Nuclear Deterrence, Strategic Stability, Missile Defense

Alexander G. Saveliev,

DOI: https://doi.org/10.31278/1810-6439-2023-21-5-20-34

2023-01-01

Rossiya v globalnoi politike

Abstract:Some nuclear-free states believe that only the possession of nuclear weapons ensures real security. In reality, the choice is between solving the security problem by political means and following the path of North Korea, with all the ensuing consequences.

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Deterrence During Disarmament: Deep Nuclear Reductions and International Security

J. Acton

2017-08-25

Abstract:There is a broad sense in both Russia and the United States that deep nuclear reductions-a goal endorsed by both governments-would constitute a risky step into the unknown and could undermine international security. However, until now, the reasons behind these concerns-and whether they are justified-have not been properly explored. Based on a series of interviews with opinion formers in both Russia and the United States, this Adelphi maps out these concerns as they relate to the effectiveness of deterrence (including extended deterrence), the possible incentives to use nuclear weapons first in a crisis, the potential for rearmament and nuclear multipolarity. Contrary to popular belief, there is evidence against which these fears can be assessed. The practical experience of deterrence at low numbers that was acquired by the Soviet Union and the United States early in the Cold War, as well as by other nuclear-armed states, is highly relevant. Based on this experience and insights from deterrence theory, this Adelphi concludes that most of the challenges associated with low numbers are not really a consequence of arsenal size and, accordingly, that there are good reasons to believe that deep reductions would not undermine international security.

Political Science
Nuclear Deterrence in the 21st Century

Dingli Shen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/1475179052000345467

2005-01-01

Defense and Security Analysis

Abstract:The purpose behind this section is to encourage, and sometimes solicit, short commentary and/or comment on timely topics that play a role in shaping current national and international defense and security policies. There is no limit or constraint on what defense and security topics are chosen, so long as they are timely and have policy relevance. By way of guidance, the nearest equivalent would be feature articles in the more reputable broadsheet press.
Nuclear Proliferation and International Security Case Studies of Iran and North Korea

Waheed Jan,Muhammad Fahim Khan,Naila Farooq

DOI: https://doi.org/10.31703/gsssr.2024(ix-iii).02

2024-09-30

Global Strategic & Securities Studies Review

Abstract:The widespread existence of weapons presents a threat, to global security as evidenced by the circumstances involving Iran and North Korea. Both countries pursued nuclear policies, leading to regional and global conflict. Rightly needing peace, Iran’s nuclear energy has faced international skepticism, resulting in sanctions and the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action to Control its Nuclear Activities (JCPOA) but the effectiveness of "the JCPOA remains controversial", worrying Iran to comply according to the law. In contrast, North Korea's nuclear program is growing more military, with many tests of nuclear weapons and missile launches in defiance of UN resolutions. Despite international attempts, including treaties and penalties, North Korea's nuclear development continues to deteriorate, defying global non-proliferation rules. Global security requires better international collaboration, robust verification methods, and long-term transnational solutions.
Defending the United States: Revisiting National Missile Defense against North Korea

Jaganath Sankaran,Steve Fetter

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1162/isec_a_00426

2022-02-25

International Security

Abstract:Abstract North Korea has made significant strides in its attempt to acquire a strategic nuclear deterrent. In 2017, it tested intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) and completed a series of nuclear test explosions. These may provide North Korea with the technical foundation to deploy a nuclear-armed ICBM capable of striking the United States. The Ground-based Midcourse Defense (GMD) missile defense system is intended to deter North Korean nuclear coercion and, if deterrence fails, to defeat a limited North Korean attack. Despite two decades of dedicated and costly efforts, however, the GMD system remains unproven and unreliable. It has not demonstrated an ability to defeat the relatively simple and inexpensive countermeasures that North Korea can field. The GMD system has suffered persistent delays, substantial cost increases, and repeated program failures because of the politically motivated rush to deploy in the 1990s. But GMD and other U.S. missile defense efforts have provoked serious concerns in Russia and China, who fear it may threaten their nuclear deterrents. Diplomacy and deterrence may reassure Russia and China while constraining North Korea's nuclear program. An alternate airborne boost-phase intercept system may offer meaningful defense against North Korean missiles without threatening the Russian or Chinese deterrents.

