Podcasts about Nuclear Posture Review

In this episode of NUCLECAST, Adam speaks with Dr. Rob Soofer, a senior fellow in the Forward Defense practice of the Atlantic Council's Scowcroft Center for Strategy and Security, where he leads its Nuclear Strategy Project. They discuss the evolving threats from countries like North Korea, Russia, and China, and the need for a robust missile defense strategy that reassures allies and deters adversaries. Soofer emphasizes the necessity of a layered missile defense system and the challenges posed by budgetary constraints in achieving these goals. The conversation also touches on the future of missile defense technology, including space-based capabilities and the importance of bipartisan support for defense initiatives.He is also an adjunct professor at Georgetown University's Center for Security Studies, teaching courses in nuclear strategy, missile defense, and arms control. He serves as a consultant for the Sandia, Los Alamos, and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories as well as the Institute for Defense Analyses.Soofer was deputy assistant secretary of defense for nuclear and missile defense policy from April 2017 to January 2021. In this capacity, he was co director of the Nuclear Posture Review and Missile Defense Review and led their implementation; testified before Congress on nuclear and missile defense policy; led biannual nuclear staff talks with key allies; served as US representative to the NATO High Level Group for nuclear planning; and was the secretary of defense representative to the US-Russia nuclear arms control talks. Previously, Soofer served for eight years as a professional staff member and Republican staff lead for the Subcommittee on Strategic Forces of the Senate Armed Services Committee and as strategic forces policy advisor to Senator Jon Kyl (R-AZ), then the Republican whip. He also was military legislative assistant to former Senator Slade Gorton (R-WA) and professional staff member on the Senate Republican Policy Committee. He taught at the National War College for three years as professor of national-security policy and served for eight years in various policy and international-affairs positions with the Strategic Defense Initiative Organization/Missile Defense Agency. In 2003, he was called to active duty as a lieutenant commander in the Naval Reserve and assigned to the newly created Terrorist Threat Integration Center. Soofer received his doctorate in international relations from the University of Southern California and is a graduate of the National War College. He was awarded the Department of Defense Exceptional Civilian Service Medal and Distinguished Public Service Medal and is the author of Missile Defenses and Western European Security (Greenwood Press, 1988). Socials:Follow on Twitter at @NucleCastFollow on LinkedIn: https://linkedin.com/company/nuclecastpodcastSubscribe RSS Feed: https://rss.com/podcasts/nuclecast-podcast/Rate: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/nuclecast/id1644921278Email comments and topic/guest suggestions to NucleCast@anwadeter.org

Nukes: DoD orders Nuclear Posture Review. Peter Huessy, Gordon Chang @GordonGChang, Gatestone, Newsweek, The Hill B-29

GOOD EVENING: The show begins in Iraq, asking about the origin and threat of  the militias in league with Iran... 1923 Baghdad CBS EYE ON THE WORLD WITH JOHN BATCHELOR FIRST HOUR 9-915 1/2: #IRAQ: AFGHANISTAN: YEMEN: Jihadist depth chart. Bill Roggio, FDD 915-930 2/2: #IRAQ: AFGHANISTAN: YEMEN: Jihadist depth chart. Bill Roggio, FDD 930-945 UKRAINE: Both incremental battle space achievements. John Hardie, Bill Roggio FDD 945-1000 #UKRAINE: Both incremental battle space achievements. John Hardie, Bill Roggio FDD SECOND HOUR 10-1015 #GAZA: IDF hostages drugged by Hamas, Malcolm Hoenlein @Conf_of_pres @mhoenlein1 @ThadMcCotter @theamgreatness 1015-1030 #LEBANON: Hezbollah conspires with the LAF. Malcolm Hoenlein @Conf_of_pres @mhoenlein1 @ThadMcCotter @theamgreatness 1030-1045 #ISRAEL The untrusted Hamas and the ceasefire. David Daoud and Bill Roggio, FDD 1045-1100 #WEST BANK: Front awakened. David Daoud, Bill Roggio FDD THIRD HOUR 1100-1115 #NewWorldReport: #Colombia Gustavo Petro backs down. Joseph Humire @JMHumire @SecureFreeSoc. Ernesto Araujo, Former Foreign Minister Republic of Brazil. #NewWorldReportHumire 1115-1130 #NewWorldReport: #MEXICO: Aims to cooperate. Joseph Humire @JMHumire @SecureFreeSoc. Ernesto Araujo, Former Foreign Minister Republic of Brazil. #NewWorldReportHumire 1130-1145 #NewWorldReport: StateSec Rubio to Panama and Central America. Joseph Humire @JMHumire @SecureFreeSoc. Ernesto Araujo, Former Foreign Minister Republic of Brazil. #NewWorldReportHumire 1145-1200 #NewWorldReport: Argentina grows GDP. Joseph Humire @JMHumire @SecureFreeSoc. Ernesto Araujo, Former Foreign Minister Republic of Brazil. #NewWorldReportHumire FOURTH HOUR 12-1215 #Russia: POTUS seeks Ukraine resolution with Moscow. Katrina Vanden Heuvel, The Nation 1215-1230 LA: Showing compassion for the homeless and despairing. @ThadMcCotter @theamgreatness 1230-1245 #PRC: Foreign investment fleeing. Alan Tonelson, @GordonGChang, Gatestone, Newsweek, The Hill 1245-100 am Nukes: DoD orders Nuclear Posture Review. Peter Huessy, Gordon Chang @GordonGChang, Gatestone, Newsweek, The Hill

Luke Litle talks with Dr. Mara Karlin about the development of the 2022 National Defense Strategy, various practical approaches to deterring adversaries, recent US security challenges, and potential future global security threats. Dr. Karlin is a professor of practice at SAIS and is the co-lead for the Security, Strategy, and Statecraft focus area. She has served in national security roles for six U.S. secretaries of defense, advising on policies spanning strategic planning, defense budgeting, the future of conflict, and regional affairs involving the Middle East, Europe, and Asia. Most recently, she served as Assistant Secretary of Defense for Strategy, Plans, and Capabilities, leading the development and implementation of the 2022 National Defense Strategy, Nuclear Posture Review, and Missile Defense Review.

In this episode of NucleCast, Bob Peters discusses the often-misunderstood concept of escalation in national security. He explores how escalation is perceived negatively by many national security professionals, leading to a risk-averse approach that can undermine deterrence. Peters argues that the U.S. needs to embrace escalation as a strategic tool, especially in the context of being a status quo power. The conversation also touches on the challenges within military education and the need for a shift in mindset regarding the use of military force.Robert Peters is a Research Fellow for Nuclear Deterrence and Missile Defense in The Heritage Foundation's Allison Center for National Security. Prior to joining Heritage, Peters served as the lead strategist at the Defense Threat Reduction Agency, where he oversaw the office that developed the Agency's five-year strategy, conducted the Agency's research and tabletop exercise program, and executed Agency-level program evaluations. Leading a team of forty-two people, Peters revamped the research function within the Agency and oversaw the Department of Defense's Track 1.5 and Track 2 strategic dialogues with allies and partners.For many years, Peters served as a Senior Research Fellow at National Defense University's Center for the Study of Weapons of Mass Destruction, where he focused on nuclear deterrence issues, countering weapons of mass destruction, and counterproliferation.In the first Obama Administration, Peters served as the Special Advisor for Countering Weapons of Mass Destruction in the Office of the Secretary of Defense, where he worked on the New START nuclear arms control treaty, the 2010 Nuclear Posture Review, and the 2010 Quadrennial Defense Review.In addition, Peters held positions at Northrop Grumman and the Potomac Institute for Policy Studies.A graduate of Miami University and Georgetown University's School of Foreign Service, Peters has lectured at National War College, Missouri State University, Army War College, and the United States Naval AcademyChapters00:00 Introduction to Escalation in National Security05:41 Understanding Escalation as a Tool12:46 The Impact of Status Quo on Escalation19:38 Challenges in Military Thinking26:59 Wishes for Military Strategy ReformSocials:Follow on Twitter at @NucleCastFollow on LinkedIn: https://linkedin.com/company/nuclecastpodcastSubscribe RSS Feed: https://rss.com/podcasts/nuclecast-podcast/Rate: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/nuclecast/id1644921278Email comments and topic/guest suggestions to NucleCast@anwadeter.org

