What about Iran and North Korea?

The end of the Cold War reduced both the danger of a U.S.-Russian nuclear exchange and the nuclear arsenals of the two countries. In 1991, the U.S. had approximately 10,000 operationally deployed strategic nuclear warheads. Last year, the U.S. cut that number to just over 2,000 under the Moscow Treaty signed by President George W. Bush in 2002. The relatively modest additional reductions agreed to by Presidents Obama and Medvedev do little to change that fundamental picture.

What has changed fundamentally is the likelihood that nuclear weapons could end up in the hands of irresponsible rulers, or terrorists who can't be deterred at all. Unfortunately, President Obama's talk about a world free of nuclear weapons seems to have little connection to the passive U.S. responses to North Korea's and Iran's nuclear activities.

There is certainly room for additional reductions in U.S. and Russian nuclear weapons, but it is unlikely to have any effect on those countries. Indeed, if the new treaty constrains U.S. missile defense efforts, it could be counterproductive. Although President Reagan wanted to eliminate nuclear weapons--believing it dangerous to rely indefinitely on a balance of nuclear terror--when Mikhail Gorbachev offered to eliminate ballistic missiles in exchange for eliminating missile defenses, Reagan refused the deal.

The new treaty provides an opportunity to question whether we are doing enough to confront the danger of nuclear weapons in the hands of terrorists and irresponsible regimes.

To be serious about a world without nuclear weapons, we must face some serious questions--questions that have nothing to do with U.S. or Russian numbers:

Is the U.S. doing enough to develop effective missile defenses? How can we prevent the language in the treaty's preamble--linking offensive and defensive weapons--from blocking more ambitious U.S. missile defense efforts in the future?

What will the administration do to counter Iran's nuclear program if sanctions prove no more effective than engagement? What about North Korea? Is there no way to peacefully promote more responsible leadership in either country?

What are we doing to preserve the safety and reliability of our diminishing number of nuclear weapons?

Since we are reducing our reliance on nuclear weapons, how can we strengthen our conventional deterrent in the face of determined efforts to deny us nearby basing options?

Twenty one years ago, when the SALT II Treaty was signed, Sen. Sam Nunn (D., Ga.) believed that the most important way to reduce the danger of nuclear war was to improve U.S. conventional deterrence, and he made that a condition for Senate ratification of the treaty. Similarly, the new treaty provides an opportunity to question whether we are doing enough to confront the danger of nuclear weapons in the hands of terrorists and irresponsible regimes.

Paul Wolfowitz is a visiting scholar at AEI.

Photo Credit: Flickr user _fLeMmA_/Creative Commons

Also Visit
AEIdeas Blog The American Magazine
About the Author

 

Paul
Wolfowitz
  • Paul Wolfowitz spent more than three decades in public service and higher education. Most recently, he served as president of the World Bank and deputy secretary of defense. As ambassador to Indonesia, Mr. Wolfowitz became known for his advocacy of reform and political openness and for his interest in development issues, which dates back to his doctoral dissertation on water desalination in the Middle East. At AEI, Mr. Wolfowitz works on development issues.


    Follow Paul Wolfowitz on Twitter.
  • Assistant Info

    Name: Hemal Shah
    Phone: 202-862-5889
    Email: hemal.shah@aei.org

What's new on AEI

image The money in banking: Comparing salaries of bank and bank regulatory employees
image What Obama should say about China in Japan
image A key to college success: Involved dads
image China takes the fight to space
AEI on Facebook
Events Calendar
  • 21
    MON
  • 22
    TUE
  • 23
    WED
  • 24
    THU
  • 25
    FRI
Wednesday, April 23, 2014 | 12:00 p.m. – 1:30 p.m.
Graduation day: How dads’ involvement impacts higher education success

Join a diverse group of panelists — including sociologists, education experts, and students — for a discussion of how public policy and culture can help families lay a firmer foundation for their children’s educational success, and of how the effects of paternal involvement vary by socioeconomic background.

Event Registration is Closed
Thursday, April 24, 2014 | 12:00 p.m. – 1:30 p.m.
Getting it right: A better strategy to defeat al Qaeda

This event will coincide with the release of a new report by AEI’s Mary Habeck, which analyzes why current national security policy is failing to stop the advancement of al Qaeda and its affiliates and what the US can do to develop a successful strategy to defeat this enemy.

Friday, April 25, 2014 | 9:15 a.m. – 1:15 p.m.
Obamacare’s rocky start and uncertain future

During this event, experts with many different views on the ACA will offer their predictions for the future.   

No events scheduled this day.
No events scheduled this day.
No events scheduled this day.
No events scheduled this day.
No events scheduled this day.