The Nuclear Crisis Group has identified four major flashpoints where the risks of nuclear conflict are extraordinarily high. Detailed action plans have been developed to address each flashpoint that would dramatically lower these risks as we work to eliminate these weapons worldwide. You can explore each of these nuclear flashpoints — and a menu of politically viable solutions — below.
The Korean peninsula has emerged as an epicenter of nuclear tensions.
North Korea’s nuclear program has accelerated in recent years, and the increasing frequency of tests—as well as the extravagant threats traded by US and North Korean leaders— stoked fears across the region and beyond.
The April 27, 2018 meeting of the South and North Korean leaders at Panmunjom offered hope of a solution to the conflict that tore the region in two seven decades ago. However, ongoing intelligence assessments, and the statements of Kim Jong Un himself, suggest that North Korea’s nuclear ambitions have not been laid to rest by this latest round of diplomacy.
In a new report released on Tuesday, Global Zero’s Dr. Bruce Blair, a former Air Force launch control officer who’s a nuclear security expert at Princeton University, argues that the United States’ nuclear stance is a “vestige of the Cold War” that creates instability with an unnecessarily hefty price tag.
Nuclear Crisis Group Director Jon Wolfsthal: “It could be possible that they’re going to give some of it up, but it’s not going to happen in the blink of an eye.”
Nuclear Crisis Group member Hon. Thomas Countryman: “I do not believe it would be possible to verify full dismantlement within a year, nor have I yet seen evidence of a firm DPRK decision to undertake full dismantlement.”
U.S. spy agencies are seeing signs that North Korea is constructing new missiles at a factory that produced the country’s first intercontinental ballistic missiles capable of reaching the United States, according to officials familiar with the intelligence.
Tensions between North Korea and the US have escalated during Donald Trump’s presidency, with threatening tweets and talk about the size of each country’s nuclear “button.” But what would happen if North Korea actually decided to follow through on its threat and launch a nuke?
India and Pakistan remain embroiled in a territorial dispute over Kashmir that has lasted nearly seven decades.
The relatively recent acquisition of nuclear weapons by both countries has raised the stakes further, and territorial disputes between China and India have added an additional level of complexity to the region’s political situation.
Most incidents take place across the Line of Control, established in 1972 as a provisional border between India- and Pakistan-controlled areas of the region. Attacks by militant groups, which India alleges have been trained by Pakistan, are an additional driver of conflict.
India’s longest-range ballistic missile, Agni-V, will be inducted into the nuclear arsenal very soon, according to official sources.
When America and the Soviet Union developed anti-missile systems in the 1960s, the opposing superpower either built more missiles, or increased the number of [nuclear] warheads on existing missiles, to saturate enemy defenses.
Shirin Mazari, a prominent Islamabad-based scholar under consideration for appointment as Pakistan’s next defence minister by soon-to-be prime minister Imran Khan, publicly advocated nuclear strikes on Indian population centres in the event of war between the two countries, a review of her work by Firstpost has revealed.
In recent years, China has worked to cement its influence in the South and East China seas, including its claims on the Spratly and Senkaku/Diaoyu islands, constructing artificial islands and conducting high-profile military exercises in both areas. However, these claims are contested by several other states in the region, and United States policy supports maintaining the international status of both areas.
In a new report released on Tuesday, Global Zero’s Dr. Bruce Blair, a former Air Force launch control officer who’s a nuclear security expert at Princeton University, argues that the United States’ nuclear stance is a “vestige of the Cold War” that creates instability with an unnecessarily hefty price tag.
China is pushing ahead with modernising its nuclear weapon delivery systems and has added to its arsenal as it boosts military expenditure, according to a report released by an independent think tank on Monday.
Southeast Asia and China have agreed on a working text to continue long drawn-out negotiations over a code of conduct in the disputed South China sea, with officials on Thursday lauding it as a “milestone” and “great progress.”
In a “technological breakthrough,” China has successfully tested its first wave rider hypersonic aircraft that can carry nuclear warheads and break through any current generation anti-missile defence system due to its high speed and “unpredictable trajectory.”
Tensions between NATO member states and Russia have been elevated since the beginning of the conflict of Ukraine in 2014, but Russia’s current drive to modernize and expand its military capabilities dates back to the beginning of President Putin’s first term, nearly two decades ago.
Allegations that Russia has violated the Intermediate Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty have further inflamed tensions and prompted similar accusations of US misconduct. Both sides have been hedging against possible future conflict with new technological capabilities, large-scale military exercises, and troop build-ups in border regions.
The future of the New START treaty, a US-Russia treaty which expires in 2021 and can be extended for five additional years, remains uncertain.
With the INF Treaty on the scrap heap, there’s no legal or political framework for limiting the proliferation of nuclear weapons in the arsenals of world’s leading atomic powers.
President Donald Trump revealed Saturday the United States intends to withdraw from a 31-year-old nuclear weapons agreement with Russia, delivering a severe blow to the arms control regime that helped preserve peace since the Cold War.
“The US has started to brief allies with the possibility of withdrawal. But I don’t believe there has been any kind of interagency process in the administration,” said Jon Wolfsthal, a former senior director for non-proliferation and arms control at the NSC.
Jon Wolfsthal, a nuclear expert on the National Security Council during the Obama administration, said a withdrawal would roil Europe.
“Things are just now calming down,” he said. “This would be another hand grenade in the middle of NATO to split the allies.”
In a new report released on Tuesday, Global Zero’s Dr. Bruce Blair, a former Air Force launch control officer who’s a nuclear security expert at Princeton University, argues that the United States’ nuclear stance is a “vestige of the Cold War” that creates instability with an unnecessarily hefty price tag.