In this episode of NucleCast, Adam Lowther and Bob Peters discuss the implications of the October 7th anniversary, focusing on the ongoing conflict in Israel and the broader Middle East. They explore the failures of deterrence leading up to the attack, the complexities of Iran's nuclear ambitions, and the evolving dynamics between Israel and its Arab neighbors. The conversation also delves into the historical context of the Palestinian issue.Robert Peters is a Research Fellow for Nuclear Deterrence and Missile Defense in The Heritage Foundation's Allison Center for National Security. Prior to joining Heritage, Peters served as the lead strategist at the Defense Threat Reduction Agency, where he oversaw the office that developed the Agency's five-year strategy, conducted the Agency's research and tabletop exercise program, and executed Agency-level program evaluations. Leading a team of forty-two people, Peters revamped the research function within the Agency and oversaw the Department of Defense's Track 1.5 and Track 2 strategic dialogues with allies and partners.For many years, Peters served as a Senior Research Fellow at National Defense University's Center for the Study of Weapons of Mass Destruction, where he focused on nuclear deterrence issues, countering weapons of mass destruction, and counterproliferation.In the first Obama Administration, Peters served as the Special Advisor for Countering Weapons of Mass Destruction in the Office of the Secretary of Defense, where he worked on the New START nuclear arms control treaty, the 2010 Nuclear Posture Review, and the 2010 Quadrennial Defense Review.In addition, Peters held positions at Northrop Grumman and the Potomac Institute for Policy Studies.A graduate of Miami University and Georgetown University's School of Foreign Service, Peters has lectured at National War College, Missouri State University, Army War College, and the United States Naval AcademyChapters00:00 Introduction and Context of October 7th03:02 Deterrence Failures and the Israeli Response05:59 Iran's Nuclear Ambitions and Regional Dynamics08:45 The Future of Israel and Iran Relations11:49 The Role of Arab Nations and Regional Politics14:47 The Palestinian Perspective and Historical Context18:03 Bob's Wishes for Peace and ResolutionSocials:Follow on Twitter at @NucleCastFollow on LinkedIn: https://linkedin.com/company/nuclecastpodcastSubscribe RSS Feed: https://rss.com/podcasts/nuclecast-podcast/Rate: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/nuclecast/id1644921278Email comments and topic/guest suggestions to NucleCast@anwadeter.org

There's more to this election cycle than who wins and who loses. It's also about who controls one of the world's largest nuclear arsenals. In this season of NukeTalk, we will explore The Nuclear Ballot: How the U.S. Election Shapes Nuclear Policy. We'll provide expert insights into how this election can affect nuclear weapons policy. As we explore the President's exclusive authority to launch nuclear weapons to the strategic decisions outlined in the Nuclear Posture Review, we unravel the complexities that shape national and global security. Additionally, we will examine the media's coverage of nuclear weapons during an election year.   Featured Guests: Kathleen Kingsbury, opinion editor at The New York Times, W.J. Hennigan, writer for The New York Times' "At the Brink" series, Dr. David Kearn, Associate Professor of Government and Politics at St. John's University, and Visiting Scholar at Harvard Kennedy School's Project on Managing the Atom, and Mackenzie Knight, Senior Research Associate at the Federation of American Scientists. 

From November 1, 2022: In recent weeks, the Biden administration has released a trio of long-awaited strategy documents, including the National Security Strategy, the National Defense Strategy, and the Nuclear Posture Review. But how should we read these documents, and what do they actually tell us about how the Biden administration intends to approach the world?To answer these questions, Lawfare senior editor Scott R. Anderson sat down with Richard Fontaine, chief executive officer of the Center for a New American Security, who is himself also a former National Security Council official and senior congressional adviser. They discussed the role these strategy documents play in U.S. foreign policy, what we can learn from them, and what they say about the state of the world and the United States' role in it.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Despite our adversaries' growing nuclear arsenals, the United States has not built a new nuclear weapon since 1989. To strengthen our strategic deterrence, it is essential that we revitalize our arsenal and encourage the development of new nuclear capabilities. Ultimately, now is the time for the U.S. to build the nuclear arsenal for the 21st century.Join us as a panel of experts offer suggestions and discuss The Heritage Foundation's special report, “Nuclear Posture Review 2025.” This report details the many changes that must be made by the next administration to ensure our country's safety and ability to deter great power conflict. Additionally, the report offers to serve as a template for a future administration's Nuclear Posture Review and to delineate a new approach to nuclear posture, declaratory policy, force structure, and the size and composition of America's nuclear arsenal over the next half century.

In October 2022, the White House released its 2022 Nuclear Posture Review, laying out the Biden administration's nuclear strategy. Perhaps the most controversial policy change in the report was the cancellation of the sea‐​launched nuclear cruise missile (SLCM‑N), which was introduced in the 2018 review. Less than two years after the cancellation, Congress reversed the program's course once again by establishing the SLCM‑N as a program of record through the fiscal year 2024 National Defense Authorization Act.Supporters argue that growing nuclear threats make the SLCM‑N more important now than ever. Opponents point to the opportunity costs of adding yet another weapon system to an already stressed nuclear modernization plan. What should be the future of this highly contested program?Please join the Cato Institute as we explore the benefits and opportunity costs of adding the SLCM‑N to the US nuclear arsenal. Cato's Eric Gomez and the Atlantic Council's Robert Soofer will examine the potential role of the SLCM‑N in the US nuclear arsenal, provide an overview of the cases for and against it, and allow participants an opportunity to engage in the discussion. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this special episode, recorded on the sidelines of ASPI's annual conference ‘Disruption and Deterrence', Bec Shrimpton speaks with Dr Brad Roberts. Brad has served as director for the Centre for Global Security Research, and as policy director of the Obama administration's Nuclear Posture Review. Bec and Brad talk about the meaning of deterrence, what has historically made for good and bad deterrence, and what Australia and its allies can do to improve deterrence going forward. Guests: Bec Shrimpton: https://www.aspi.org.au/bio/bec-shrimpton Dr Brad Roberts: https://cgsr.llnl.gov/experts/fellows/brad_roberts Music: "Rodeo Drive" by Eazy, licensed with permission from the Independent Music Licensing Collective - imlcollective.uk

2022 is over and in this show, we relive what we did on the show by sharing the hooks/the teasers for all but about 4 of our shows. We trace our steps from January and the Veterans for Peace alternative Nuclear Posture Review all the way to re-celebrating the Christmas Truce. We hoped that by sharing these hooks/teasers we might have seen some positive progress. It is hard to say that we did.

Today, we go over the USA's 2022 National Defense Strategy. As we head into 2023, we take a look at the Department of Defense's strategic goals in this "decisive decade" as President Biden has called it in contest with China. See what we have to share from our perspective as this goes largely uncovered in the mainstream media.2022 National Defense Strategy, Nuclear Posture Review, and Missile Defense Review2018 National Defense Strategy reviewMedea Benjamin  discusses her latest book War in Ukraine: Making Sense of a Senseless Conflict.In Theory Anarchism, war and the stateTo see all our episodes go to:What's Left? Website:Contact us @:  Subscribe to What's Left? on Telegram:Find out more about our anti-mandate group: Workers & Students for Choicehttps://www.askhealthyquestions.com/ws4choiceiTunes: Spotify: Bitchute: YouTube:  LBRY: Telegram :Odysee: stitcher: Googleplaymusic: Rumble

The inaugural episode of The Nuclear View where our panel discusses the Nuclear Posture Review 2022.

Revisit Press the Button LIVE: Nuclear Policy in Crisis with us — this time with Ploughshares Fund President Emma Belcher and Mallory Stewart, Assistant Secretary of State for the Bureau of Arms Control, Verification, and Compliance. Stewart discusses the Nuclear Posture Review, New START, China's nuclear arsenal, and many other issues. On Early Warning, Angela Kellett speaks with Jessica Sleight, Partner for Strategy, Policy & Partnerships at Global Zero. They discuss Russia's decision to postpone talks on New START, which is set to expire in 2026, and how Russia's war in Ukraine has impacted arms control.

Today it's all about the bomb. Nuclear weapons are back in a big way and everything about the Cold War suddenly feels very fresh. Nukes are strange things. They've only been used twice and the language and knowledge around them can often feel arcane, almost religious. There's all these little rituals in nuclear space. We're gonna talk about one of those rituals today—the Nuclear Posture Review. Once in every U.S. presidential administration, the nuclear curtain is withdrawn and we get a glimpse at what the Pentagon, and critically, the President is thinking. But what is the Nuclear Posture Review? Who writes it? And what does it have to do with the price of gas in an apocalyptic nuclear hellscape.Here to answer some of those questions for us today is Stephen Young. Young is the Senior Washington Representative for the Union of Concerned Scientists, the former Deputy Director of the Coalition to Reduce Nuclear Dangers, and consulted on this most recent review.The Nuclear Posture ReviewNuke Experts Are Horrified by Biden's New ‘Nuclear Posture Review'Angry Planet has a substack! Join the Information War to get weekly insights into our angry planet and hear more conversations about a world in conflict.https://angryplanet.substack.com/subscribeYou can listen to Angry Planet on iTunes, Stitcher, Google Play or follow our RSS directly. Our website is angryplanetpod.com. You can reach us on our Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/angryplanetpodcast/; and on Twitter: @angryplanetpod.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/warcollege. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The Biden administration recently released its Nuclear Posture Review, which sets forth a strategy intended to address the growing nuclear threat from China since the “strategic breakout” of its nuclear forces was revealed to the public in summer 2021. China has surpassed its historic nuclear strategy of minimum deterrence and can now execute any nuclear […]

