspicuously absent from the headlines: the world’s 17,000 nuclear weapons.
As the P5+1 negotiations with Iran continue, there are grounds for optimism that an agreement can be reached by the July 20th deadline. A deal would be a significant achievement in the ongoing battle against the proliferation of nuclear weapons.
But this raises the question: what about the rest of the world’s nuclear weapons?

Congress Provides Space for Negotiations with Iran

As the world explores the feasibility of Russia's proposal to remove chemical weapons from Syria, Ploughshares Fund experts are being called upon by the media to explain what such an effort would entail and...
surprise proposal by Russia offered a solution to the crisis in Syria that would also achieve a longstanding goal of the non-proliferation community: the elimination of Syria’s chemical weapons program. The Russian proposal would move all Syrian chemical weapons into international custody for safe keeping and eventual dismantlement. It’s a sound policy idea – the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons has roughly two decades of experience in verifying deals just like this. And so far, political responses seem to be encouraging. Below is a summary of responses to the proposal.*
As talk of strikes on Syria continues, the media has started to examine the impact military action in Syria might have on the United States foreign policy goals, most notably on
Eisenhower wanted it; Kennedy almost got it; Clinton negotiated it; and now Obama can deliver it.  It is the longest-sought, hardest-fought for goal in the history of nuclear arms control: a global ban on nuclear weapons tests.

No comments:

Post a Comment