international relations
Space, Missile Defense, and Nuclear Weapons

Michael E. O’Hanlon

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7591/cornell/9781501754470.003.0005

2021-05-15

Abstract:This chapter delves much deeper into three areas — nuclear weapons, space and satellites, and missile defense. It argues that these are among the subjects in military technology that are both simple enough to be accessible to the generalist, and important and enduring enough that they can be expected to remain relevant for policymakers well into the future. The chapter also discusses the significance of space and its purposes for military activities, noting the basic principles of the national security space subject are grounded in immutable principles of physics. It examines the approach used in the study which suggests a methodology for diving deeper into other key areas of defense technology. Ultimately, the chapter contends that constructing adequate defenses, stable military balances of power, and robust means of national protection is fated to be a very difficult undertaking. To put it bluntly, two opposing countries or blocs of nations with roughly comparable military capabilities are generally not inherently safe from each other.
SECURITY DYNAMIC OF THE STRATEGIC NUCLEAR BALANCE IN SYSTEMS THEORY AND THE CONCEPT OF CENTRES OF GRAVITY

Mario MARINOV,Plamen BOGDANOV

DOI: https://doi.org/10.53477/2668-6511-22-16

2022-02-09

STRATEGIES XXI: The Complex and Dynamic Nature of the Security Environment

Abstract:The general concepts and understandings of the international security environment in the 21st century have become more complex owing to a multitude of factors spanning both traditional and novel security domains. In the current era, nuclear security in particular has continued to exist in its paramount role of importance. The following paper explores the defined state of the “strategic nuclear balance” as a state extant within the systemic approach towards international security. Based upon previous research in defining the state through core concepts fundamental to systems theory and supporting concepts such as those of centres of gravity, this paper aims to further expand contemporary understandings and illustrate a point of coalescence. Thereby the given study demonstrates how based upon key postulations in the understanding of the security concept in systems theory and centres of gravity of both physical and non-physical nature within a system, a combined novel model can be extrapolated, which demonstrates the security dynamic in the “strategic nuclear balance” between major global nuclear armed state actors.
The unsolved issue of arms control: anti-missile dilemma

Victor I. Mizin

DOI: https://doi.org/10.31857/s0869049923010057

2023-02-15

Obshchestvennye nauki i sovremennost

Abstract:The issue of missile defense (ABM) remains one of the key topics of the discussion on arms control at the present stage. Without its eventual forthcoming solution, it is impossible to further advance towards reducing the military threat on a global scale, and mutual reduction of the nuclear weapons capabilities of Russia and the United States, Russia and NATO, as well as to strengthen global strategic stability overall. At the same time, this issue is a serious irritant in Russia’s relations with its Western counterparts, and, above all, with the NATO military-political alliance led by the United States. Consequently, finding mutually acceptable solutions in this area would help restore trust between Russia and her counterparts and create prerequisites for moving towards a safer and more stable world. А number of tangible priority steps are suggested. Those measures might create certain ways out of the current negotiating impasse over the missile defense issue and help adopt pragmatic measures that would not violate the national security of any states. This process might take place in case of normalization of relations between Moscow and Washington.
South Korea’s missile forces and the emergence of triangular strategic (in)stability

Joshua H. Pollack,Minji Kim

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10736700.2020.1809156

2020-01-02

The Nonproliferation Review

Abstract:South Korea's sustained pursuit of conventional precision-strike capabilities and greater autonomy in military decision making is reshaping strategic-stability dynamics between its nuclear-armed ally, the United States, and its nuclear-armed adversary, North Korea. For the last decade, advances in conventional, precision-strike missiles in both Koreas have accompanied reciprocal threats of pre-emption and attacks on leaders, creating a new pathway for a crisis to escalate into a war. Given US security guarantees to South Korea, and North Korea's development of a nuclear arsenal to deter the United States, any large-scale armed conflict in Korea is liable to involve the use of nuclear weapons. The traditional concern of the alliance with the quality of extended deterrence should be broadened to reflect an understanding of this triangular stability dynamic.
Plus Ça Change? Prospects of a Nuclear Deterrence Multipolarity in Southern Asia