The Biden administration recently released its Nuclear Posture Review, which sets forth a strategy intended to address the growing nuclear threat from China since the “strategic breakout” of its nuclear forces was revealed to the public in summer 2021. China has surpassed its historic nuclear strategy of minimum deterrence and can now execute any nuclear employment strategy, according to U.S. Strategic Command. Meanwhile, the U.S. nuclear arsenal has not significantly changed and remains designed around the 2010 New START Treaty. Whether this posture is sufficient to deter the growing Chinese nuclear threat while still deterring Russia's expanding arsenal at the same time is uncertain.Given the Nuclear Posture Review's long-awaited release, join us to learn what China's nuclear expansion means for the U.S. and what options policymakers should consider in response. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Scott brings Ted Snider back on to discuss a major story that nobody but Antiwar.com appears to be covering. The Biden Administration recently declassified its Nuclear Posture Review where it is admitted that Iran is not working towards a nuclear bomb. After a quick discussion about how U.S. nuclear strike policy has evolved since the Cold War, Scott and Snider dig into this bombshell of a story. They reflect back on all the revelations that made it clear the Iran nuclear weapons program was a hoax. Now, this official acknowledgment really drives home how ridiculous all this chest-thumping has been. Scott and Snider finish with a quick discussion about how the U.S. has created and prolonged the nuclear tension with North Korea.  Discussed on the show: “US Admits Iran Is Not Building a Nuclear Bomb” (Antiwar.com) The Threat by Andrew Cockburn Manufactured Crisis by Gareth Porter Losing an Enemy by Trita Parsi “When the Ayatollah Said No to Nukes” (Foreign Policy) “Iran, Islam, and Banning the Bomb” (Antiwar.com) Ted Snider has a graduate degree in philosophy and writes on analyzing patterns in U.S. foreign policy and history. He is a regular writer for Truthout, MondoWeiss and antiwar.com. This episode of the Scott Horton Show is sponsored by: The War State and Why The Vietnam War?, by Mike Swanson; Tom Woods' Liberty Classroom; ExpandDesigns.com/Scott; and Thc Hemp Spot. Get Scott's interviews before anyone else! Subscribe to the Substack. Shop Libertarian Institute merch or donate to the show through Patreon, PayPal or Bitcoin: 1DZBZNJrxUhQhEzgDh7k8JXHXRjYu5tZiG. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

 Download Episode. Scott brings Ted Snider back on to discuss a major story that nobody but Antiwar.com appears to be covering. The Biden Administration recently declassified its Nuclear Posture Review where it is admitted that Iran is not working towards a nuclear bomb. After a quick discussion about how U.S. nuclear strike policy has evolved since the Cold War, Scott and Snider dig into this bombshell of a story. They reflect back on all the revelations that made it clear the Iran nuclear weapons program was a hoax. Now, this official acknowledgment really drives home how ridiculous all this chest-thumping has been. Scott and Snider finish with a quick discussion about how the U.S. has created and prolonged the nuclear tension with North Korea.  Discussed on the show: “US Admits Iran Is Not Building a Nuclear Bomb” (Antiwar.com) The Threat by Andrew Cockburn Manufactured Crisis by Gareth Porter Losing an Enemy by Trita Parsi “When the Ayatollah Said No to Nukes” (Foreign Policy) “Iran, Islam, and Banning the Bomb” (Antiwar.com) Ted Snider has a graduate degree in philosophy and writes on analyzing patterns in U.S. foreign policy and history. He is a regular writer for Truthout, MondoWeiss and antiwar.com. This episode of the Scott Horton Show is sponsored by: The War State and Why The Vietnam War?, by Mike Swanson; Tom Woods' Liberty Classroom; ExpandDesigns.com/Scott; and Thc Hemp Spot. Get Scott's interviews before anyone else! Subscribe to the Substack. Shop Libertarian Institute merch or donate to the show through Patreon, PayPal or Bitcoin: 1DZBZNJrxUhQhEzgDh7k8JXHXRjYu5tZiG.

On COI #345, Kyle Anzalone and Connor Freeman break down the critical admission by the White House that Iran is not seeking nuclear weapons, the latest escalations with North Korea, and Elon Musk's cozy relationship with the Pentagon. President Joe Biden's special envoy for Iran, Robert Malley, has said Washington will no longer “waste its time” on the JCPOA talks. This puts the nail in the coffin of the already de facto dead negotiations. Saudi Arabia is claiming without evidence that Tehran is preparing an attack against the Kingdom, which has increased regional tensions. The Iranians will send a delegation to Vienna to have talks with the International Atomic Energy Agency aimed at resolving the uranium traces issue, and hopefully increasing cooperation and mutual understanding. Antiwar.com has a major scoop on how within the recently released Nuclear Posture Review, as well as the Pentagon's new National Defense Strategy, Biden's White House admits that Tehran is not seeking nuclear weapons and that there is no evidence they have made a decision to pursue a bomb. This week, Pyongyang carried out large-scale military exercises as Washington and Seoul conducted record-setting aerial war games, unleashing 23 missiles and over 100 artillery rounds before launching additional munitions on Thursday. Amid ever escalating tensions on the Korean Peninsula, the State Department has demanded the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula and declared that Washington will never accept Pyongyang as a nuclear weapons state. This comes as the State Department recently threatened Washington would nuke North Korea in defense of its allies. America's top military officer General Mark Milley praised SpaceX CEO Elon Musk by name at an event hosted by the Space Force, saying the ‘Chief Twit' exemplifies ”the civil and military cooperation and teamwork that makes the US the most powerful country in space.” SpaceX regularly contracts with the Pentagon and some allied militaries to launch satellites, and has notably aided the White House's proxy war in Ukraine. Odysee Rumble  Donate LBRY Credits bTTEiLoteVdMbLS7YqDVSZyjEY1eMgW7CP Donate Bitcoin 36PP4kT28jjUZcL44dXDonFwrVVDHntsrk Donate Bitcoin Cash Qp6gznu4xm97cj7j9vqepqxcfuctq2exvvqu7aamz6 Patreon Subscribe Star YouTube Facebook  Twitter  MeWe Apple Podcast  Amazon Music Google Podcasts Spotify iHeart Radio Support Our Sponsor Visit Paloma Verde and use code PEACE for 20% off our CBD  

On COI #345, Kyle Anzalone and Connor Freeman break down the critical admission by the White House that Iran is not seeking nuclear weapons, the latest escalations with North Korea, and Elon Musk's cozy relationship with the Pentagon. President Joe Biden's special envoy for Iran, Robert Malley, has said Washington will no longer “waste its time” on the JCPOA talks. This puts the nail in the coffin of the already de facto dead negotiations. Saudi Arabia is claiming without evidence that Tehran is preparing an attack against the Kingdom, which has increased regional tensions. The Iranians will send a delegation to Vienna to have talks with the International Atomic Energy Agency aimed at resolving the uranium traces issue, and hopefully increasing cooperation and mutual understanding. Antiwar.com has a major scoop on how within the recently released Nuclear Posture Review, as well as the Pentagon's new National Defense Strategy, Biden's White House admits that Tehran is not seeking nuclear weapons and that there is no evidence they have made a decision to pursue a bomb. This week, Pyongyang carried out large-scale military exercises as Washington and Seoul conducted record-setting aerial war games, unleashing 23 missiles and over 100 artillery rounds before launching additional munitions on Thursday. Amid ever escalating tensions on the Korean Peninsula, the State Department has demanded the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula and declared that Washington will never accept Pyongyang as a nuclear weapons state. This comes as the State Department recently threatened Washington would nuke North Korea in defense of its allies. America's top military officer General Mark Milley praised SpaceX CEO Elon Musk by name at an event hosted by the Space Force, saying the ‘Chief Twit' exemplifies ”the civil and military cooperation and teamwork that makes the US the most powerful country in space.” SpaceX regularly contracts with the Pentagon and some allied militaries to launch satellites, and has notably aided the White House's proxy war in Ukraine.

