Is the U.S. nuclear arsenal sufficient to address today’s security challenges? A new report from the Pentagon’s Defense Science Board (DSB) says no, claiming that “nuclear weapons are needed that produce much lower collateral damage”, and presenting detailed support for its case. In this peer-reviewed paper for Nature, Michael Levi assesses the DSB’s arguments, concluding that while they add usefully to the debate, they are ultimately unsound.
Reprinted by permission of Nature, (Vol. 428, April 29, 2004).