Toby Dalton

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/25751654.2022.2158702

2022-12-17

Journal for Peace and Nuclear Disarmament

Abstract:Some scholars assess that Southern Asia comprises a nuclear chain or a deterrence trilemma. Although the region is home to three states with nuclear weapons, there is only one clear nuclear deterrence dyad. India and Pakistan have explored the contours of nuclear deterrence in several past military crises, while nuclear weapons have been notably absent from recent Sino-Indian border tensions. What factors or developments might push the region toward a nuclear deterrence multipolarity? The key variable is the India–China relationship and the extent to which nuclear weapons become more prominent in respective national security belief systems in New Delhi and Beijing. Notable trends already favor such a development, including changing geopolitics in the region, the rise of nationalist domestic politics, technology competition, and growing crisis escalation concerns. Two fulcrums that might tip the region from the status quo into a deterrence multipolarity are parallel nuclear posture changes in India and China that create nuclear coupling, and hardening of geopolitical alignments into more adversarial blocs. Preventing deterrence multipolarity through new nuclear confidence-building measures will be difficult owing to divergent interests, power and institutions in the region. Upgrades to existing nuclear CBMs may be more politically feasible. Even in the absence of new nuclear CBMs, however, China, India, and Pakistan could build predictability in the region and mitigate potential sources of conflict through new measures to manage common-pool resource competition, dangerous behaviours in space, and a range of crises and emergencies.
China'S Nuclear Perspective: Deterrence Reduction, Nuclear Non-Proliferation, and Disarmament

Dingli Shen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09700160802214409

2008-01-01

Strategic Analysis

Abstract:This article offers a Chinese perspective on reducing the threat of nuclear weapons due to nuclear weapons proliferation and its deterrent gestures, long employed since the Cold War. It is pointed out that nuclear weapons are increasingly irrelevant to nuclear weapons states. However, some non-nuclear weapons states may view this differently. Nuclear abolition has presented a visionary opportunity for all sides to relinquish those weapons increasingly unnecessary for nuclear weapons states. Before such an idealistic world is attained, efforts of nuclear non-proliferation are indispensable along with a process of nuclear disarmament.
Korean Nuclear Crises: Is There A Way Forward?

Muzaffar Ganaie

DOI: https://doi.org/10.31124/advance.12630065.v1

2020-07-09

Abstract:North Korea’s nuclear programme remains a key foreign policy challenge for United States. After its first nuclear test in 2006, Pyongyang has made an impressive progress in developing a credible nuclear deterrent through series of nuclear and missile tests. The diplomatic efforts to dissuade North Korea’s nuclear ambitions have not yielded positive results so far, as Pyongyang has not only developed a credible deterrent but continues to expand and strengthen it. The failure of Hanoi Summit, latest in the series of diplomatic initiatives to end the series has depended pessimism regarding future negations. Experts are skeptical about finding a diplomatic solution to the crises and the demand to explore other alternatives _____ limited surgical strike, regime change, treating North Korea as de-facto nuclear weapon state _____ to end the crises has intensified in recent years. However, dealing with the threat though these tools is highly risky and diplomatic outreach is the most preferred course to end the crises.
The US and South Korea: The Trouble with Nuclear Assurance

Adam Mount

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00396338.2023.2193104

2023-03-30

Survival

Abstract:As US officials have grown more anxious about the credibility of extended nuclear deterrence, they have placed renewed emphasis on nuclear-assurance measures. The hope is that closer exercises and consultations can reassure allies, strengthen deterrence postures and reduce the risk that an ally could pursue their own nuclear weapons. However, recent developments in the US–South Korea alliance suggest that nuclear assurance is not only ineffective at reassuring Seoul but may also be fuelling proliferation risks. By raising the salience of nuclear weapons within the alliance, nuclear assurance reinforces the fiction that South Korea's defence depends on nuclear use. Misunderstanding the risks and potential of nuclear assurance has fuelled calls for a South Korean nuclear-weapons programme and obstructed the alliance's ability to adapt and improve its deterrence posture.

political science,international relations
Deepening Predicament of International Security:The DPRK's Nuclear Test and Its Empirical Implications

ZHU Feng

2006-01-01

Abstract:International non-proliferation regime is the benchmark of post-Cold War security in the world.However,the debate between proliferation pessimists and optimists has never stopped despite of the internationally shared consensus of pushing nuclear nonproliferation agenda.The DPRK's nuclear test on October 9 of 2006 explicitly induces new imperatives into the daunting question of if nuclear nonproliferation is inevitable.Pyongyang's top leader accounts mostly for his decision to test nuclear bomb,rather than his strong demand for securing the country.The ongoing debate on nuclear proliferation urges new growing necessity of introducing new analytical framework into non-proliferation study.
The Missile Defense Systems and Concepts of Limited Nuclear War