This week, Alan, Quinta, and Scott shook off their post-Halloween sugar comas to hash through some of the week's big national security news stories, including:“A Home Invasion in the House.” A man connected to various online conspiracies broke into the San Francisco home of Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and violently assaulted her husband, all as part of a plot to kidnap and torture her. What is to blame for this type of violence? Are we taking it seriously enough?“First (R)use?” The Biden administration's recently released Nuclear Posture Review has taken many progressives by surprise, as it appears to walk back candidate Biden's commitment to a policy against first use. Is this criticism fair? What should we make of the Biden administration's nuclear strategy?“Trust and the Fourth Estate.” The Justice Department has codified new guidelines putting significant restrictions on when and how prosecutors can subpoena and arrest journalists. Are these restrictions well-founded or do they go too far? For object lessons, Alan recommended his favorite recent audiobook, Daniel Immerwahr's "How to Hide an Empire." Quinta threw her support behind the season of Fall, and shared a photo of some of its lovely colors (see our show page). And Scott recommended a cocktail named after the only way worth living: Naked and Famous. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In recent weeks, the Biden administration has released a trio of long-awaited strategy documents, including the National Security Strategy, the National Defense Strategy, and the Nuclear Posture Review. But how should we read these documents, and what do they actually tell us about how the Biden administration intends to approach the world?To answer these questions, Lawfare senior editor Scott R. Anderson sat down with Richard Fontaine, chief executive officer of the Center for a New American Security, who is himself also a former National Security Council official and senior congressional adviser. They discussed the role these strategy documents play in U.S. foreign policy, what we can learn from them, and what they say about the state of the world and the United States' role in it.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Dr. John R. Harvey is a physicist with over 40 years of experience working nuclear weapons and national security issues, first at LLNL, then at Stanford's Center for International Security and Arms Control and in senior positions in the Departments of Defense (twice) and Energy. From 2009-2013, he served as Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Nuclear, Chemical, and Biological Defense Programs. In this role, he was Undersecretary Ash Carter's “go to” person for the 2010 Nuclear Posture Review, and for interactions with the NNSA on joint oversight of the U.S. nuclear weapons stockpile. Dr. Harvey provided oversight to DoD acquisition programs to sustain and modernize nuclear weapons delivery systems and systems for their command and control. He has written and spoken extensively on these issues. On retiring from government service in 2013, he consults with, among others, the Defense Science Board, Institute for Defense Analysis, Los Alamos National Laboratory, U.S. Strategic Command's Advisory Panel on Nuclear Command and Control and NNSA's Defense Programs Advisory Committee.

Big news: Biden's long-awaited Nuclear Posture Review is finally out! This week, Tom Collina talks with Jessica Sleight and Jon Wolfsthal from Global Zero. They review Biden's nuclear weapons policy, and discuss where it fell short and how it can be improved. On Early Warning, Angela Kellett sits down with Scott Roecker, Vice President of the Nuclear Material Security Program at the Nuclear Threat Initiative. He discusses Russia's unsubstantiated allegation that Ukraine is preparing to use a dirty bomb.  

This week, Deputy Secretary of State Wendy Sherman reiterated the U.S. Nuclear Posture Review, which states that "the United States would only consider the employment of nuclear weapons in extreme circumstances to defend the vital interests of the United States, its allies, and partners. Extreme circumstances could include significant non-nuclear strategic attacks." Natalie Armbruster of Defense Priorities joins us this week to talk about who is formally a US ally — and not — and how over the years Washington has built a web of entangling alliances of different formalities and caliber, drawing the US into fights and causing others that have no real basis in the U.S. national interest. In the second segment, Kelley & Dan talk about the U.S. 101st Airborne Division on the border with Ukraine, and the progressives going wobbly on diplomacy.More from Natalie: Who is an ally and why does it matter? — w/ Ben Friedman, Defense Priorities, 10/12/22The 2023 Defense Authorization risks more of the same — Instick Media, 8/4/22Biden shouldn't put American lives on the line to defend the United Arab Emirates — Business Insider, 6/14/22Apply the logic of the Afghanistan withdrawal to Syria — Defense Priorities, 3/7/2022 This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit crashingthewarparty.substack.com

Amid Putin's nuclear saber-rattling, what exactly makes a nuclear weapon “tactical” — and is that even the right word to use? This week, Tom Collina talks with Hans Kristensen, director of the Nuclear Information Project at the Federation of American Scientists. He corrects the many misperceptions of “tactical” nuclear weapons and discusses how Russia could use nuclear weapons in Ukraine. On Early Warning, Lauren Billet sits down with Allen Hester, who leads the Friends Committee on National Legislation's Nuclear Disarmament and Pentagon spending portfolio. He discusses the Biden Administration's newly released National Security Strategy and its implications for the long-awaited Nuclear Posture Review.

Episode five of NucleCast features Dr. Brad Roberts, who has served as director of the Center for Global Security Research at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory since 2015. From 2009 to 2013, he was deputy assistant secretary of defense for Nuclear and Missile Defense Policy. In this role, he served as policy director of the Obama administration's Nuclear Posture Review and Ballistic Missile Defense Review and led their implementation. Prior to entering government service, Dr. Roberts was a research fellow at the Institute for Defense Analyses and the Center for Strategic and International Studies, editor of The Washington Quarterly, and an adjunct professor at George Washington University. Between leaving the Office of the Secretary of Defense in 2013 and assuming his current responsibilities, Dr. Roberts was a consulting professor at Stanford University and William Perry Fellow at the Center for International Security and Cooperation (CISAC). While at CISAC, he authored a book entitled The Case for US Nuclear Weapons in the 21st Century, which won the Choice Award for Outstanding Academic Title in 2016.

Veterans for Peace sent an open letter to Biden demanding that he and his administration read our Nuclear Posture Review before issuing his. In this time of nuclear threat, and nuclear weaponization and modernization, of investment in apocalypse versus peace, the No Nukes group of Veterans for Peace crafted this open letter that group leader Gerry Condon came on the show to share, explain, and discuss. The conversation quickly expanded to other issues linked to nuclear weapons such as press coverage, militarism, politics. Gerry also gave a wonderful description of the Golden Rule Great Loop project, one effort o teach peace.

It's a curtain call for co-host Michelle Dover. On her last Press the Button episode, Dover is joined by Ploughshares Fund President Emma Belcher and fellow co-host Tom Collina. They quiz Dover on her favorite moments on the podcast and her personal journey in the nuclear policy field. On Early Warning, co-host Tom Collina is joined by Emma Claire Foley, senior associate for research and policy at Global Zero. She walks through how nuclear policy has changed since Obama's Prague speech and what we'll most likely see from the upcoming Nuclear Posture Review.

The Nuclear Posture Review is an important document to guide the Department of Defense regarding its nuclear forces and, thus, the nuclear deterrence capability of the United States. https://ept.ms/36sjEAU

There is justified concern that as part of its upcoming Nuclear Posture Review, which assesses the nuclear deterrent requirements of the United States, the Biden administration will cancel the Trump administration's 2018 NPR decision to revive production of the nuclear-armed, sea-launched cruise missile. https://ept.ms/3L0BGsG Nuclear Posture Review, Russia, China, Ukraine, Vladimir Putin, the United States, NATO

Xubi, Janet, and Joel are joined by Veterans for Peace Santa Fe Co-founder Ken Mayers for our continuing conversation about the situation turned invasion in Ukraine. Ken offers us a peace activist take on the situation that is somewhat more nuanced and historically accurate than most of what you will hear in the mainstream media.   View Veterans For Peace's Nuclear Posture Review tinyurl.com/VFP-NPR

In the first episode of the series, Sarah and Hanna speak with Prof. Scott Sagan, who is the Caroline S.G. Munro Professor of Political Science, the Mimi and Peter Haas University Fellow in Undergraduate Education, and Senior Fellow at the Center for International Security and Cooperation and the Freeman Spogli Institute at Stanford University. The hosts discuss with Professor Sagan his recently coauthored article in International Security entitled, “The Rule of Law and the Role of Strategy in US Nuclear Doctrine.” The conversation tackles the relationship between nuclear doctrine and the law of armed conflict, related ethical and legal concerns, the implications for US policymakers and military planners, recommendations for the upcoming Nuclear Posture Review, and more generally the dangers inherent in “siloing” legal and strategic studies. Prof. Scott Sagan is a Caroline S.G. Munro Professor of Political Science at Stanford University and Senior Fellow at Stanford's Center for International Security and Cooperation. He is known for his research on nuclear weapons policy and nuclear disarmament, including discussions of system accidents, and has published widely on these subjects.

Today we link two events, the birthday of Dr. King and the anniversary of the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons. We hear Dr. King in his own words as he decries militarism in general and specifically nuclear weapons during his Nobel Peace Prize-winning lecture. We read an Op-Ed from the Oak Ridge Environment and Peace Alliance that links Dr. King with the TPNW and then we hear the words of Beatrice Fihn, Executive Director of ICAN, the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons, the Nobel Prize-winning organization the pushed for the TPNW. We note that Veterans for Peace, in the spirit of Dr. King and the spirit of Peace are issuing our own Nuclear Posture Review before the Biden Administration issues theirs. We hear Dr. King's call to action and then we finish with Dr. King's favorite song, sung by Mahalia Jackson.

We continue to discuss the importance of the effort of Veterans for Peace to develop a legitimate Nuclear Posture Review with a distinguished panel including David Swanson, Executive Director of World Beyond War, Alice Slater of World Beyond War and the VFP Nuclear Abolition Working Group and Rachel Clark of VFP and the Nuclear Abolition Working Group. While the Biden Administration and the Defense Department develop their own Nuclear Posture Review which will more than likely support nuclear saber-rattling and expansion of the madness of our nuclear program, Veterans for Peace has developed an alternative NPR, an NPR that considers humanity.

