Preparing for Deep Cuts: Options for Enhancing Euro-Atlantic and International Security
Four years after the conclusion of the New START Treaty, the United States and Russia continue to maintain nuclear arsenals far exceeding the requirements for deterrence. Even before the current tensions between Russia and the West over Ukraine and Crimea, differences over other security questions had stymied progress on further nuclear arms cuts. It nevertheless remains important that policymakers in Washington, Moscow and European capitals continue to explore ideas for promoting greater stability and predictability at lower levels of armaments. The 21-member U.S.-Russian-German Deep Cuts Commission has formulated proposals to achieve further arms control and nuclear risk reduction to enhance national, Euro-Atlantic and international security.
On April 28, the Brookings Arms Control and Non-Proliferation Initiative hosted the release of the Deep Cuts Commission’s first report, “Preparing for Deep Cuts: Options for Enhancing Euro-Atlantic and International Security,” and a discussion of its key findings and policy recommendations. Ulrich Kuehn and Götz Neuneck of the Institute for Peace Research and Security Policy; Eugene Miasnikov of the Center for Arms Control, Energy and Environmental Studies; and Greg Thielmann of the Arms Control Association detailed the possibilities for and challenges facing further nuclear reductions. Brookings Senior Fellow Steven Pifer moderated.
Deep Cuts Project Coordinator, Institute for Peace Research and Security Policy - University of Hamburg
Deputy Director, Institute for Peace Research and Security Policy - University of Hamburg
Director - Center for Arms Control, Energy and Environmental Studies
Senior Fellow - Arms Control Association
To subscribe or manage your subscriptions to our top event topic lists, please visit our event topics page.
At the end of the day, as we all know thorny national security issues don’t just involve the military; political-military considerations invariably bleed into them. If the senior military’s leadership views are going to be just constrained to military advice … who is thinking about issues from that broader perspective?