V. Klimov

DOI: https://doi.org/10.20542/0131-2227-2022-66-8-16-24

2022-01-01

World Economy and International Relations

Abstract:In the case of an intercepting massive nuclear missile attack, the technical capabilities of modern missile defense systems remain poor, nevertheless, the options for using the latest missile defense systems go beyond the “classic nuclear scenario”. First and foremost, missile defense systems have been used in conventional armed conflicts. This practice has already demonstrated their combat effectiveness which has become an impetus for the ongoing technical modernization of their main elements. In recent years, the conflict scenarios have been worked out in the United States and Russia where the limited use of low-yield nuclear weapons is allowed. The limited nuclear strike can be launched at the initial stages of a traditional conflict to consolidate the acquired military benefits and disrupt the enemy’s counteroffensive. Obviously, the limited use of nuclear weapons is fraught with an aggravation of the risk of a rapid and uncontrolled nuclear escalation. Unexpectedly, in this context, missile defense becomes a severe deterrent. Missile defense systems deployed at critical military facilities can remove the incentives for the limited nuclear strike as well as give considerable strategic and political advantages. Under these circumstances, missile defense systems become key players in the military balance. To reduce the risks of the limited use of nuclear weapons the author proposes “a roadmap” based on revitalization of the main arms control regimes and use of the capabilities of modern missile defense systems. It is hypothesized that “thin” missile defense removes the incentive to launch the first limited nuclear strike, thus enhancing strategic stability.
Assessing the Effectiveness of Security Assurances on the DPRK's Nuclear Issue

Yi Ding,Dingli Shen

2019-01-01

Abstract:In the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK)'s case of nuclear proliferation, less attention has been paid to the role of security assurances. This paper seeks to assess the role of security assurances for the DPRK provided by the UN, the Soviet Union, China, and the United States and to figure out why these assurances are less effective to bridle its nuclear ambition. It argues that an effective security assurance for nuclear non-proliferation should meet at least two conditions. Firstly the security assurance should be credible, which can be realized by being publicized, legally binding, and infusing with further commitments. Secondly, the security assurance tailored to the unique features of the target state's concerns is more likely to be effective. Using this set of criteria, the only moderately effective assurance is that provided by the Soviet Union. The general security assurance of the UN is neither legally binding nor specifically targeted. The alliance with China exists only on paper as Pyongyang believes Beijing is reluctant to fulfill its obligation as an ally. The United States is taking a capricious attitude on the DPRK and none of its security assurances are legalized or address its major concern of regime survival. These may help explain why security assurances failed to prevent the DPRK from acquiring nuclear weapons.
Cooperative Denuclearization toward North Korea

Dingli Shen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01636600903232251

2009-01-01

Abstract:Why has the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) been so defiant against the international community? What could be its external and internal motivations to carry out new missile tests, and...
Reducing nuclear dangers

Matthew Bunn

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.adr0532

IF: 56.9

2024-06-21

Science

Abstract:Dark clouds loom on the nuclear horizon, with threats from all directions: Russia's nuclear bombast in its war on Ukraine, China's construction of hundreds of nuclear missile silos, North Korea's missile testing, India and Pakistan's ongoing nuclear competition, and Iran's push toward nuclear weapons capability. In response, US policy-makers are discussing whether a further American nuclear arms buildup is needed. At the same time, evolving technologies, from hypersonic missiles to artificial intelligence, are straining military balances and may be making them more unstable. The risk of nuclear war has not been so high since the Cuban Missile Crisis.

multidisciplinary sciences
Us Extended Nuclear Deterrence In Europe And East Asia: A Comparative Analysis