Combating gender-based violence in the U.S. military Kyleanne Hunter, adjunct senior fellow for the Military, Veterans, and Society Program at the Center for a New American Security, discusses the Defense Department's progress on implementing the Women, Peace, and Security Act of 2017 and explains how the legislation helps address sexual harassment and assault in the military Latest on military situation with Russia at Ukraine border Steven Pifer, nonresident senior fellow in the Center on the United States and Europe at the Brookings Institution, discusses conversations between Biden and Putin and potential sanctions the U.S. would impose on Russia in the event of further military action towards Ukraine Developments in nuclear stockpiles for U.S., allies, adversaries Daryl Kimball, executive director at the Arms Control Association, discusses the possibility of a U.S. shift to a No First Use nuclear policy and considerations Biden will make in the Nuclear Posture Review

The Biden administration is working on a nuclear posture review that will determine our "needs" and ways to "use" our nuclear stockpile. Based on the Biden administration's support of militarism, saber-rattling and a bloated military budget, we can only assume that his nuclear posture review will be more of the same. SO WHY BOTHER. Thus Veterans for Peace and the Working Group to Abolish Nuclear Weapons worked the last two months to develop an alternative Nuclear Posture Review that actually considers the people, the planet, and PEACE. Members of Veterans for Peace and this working group come on the show to explain just exactly what is in the VFP NPR and why this is the one that should be implemented.

The ongoing Nuclear Posture Review gives the Biden Administration the opportunity to align policy, strategy, and capabilities against the current threat environment. As part of this process, the Administration is reportedly considering changing U.S. nuclear declaratory policy from one of strategic ambiguity to one of “no first use” or “sole purpose.” Under a “no first use” or “sole purpose” policy, the United States would pledge never to use nuclear weapons first in a conflict, including in response to chemical, biological, cyber, or massive conventional attacks on the U.S. or its allies. While proponents of such a change argue that “no first use” or “sole purpose” would help the U.S. achieve its nonproliferation goals, this change could have grave impacts on U.S. extended deterrence commitments. On December 7, hear directly from esteemed speakers from the U.S. and abroad on the implications of changes in U.S. nuclear declaratory policy on both U.S. national security and extended deterrence. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

The ongoing Nuclear Posture Review gives the Biden Administration the opportunity to align policy, strategy, and capabilities against the current threat environment. As part of this process, the Administration is reportedly considering changing U.S. nuclear declaratory policy from one of strategic ambiguity to one of “no first use” or “sole purpose.” Under a “no first use” or […]

The People's Republic of China recently tested an advanced new hypersonic glide vehicle that circles the Earth and is designed to evade U.S. defenses and conduct a nuclear attack against the American homeland. A new Pentagon report reveals that Beijing is expanding the size of its nuclear arsenal much faster than expected and that in 2020 China's rulers launched more ballistic missiles for testing and training “than the rest of the world combined.” Moscow conducted an anti-satellite test on November 15 that created more than 1500 pieces of trackable space debris, putting American astronauts (and Russian cosmonauts) on the International Space Station in danger. The test also demonstrated again Russia's ability to target American satellites that we depend on for our security. Meanwhile, Iran continues to expand its ballistic missile arsenal and inch toward a nuclear weapons capability. As the Biden administration prepares its Nuclear Posture Review for publication next year, what should we understand about the Chinese and Russia nuclear weapons threats to Americans and our allies and what should we do about it? Should the U.S. adopt a “sole purpose” or “no first use” nuclear policy? What is the status of U.S. efforts to modernize our nuclear deterrent? What is the role of missile defense in all of this, and what level of defense spending is needed to secure our nation? U.S. Congressman Mike Turner, who represents Ohio's 10th district, is a senior member of the House Armed Services Committee and serves as Ranking Member of the Strategic Forces Subcommittee, which oversees, among other things, strategic deterrence, nuclear weapons, missile defense, and space. To discuss these issues and more, Representative Turner sat down with senior director of FDD's Center on Military and Political Power, Bradley Bowman, on this special edition of Foreign Podicy.

The People's Republic of China recently tested an advanced new hypersonic glide vehicle that circles the Earth and is designed to evade U.S. defenses and conduct a nuclear attack against the American homeland. A new Pentagon report reveals that Beijing is expanding the size of its nuclear arsenal much faster than expected and that in 2020 China's rulers launched more ballistic missiles for testing and training “than the rest of the world combined.” Moscow conducted an anti-satellite test on November 15 that created more than 1500 pieces of trackable space debris, putting American astronauts (and Russian cosmonauts) on the International Space Station in danger. The test also demonstrated again Russia's ability to target American satellites that we depend on for our security. Meanwhile, Iran continues to expand its ballistic missile arsenal and inch toward a nuclear weapons capability. As the Biden administration prepares its Nuclear Posture Review for publication next year, what should we understand about the Chinese and Russia nuclear weapons threats to Americans and our allies and what should we do about it? Should the U.S. adopt a “sole purpose” or “no first use” nuclear policy? What is the status of U.S. efforts to modernize our nuclear deterrent? What is the role of missile defense in all of this, and what level of defense spending is needed to secure our nation? U.S. Congressman Mike Turner, who represents Ohio's 10th district, is a senior member of the House Armed Services Committee and serves as Ranking Member of the Strategic Forces Subcommittee, which oversees, among other things, strategic deterrence, nuclear weapons, missile defense, and space. To discuss these issues and more, Representative Turner sat down with senior director of FDD's Center on Military and Political Power, Bradley Bowman, on this special edition of Foreign Podicy.

Terrell Jermaine Starr, a nonresident senior fellow at the Atlantic Council's Eurasia Center, joins co-host Michelle Dover to put nuclear security in context. In covering topics ranging from Iran to new hypersonic missile development, Starr discusses the importance of a grassroots movement that pushes for the elimination of the nuclear arsenal. Meanwhile on Early Warning, Jessica Sleight, Program Director at Global Zero, checks in on the upcoming Nuclear Posture Review with co-host Tom Collina.

Principal Deputy National Security Advisor Jon Finer in discussion with Ploughshares Fund President Emma Belcher. They cover topics ranging from the Iran nuclear deal to President Biden's upcoming Nuclear Posture Review, as well as the AUKUS nuclear-powered submarine deal. On Early Warning: Ploughshares Fund Senior Program Officer Cara Marie Wagner shares details on an exciting new request for proposals and opportunities to fund new projects.

Chairman Adam Smith of the House Armed Services Committee discusses opportunities President Biden has with the Nuclear Posture Review – working with Russia to reduce the arsenal, getting back to the Iran deal and avoiding nuclear war. Congressman Smith also shares insights on how next year's budget process will drive some of the biggest decisions on nuclear monetization. Extended Early Warning: An in-depth nuclear policy discussion with Dr. Jane Vaynman, Jon Wolfsthal and Lilly Adams.

Ploughshares Fund's Roger L. Hale Fellow Dr. Doreen Horschig discusses her new interactive report urging President Biden to focus his upcoming Nuclear Posture Review on preventing accidental nuclear war. Early Warning guests feature Christopher Jackson, a PhD candidate at the University of California Berkeley, and Maggie Boughman, a data and language intelligence analyst at SOS international Center for intelligence research analysis.

Is the Nuclear Posture Review something worth doing, or a massive waste of time and political capital? Jeffrey and Aaron vote "waste." The NPR takes up a ton of time, leaves policy on autopilot during its duration, and burns a ton of bandwidth that could be used for actual reflection and policy change.  But what is more valuable? No Review at all? An Integrated Deterrence Review? The team walks through the pitfalls of the NPR, propose some modest alternatives, and outline a possible alternative mission for the Missile Defense Agency.... Support us over at Patreon.com/acwpodcast!

John C. Rood John Rood has over 30 years of experience in national security positions in the U.S. Government and the private sector in international business and aerospace and defense. He served as a senior official at the Defense & State Department, White House/National Security Council, Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), in Congress as a staffer in the U.S. Senate, and as an executive at Lockheed Martin and Raytheon. Mr. Rood has been an Associate at SMA consulting since March 2020.In addition to his work at SMA, Mr. Rood serves as Chairman of the Board and Security Director of Radisson Hospitality, Inc. He is also CEO of John Rood and Associates LLC where he assists clients with growth strategies and government relations in the U.S. and overseas. From January 2018 to February 2020, Mr. Rood served as Under Secretary of Defense for Policy where he led formulation and coordination of national security policy within the Department of Defense as the principal advisor to the Secretary of Defense for such matters. He managed a team of over 2,100 civilians and military service members and was responsible for building partnerships and defense cooperation with U.S. allies, including overseeing the $55B foreign military sales program and export controlsMr. Rood managed implementation of strategies, including the National Defense Strategy resulting in a new focus on addressing the implications of growing competition among the world’s great powers. He oversaw development of a new cyber strategy, authorities, and approach; a space strategy for the newly-established Space Force; completion of the Missile Defense Review; Nuclear Posture Review; and a counter-terrorism strategy for the defeat of ISIS. Prior to serving as Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, Mr. Rood worked for nearly a decade in the private sector. From March 2016 to January 2018, he was Senior Vice President of Lockheed Martin International where he was a corporate officer and direct report to the Chairman and CEO charged with leading business growth and industrial partnerships in more than 70 countries. He also served as VP for Corporate Domestic Business Development at Lockheed Martin. Prior to joining Lockheed Martin, Mr. Rood was VP for U.S. Business Development at Raytheon from 2009 to 2014, where he managed teams in Washington, DC and 28 field offices responsible for growing the business, preparing market assessments, and managing customer relationships.From 2007 to 2009, Mr. Rood served at the State Department as Acting Under Secretary for Arms Control and International Security. He was responsible for policy on countering the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and missiles, arms control, nuclear weapons, security cooperation with other nations, and export controls. He also served as Assistant Secretary of State for International Security and Nonproliferation. In two tours at the White House/National Security Council from 2005 to 2006 and 2001 to 2003, he served under President George W. Bush as Special Assistant to the President and Senior Director for Counterproliferation Strategy, and Director for Proliferation Strategy, Counterproliferation, and Homeland Defense. From 2003 to 2005, Rood served as Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Forces Policy, where he was responsible for the development and oversight of policy and programs related to U.S. nuclear and conventional strategic forces, missile defenses, and space systems. Earlier in his career, Mr. Rood worked as Senior Policy Advisor to Senator Jon Kyl of Arizona and as a Fellow for Senator Thad Cochran of Mississippi on the Senate Governmental Affairs Subcommittee on International Security. From 1988 to 1999, Rood served in a variety of positions as an analyst at the CIA, including following missile programs in foreign countries. Mr. Rood holds a Bachelor of Science in Economics from Arizona State University.

John C. Rood John Rood has over 30 years of experience in national security positions in the U.S. Government and the private sector in international business and aerospace and defense. He served as a senior official at the Defense Department, State Department, White House/National Security Council, Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), in Congress as a staffer in the U.S. Senate, and as an executive at Lockheed Martin and Raytheon. Mr. Rood has been an Associate at SMA consulting since March 2020In addition to his work at SMA, Mr. Rood serves as Chairman of the Board and Security Director of Radisson Hospitality, Inc. He is also CEO of John Rood and Associates LLC where he assists clients with growth strategies and government relations in the U.S. and overseas. From January 2018 to February 2020, Mr. Rood served as Under Secretary of Defense for Policy where he led formulation and coordination of national security policy within the Department of Defense as the principal advisor to the Secretary of Defense for such matters. He managed a team of over 2,100 civilians and military service members and was responsible for building partnerships and defense cooperation with U.S. allies, including overseeing the $55B foreign military sales program and export controlsMr. Rood managed implementation of strategies, including the National Defense Strategy resulting in a new focus on addressing the implications of growing competition among the world's great powers. He oversaw development of a new cyber strategy, authorities, and approach; a space strategy for the newly-established Space Force; completion of the Missile Defense Review; Nuclear Posture Review; and a counter-terrorism strategy for the defeat of ISIS. Prior to serving as Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, Mr. Rood worked for nearly a decade in the private sector. From March 2016 to January 2018, he was Senior Vice President of Lockheed Martin International where he was a corporate officer and direct report to the Chairman and CEO charged with leading business growth and industrial partnerships in more than 70 countries. He also served as Vice President for Corporate Domestic Business Development at Lockheed Martin. Prior to joining Lockheed Martin, Mr. Rood was VP for U.S. Business Development at Raytheon from 2009 to 2014, where he managed teams in Washington, DC and 28 field offices responsible for growing the business, preparing market assessments, and managing customer relationships From 2007 to 2009, Mr. Rood served at the State Department as Acting Under Secretary for Arms Control and International Security. He was responsible for policy on countering the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and missiles, arms control, nuclear weapons, security cooperation with other nations, and export controls. He also served as Assistant Secretary of State for International Security and Nonproliferation. In two tours at the White House/National Security Council from 2005 to 2006 and 2001 to 2003, he served under President George W. Bush as Special Assistant to the President and Senior Director for Counterproliferation Strategy, and Director for Proliferation Strategy, Counterproliferation, and Homeland DefenseFrom 2003 to 2005, Rood served as Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Forces Policy, where he was responsible for the development and oversight of policy and programs related to U.S. nuclear and conventional strategic forces, missile defenses, and space systems. Earlier in his career, Mr. Rood worked as Senior Policy Advisor to Senator Jon Kyl of Arizona and as a Fellow for Senator Thad Cochran of Mississippi on the Senate Governmental Affairs Subcommittee on International Security. From 1988 to 1999, Rood served in a variety of positions as an analyst at the CIA, including following missile programs in foreign countries. Mr. Rood holds a Bachelor of Science in Economics from Arizona State University.

Zack, Jenn, and Alex discuss the Trump administration’s decision to put a mini nuclear weapon on a US submarine for the first time. They explain what a mini-nuke actually is, the reasons for this decision, the cases for and against doing it, and how to think about the future of nuclear weapons policy in a world of renewed great power politics and weakening arms control agreements. Zack confesses his fascination with pre-modern warfare, Jenn coins a Ringo Starr theory of nuclear policy, and Alex describes himself as an “end of the world enthusiast.” References: This is a really great summary of the debate on putting mini-nukes on submarines. Here’s a link to the Trump administration’s Nuclear Posture Review. Zack talked about Vipin Narang’s War on the Rocks piece on the discrimination problem when using low-yield nukes. Alex discussed Russia’s “escalate to de-escalate” strategy. Jenn mentioned the idea of a “nuclear taboo” and also referenced the book Thinking about the Unthinkable.  Here’s a link to the “mineshaft gap” scene in Dr. Strangelove. Alex broke the story about the Trump administration’s new landmine policy, and also wrote a great (and terrifying) feature on how nuclear war could kill us all. Hosts: Zack Beauchamp (@zackbeauchamp), senior correspondent, Vox Jennifer Williams (@jenn_ruth), senior foreign editor, Vox Alex Ward (@AlexWardVox), national security reporter, Vox More to explore: Subscribe for free to Today, Explained, Vox’s daily news podcast to help you understand the news, hosted by Sean Rameswaram. About Vox: Vox is a news network that helps you cut through the noise and understand what's really driving the events in the headlines. Follow Us: Vox.com  Newsletter: Vox Sentences  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