Tom Sauer

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03068374.2022.2074731

2022-06-07

Asian Affairs

Abstract:Analysing the alliance system in Europe and Asia in a comparative perspective also demands having a look at the specific role of nuclear weapons in the defence doctrines, and more in particular the role of US extended nuclear deterrence. The main question that this article wants to resolve is: what are the similarities and differences in both regions with respect to extended nuclear deterrence? This (comparative) descriptive analysis is complimented with the following predictive question: which trends in both regions make it likely that extended nuclear deterrence will be strengthened, weakened, or maybe completely disappear? To answer these questions, the following structure is followed: first, the concept of extended nuclear deterrence will be described; next, this concept of extended nuclear deterrence will be applied to Europe and Asia; lastly, three trends that have an impact on the current debate on extended nuclear deterrence are analysed: 1) the deteriorating security situation; 2) the changing balance of power, and more in particular the relative decline of the US and the rise of China; and 3) the evolving nuclear arms control and disarmament regime, including the arrival of the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW).
China's Search for Assured Retaliation: The Evolution of Chinese Nuclear Strategy and Force Structure

M. Taylor Fravel,Evan S. Medeiros

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1162/isec_a_00016

2010-10-01

International Security

Abstract:After exploding its first nuclear device in 1964, China did not develop sufficient forces or doctrine to overcome its vulnerability to a first strike by the United States or the Soviet Union for more than three decades. Two factors explain this puzzling willingness to live with nuclear vulnerability: (1) the views and beliefs of senior leaders about the utility of nuclear weapons and the requirements of deterrence, and (2) internal organizational and political constraints on doctrinal innovation. Even as China's technical expertise grew and financial resources for modernization became available after the early 1980s, leadership beliefs have continued to shape China's approach to nuclear strategy, reflecting the idea of assured retaliation (i.e., using the fewest number of weapons to threaten an opponent with a credible second strike). The enduring effect of these leadership ideas has important implications for the trajectory of China's current efforts to modernize its nuclear force.

international relations
Missile Defense of the U.S. and Their Allies in Northeast Asia and Regional Security

O. O. Krivolapov

DOI: https://doi.org/10.31857/s032150750031033-8

2024-12-15

Asia and Africa today

Abstract:The situation around the Korean Peninsula combines such factors as nuclear weapons, missile defense systems, and huge groups of conventional armed forces concentrated in Northeast Asia. The U.S. administration argues that missile defense’s mission is to counter the threat from North Korean missiles to American and allied troops in South Korea and Japan. Hence, this line of confrontation between the U.S. and DPRK is at the focus of the article. A significant number of experts believe that regional missile defense (theater missile defense, TMD) will only stabilize the situation. The purpose of this article is to determine a possible impact of strengthened TMD architecture of the U.S., South Korean and Japanese forces for the security situation in the region under consideration. The author analyzes scenarios, which are most often discussed by experts, scientists, military, and politicians. The role of the doctrinal guidelines of the DPRK, South Korea and the United States in aggravating the situation in the event of strengthening of the American and allied regional missile defense system in Northeast Asia in the context of a political-military crisis is shown.

Nuclear Deterrence, Strategic Stability, Missile Defense

Deterrence During Disarmament: Deep Nuclear Reductions and International Security

Nuclear Deterrence in the 21st Century

Nuclear Proliferation and International Security Case Studies of Iran and North Korea

Defending the United States: Revisiting National Missile Defense against North Korea

Space, Missile Defense, and Nuclear Weapons

SECURITY DYNAMIC OF THE STRATEGIC NUCLEAR BALANCE IN SYSTEMS THEORY AND THE CONCEPT OF CENTRES OF GRAVITY

The unsolved issue of arms control: anti-missile dilemma

South Korea’s missile forces and the emergence of triangular strategic (in)stability

Plus Ça Change? Prospects of a Nuclear Deterrence Multipolarity in Southern Asia

China'S Nuclear Perspective: Deterrence Reduction, Nuclear Non-Proliferation, and Disarmament

Korean Nuclear Crises: Is There A Way Forward?

The US and South Korea: The Trouble with Nuclear Assurance

Deepening Predicament of International Security:The DPRK's Nuclear Test and Its Empirical Implications

The Missile Defense Systems and Concepts of Limited Nuclear War

Assessing the Effectiveness of Security Assurances on the DPRK's Nuclear Issue

Cooperative Denuclearization toward North Korea

Reducing nuclear dangers

Us Extended Nuclear Deterrence In Europe And East Asia: A Comparative Analysis

China's Search for Assured Retaliation: The Evolution of Chinese Nuclear Strategy and Force Structure

Missile Defense of the U.S. and Their Allies in Northeast Asia and Regional Security