From a Catholic perspective, let's first discuss the question of nuclear weapons. (See below a recent statement coming from the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops.) Then we'll take some time to update efforts by "solidarity minded" candidates for public office in California! USCCBAn ethics and a law based on the threat of mutual destruction – and possibly the destruction of all mankind – are contradictory to the very spirit of the United Nations. We must therefore commit ourselves to a world without nuclear weapons, by fully implementing the Non-Proliferation Treaty, both in letter and spirit. —Pope Francis to UN Conference to Prohibit Nuclear Weapons, March 2017 In 1963 Saint John XXII wrote in Pacem in Terris: “Nuclear weapons must be banned. A general agreement must be reached on a suitable disarmament program, with an effective system of mutual control.” Support for nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation has been emphasized by Blessed Paul VI, Saint John Paul II, Benedict XVI and Francis. The U.S. Bishops have worked for nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation for decades. Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty: The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) is the cornerstone of global efforts to curb and reverse the spread of nuclear weapons. One-hundred-and-ninety-eight countries have ratified the treaty, including the five acknowledged nuclear powers: United States, Russia, United Kingdom, France, and China. Only four nations have not: India, Israel, Pakistan and North Korea. The NPT prohibits non-nuclear states from acquiring nuclear weapons (non-proliferation), requires nuclear states to reduce and eliminate nuclear weapons (disarmament), and guarantees access to peaceful nuclear technology (nuclear power). Years ago, President Ronald Reagan and General Secretary Mikhail Gorbachev called for abolishing all nuclear weapons. Former Secretaries of State and Defense George Shultz, William Perry and Henry Kissinger and Senator Sam Nunn have promoted a nuclear-free world. Past presidents Barack Obama and Russian Dmitry Medvedev committed “our two countries to achieving a nuclear free world.” The Trump administration's plans for the U.S. nuclear stockpile will be articulated in a forthcoming Nuclear Posture Review. The administration will also have the opportunity to pursue an extension of New START beyond its 2021 expiration date, an extension supported by many experts and Russia as “fundamental to global security.” New START Treaty: In 1991, the United States and Soviet Union ratified the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START). This treaty limited the number of nuclear warheads and delivery vehicles (missiles and bombers) that each country could deploy. The treaty also incorporated a solid set of verification measures the two nations could use to monitor each other's nuclear arsenals and compliance with the treaty. Today the United States and Russia still hold about 90% of all nuclear weapons, large arsenals left over from the Cold War. START expired in 2009 and with it the verification protocols, but both nations agreed to keep its provisions in effect while they negotiated a START follow-on treaty. Implementation of a New START Treaty was critical because verification ensures transparency and even modest reductions in the number of weapons can set the stage for future reductions. The U.S. and Russia signed a new Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START) on April 8, 2010, which was ratified by the Senate on a solid bipartisan vote of 71 to 26. The Holy See has “welcome[d] and recognize[d] the ongoing successful implementation of New START.” The New START Treaty: reduces deployed strategic warheads to 1550, 30 percent below the existing ceiling; limits both nations to no more than 700 delivery vehicles; and includes new verification requirements. Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty: Despite U.S. involvement in initiating the negotiations, in 1999 the U.S. Senate failed to ratify the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) that would stop nuclear testing. Some Senators who voted “no” expressed concerns about the ability of the United States to maintain its arsenal in the absence of testing and others were concerned about verifying compliance with the treaty. Prominent scientists have argued that the U.S. can safely maintain its nuclear arsenal without testing and that the ability of the international community to verify compliance is amply demonstrated by detections of tests in North Korea. One hundred and fifty-one other nations have ratified the CTBT, including UK, France, and Russia. The United States' failure to ratify the CTBT prevents the treaty's immediate entry into force. The Holy See declared, “There is no reason for procrastination.” It is not known when the CTBT may be submitted to the Senate for ratification. P5+1 Agreement with Iran: In recent years, serious questions were raised regarding Iran's nuclear program. In response, talk of military intervention increased, and crippling international sanctions were instituted to the detriment of Iran's economy and its citizens. Following the election of Iranian President Rouhani, the United States, United Kingdom, Russia, China, Germany and France (P5+1) entered into diplomatic negotiations with Iran regarding its nuclear program and international sanctions. In July 2015, after 20 months of concerted collaboration, the P5+1 reached an agreement with Iran that aims to curb Iran's development of nuclear weapons while allowing for the use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes. In September, a cloture vote in the Senate that would have allowed rejection of the P5+1 deal failed, so the agreement stands. Recent Iranian launches of ballistic missiles, inconsistent with UN Security Council Resolution 2231, but not in violation of the P5+1 Agreement, have raised concerns. In October 2017, President Trump announced he would not certify to Congress that Iran was in compliance, despite U.S. and international evidence that Iran is observing the agreement. To date, Congress has not acted to undermine the agreement. Nuclear Ban Treaty: In a major and encouraging development, a majority of the world's nations supported adoption of the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons with the goal of leading towards their total elimination in July 2017. The vote was 122 in favor (including the Holy See), 1 against, and 1 abstention. Unfortunately, 69 nations did not vote, including all nuclear weapon states and all but one NATO member. USCCB POSITION: The United States and other nuclear powers must move away from reliance on nuclear weapons for security. USCCB urges the Administration and Congress to view arms control treaties not as ends in themselves but as steps along the way to achieving a mutual, verifiable global ban on nuclear weapons. A global ban is more than a moral ideal; it should be a policy goal. USCCB advocated for ratification of the P5+1 Agreement with Iran in 2015. The USCCB Committee on International Justice and Peace, reflecting the longstanding position of the Holy See, urged our nation to pursue diplomacy to ensure Iran's compliance with its obligations under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. The Church did not weigh-in on the technical details of the agreement, but consulted with many experts on the broad outlines required for a credible and verifiable agreement. Led by Pope Francis, the U.S. bishops and Holy See continue to support the P5+1 Agreement with Iran as a “definitive step toward greater stability and security in the region.” The Holy See notes that the agreement “requires further efforts and commitment by all the parties involved in order for it to bear fruit.” During the negotiations on the Nuclear Ban Treaty, USCCB and the Conference of European Justice and Peace Commissions issued a joint call for a strategy to eliminate nuclear weapons globally USCCB plans to support Senate ratification of the CTBT if and when it is introduced. The Church opposes the use of nuclear weapons, especially against non-nuclear threats. The U.S. should commit to never use nuclear weapons first and to reject use of nuclear weapons to deter non-nuclear threats. The Church urges that nuclear deterrence be replaced with concrete measures of disarmament based on dialogue and multilateral negotiations. ACTION REQUESTED: 1. Urge bold and concrete commitments to accelerate verifiable nuclear disarmament, including taking weapons off “launch on warning” status to prevent a catastrophic accident and making deeper cuts in nuclear arsenals. 2. Oppose the investment of hundreds of billions of dollars in modernizing nuclear weapons systems that ultimately we must work to dismantle. 3. Support serious negotiations on a fissile material cut-off treaty and other prudent measures. 4. If it is introduced, urge Senators to support ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) to bring it into force. 5. Encourage Congress and the Administration not to take any actions that could undermine the agreement between the P5+1 and Iran. For further information: visit http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/human-life-and-dignity/war-andpeace/nuclear-weapons/index.cfm or contact Stephen Colecchi, Director, Office of International Justice and Peace, USCCB, 202-541-3196 (phone), 202-541-3339 (fax), scolecchi@usccb.org.

The release of the Trump Administration’s Nuclear Posture Review earlier this year emphasized the growing threat of nuclear competition in the Asia-Pacific, specifically with reference to Russia, North Korea, and China. In this podcast, Tong Zhao sat down with David Santoro, Director and Senior Fellow of Nuclear Policy Programs at the Pacific Forum, to explore pressing nuclear issues in the region and their implications for the U.S.-China relationship.

In this episode of Russian Roulette, we sit down with Andrey Baklitskiy. Andrey is a consultant with the PIR Center in Moscow who writes and speaks on arms control and nonproliferation issues. We discuss Russian approaches to nonproliferation, Iran and North Korea, the Treaty on Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), and the future of arms control. You can read Andrey’s bio and some of his recent articles here: http://www.pircenter.org/en/experts/25-2147658. Olya and Andrey’s recently coauthored article, “The Nuclear Posture Review and Russian ‘De-Escalation:’ A Dangerous Solution to a Nonexistent Problem,” is available for you to read, here: https://warontherocks.com/2018/02/nuclear-posture-review-russian-de-escalation-dangerous-solution-nonexistent-problem/. We encourage you to read the final report and discussion papers from our U.S.-Russia Crisis Stability dialogue here: https://www.csis.org/programs/russia-and-eurasia-program/us-russia-crisis-stability-results-track-ii-dialogue. You can watch Olya, Andrey, and Sharon Squassoni of George Washington University discuss the results of that dialogue here: https://www.csis.org/events/us-russia-crisis-stability-results-strategic-dialogue. As always, keep sending us mailbag questions! If you would like to have your question answered on the podcast, send it to us! Email rep@csis.org and put “Russian Roulette” in the subject line. And, if you have one, include your Twitter handle, so we can notify you publicly when we answer your question (or, if you don’t want us to, tell us that). We look forward to hearing from you.

In this episode of Russian Roulette, we sit down with Andrey Baklitskiy. Andrey is a consultant with the PIR Center in Moscow who writes and speaks on arms control and nonproliferation issues. We discuss Russian approaches to nonproliferation, Iran and North Korea, the Treaty on Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), and the future of arms control. You can read Andrey’s bio and some of his recent articles here: http://www.pircenter.org/en/experts/25-2147658. Olya and Andrey’s recently coauthored article, “The Nuclear Posture Review and Russian ‘De-Escalation:’ A Dangerous Solution to a Nonexistent Problem,” is available for you to read, here: https://warontherocks.com/2018/02/nuclear-posture-review-russian-de-escalation-dangerous-solution-nonexistent-problem/. We encourage you to read the final report and discussion papers from our U.S.-Russia Crisis Stability dialogue here: https://www.csis.org/programs/russia-and-eurasia-program/us-russia-crisis-stability-results-track-ii-dialogue. You can watch Olya, Andrey, and Sharon Squassoni of George Washington University discuss the results of that dialogue here: https://www.csis.org/events/us-russia-crisis-stability-results-strategic-dialogue. As always, keep sending us mailbag questions! If you would like to have your question answered on the podcast, send it to us! Email rep@csis.org and put “Russian Roulette” in the subject line. And, if you have one, include your Twitter handle, so we can notify you publicly when we answer your question (or, if you don’t want us to, tell us that). We look forward to hearing from you.

Cold War: Part Duex In early February, Defense Secretary James Mattis and Vice Chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Paul Selva testified to Congress about two recently released war strategy documents: The National Defense Strategy and the Nuclear Posture Review. In this episode, hear some of the most powerful people in the world discuss their plans to reboot the Cold War, including an extremely expensive plan, which has already begun, to replace the United States entire nuclear weapons arsenal. Please Support Congressional Dish Click here to contribute using credit card, debit card, PayPal, or Bitcoin Click here to support Congressional Dish for each episode via Patreon Mail Contributions to: 5753 Hwy 85 North #4576 Crestview, FL 32536 Thank you for supporting truly independent media! Recommended Congressional Dish Episodes CD067: What Do We Want in Ukraine? CD093: Our Future in War Short Story Long Podcast Appearance Additional Reading Article: Trump's favorite general: Can Mattis check an impulsive president and still retain his trust? by Greg Jaffe and Missy Ryan, The Washington Post, February 7, 2018. Report: Beijing hits back at US defence strategy and 'cold war mindset' by Kinling Lo, South China Morning Post, January 20, 2018, Report: A top secret desert assembly plant starts ramping up to build Northrop's B-21 bomber by Ralph Vartabedian, W.J. Hennigan, and Samantha Masunaga, The Los Angeles Times, November 10, 2017. Article: Lockheed close to massive F-35 fighter jet deal with 11 nations by Thom Patterson, CNN Money, June 19, 2017. Article: Russian lawmaker: We would use nukes if US or NATO enters Crimea by Patrick Tucker, Defense One, May 28, 2017. Report: Russia is now the world's third largest military spender by Ivana Kottasova, CNN Money, April 24, 2017. Article: The F-35 may carry one of the US's most polarizing nuclear weapons sooner than expected by Alex Lockie, Business Insider, January 12, 2017. Article: Henry Kissinger's war crimes are central to the divide between Hilary Clinton and Bernie Sanders by Dan Froomkin, The Intercept, February 12, 2016. Review: Hillary Clinton reviews Henry Kissinger's 'World Order' by Hillary Rodham Clinton, The Washington Post, September 4, 2014. Resources Congressional Budget Office: Approaches for Managing the Costs of U.S. Nuclear Forces, 2017 to 2046 Congressional Research Service: Navy Columbia (SSBN-826) Class Ballistic Missile Submarine Program: Background and Issues for Congress Defense.gov: 2018 Summary of the National Defense Strategy Indictment: Internet Research Agency Indictment Media.defense.gov: 2018 Nuclear Posture Review OpenSecrets.org: Huntington Ingalls Industries, Profile for 2016 Election Cycle OpenSecrets.org: General Dynamics Organization Summary OpenSecrets.org: Lobbyists Representing General Dynamics, 2017 OpenSecrets.org: Northrop Grumman Organization Summary OpenSecrets.org: Northrop Grumman Lobbying Info Book: World Order by Henry Kissinger Visual Resources Sound Clip Sources Hearing: National Defense Strategy and Nuclear Posture Review, C-SPAN, House Armed Services Committee, February 6, 2018. Witnesses James Mattis - Secretary of the Department of Defense General Paul Silva - Vice Chair of the Joints Chiefs of Staff 12:25 Defense Secretary James Mattis: To advance the security of our nation, these troops are putting themselves in harm’s way, in effect, signing a blank check payable to the American people with their lives. They do so despite Congress’ abrogation of its constitutional responsibility to provide sufficient stable funding. Our military have been operating under debilitating continuing resolutions for more than 1,000 days during the past decade. These men and women hold the line for America while lacking this most fundamental congressional support: a predictable budget. Congress mandated—rightfully mandated—this National Defense Strategy—the first one in a decade—and then shut down the government the day of its release. Today we are again operating under a disruptive continuing resolution. It is not lost on me that as I testify before you this morning we are again on the verge of a government shutdown, or, at best, another damaging continuing resolution. I regret that without sustained, predictable appropriations, my presence here today wastes your time because no strategy can survive, as you pointed out, Chairman, without the funding necessary to resource it. 19:15 Defense Secretary James Mattis: Our second line of effort is to strengthen traditional alliances while building new partnerships. History is clear that nations with allies thrive. We inherited this approach to security and prosperity from the Greatest Generation, and it has served the United States well for 70 years. Working by, with, and through allies who carry their fair share is a source of strength. Since the costly victory in World War II, Americans have carried a disproportionate share of the global-defense burden while others recovered. Today the growing economic strength of allies and partners has enabled them to step up, as demonstrated by more than 70 nations and international organizations participating in the Defeat ISIS campaign and again in the 40-some nations standing shoulder to shoulder in NATO’s Resolute Support Mission in Afghanistan. Most NATO allies are also increasing their defense budgets, giving credence to the value of democracies standing together. 24:33 Defense Secretary James Mattis: As Senator McCain said last week, since the end of the Cold War, we have let our nuclear capabilities atrophy under the false belief that the era of great power competition was over. As the new National Defense Strategy rightfully acknowledges, we now face the renewed threat of competition from Russia and China, and we cannot ignore their investments in nuclear weapons in addition to conventional forces. The 2018 Nuclear Posture Review reaffirms the findings of previous reviews that the nuclear triad—comprised of silo-based intercontinental ballistic missiles, bomber aircraft, and nuclear submarines—is the most strategically sound means of ensuring nuclear deterrence. To remain effective, however, we must recapitalize our Cold War legacy nuclear-deterrence forces, continuing a modernization program initiated during the previous administration. 27:05 Defense Secretary James Mattis: We need Congress to lift the defense spending caps and support the budget for our military of 700 billion for this fiscal year and 716 billion for next fiscal year. Let me be clear: as hard as the last 16 years of war have been on our military, no enemy in the field has done as much to harm the readiness of the U.S. military than the combined impact of the Budget Control Act’s defense spending caps, worsened by operating for 10 of the last 11 years under continuing resolutions of varied and unpredictable duration. The Budget Control Act was purposely designed to be so injurious that it would force Congress to pass necessary budgets. It was never intended to be the solution. 34:50 General Paul Selva: Two supplemental capabilities recommended in the Nuclear Posture Review—the nuclear-armed sea-launched cruise missile and a modification of a small number of existing submarine-launched ballistic missile warheads—would enhance deterrence by ensuring that no adversary under any set of circumstances can perceive an advantage through the use of a limited nuclear escalation or other strategic attack. Fielding these capabilities will not lower the threshold at which the U.S. would employ nuclear weapons; rather, it will raise the nuclear threshold for potential adversaries, making the use of nuclear weapons less likely. 35:45 General Paul Selva: It is important to note that the National Defense Strategy and the Nuclear Posture Review both make the assumption that the military will receive timely, predictable, and sufficient funding to execute these strategies. As General Mattis has emphasized, we in uniform appreciate the support of this committee and the Congress, and we trust that the Congress will provide the funding needed to turn these strategies into reality. 1:03:05 Representative Joe Wilson (SC): Secretary Mattis, your Nuclear Posture Review, NPR, recommends that U.S. develop two supplemental nuclear capabilities: first, a low-yield submarine-launched ballistic missile, SLBM; and second, a sea-launched cruise missile. Why are these needed for deterrence and assurance? And following on that, some are arguing that they lower the threshold for the U.S. to use nuclear weapons. Do you believe that the addition of these capabilities to the U.S. nuclear arsenal is an increase or decrease the likelihood of a nuclear war? And another angle: why should we need a low-yield SLBM when we already have a low-yield nuclear gravity bomb? Are these capabilities redundant? Defense Secretary James Mattis: Congressman, I don’t believe it lowers the threshold at all. What it does, it makes very clear that we have a deterrent. If the Russians choose to carry out what some of their doctrine people have promoted, their political leaders have promoted, which would be to employ a low-yield nuclear weapon in a conventional fight in order to escalate to de-escalate; in other words, to escalate to victory and then de-escalate. We want to make certain they recognize that we can respond in kind. We don’t have to go with a high-yield weapon; thus, the deterrent effort stays primary. It is not to in any way lower the threshold to use nuclear weapons. On the sea-launched cruise missile, as you know, we have an ongoing issue with Russia’s violation of the INF. I want to make certain that our negotiators have something to negotiate with, that we want Russia back into compliance. We do not want to forgo the INF, but at the same time, we have options if Russia continues to go down this path. Discussion: Kissinger and Schultz on Global Challenges, C-SPAN, Senate Armed Services Committee, January 25, 2018. Witnesses: Henry Kissinger National Security Advisor & Secretary of State in Nixon & Ford Administrations George Shultz Secretary of State in Reagan Administration Richard Armitage Deputy Secretary of State in the first term of the George W. Bush administration 12:45 Henry Kissinger: The international situation facing the United States is unprecedented. What is occurring is more than a coincidence of individual crises. Rather, it is a systemic failure of world order, which is gathering momentum and which has led to an erosion of the international system rather than its consolidation, a rejection of territorial acquisition by force, expansion of mutual trade benefits without coercion, which are the hallmark of the existing system are all under some kind of strain. Compounding this dynamism is the pace of technological development, whose extraordinary progress threatens to outstrip our strategic and moral imagination and makes the strategic equation tenuous unless major efforts are made to sustain it. 19:45 Henry Kissinger: There is no doubt that the military capacity of China, as well as its economic capacity, is growing, and there have been challenges from Russia which have to be met, especially in Ukraine, Crimea, and Syria. And this raises these fundamental questions: What is the strategic relationship between these countries vis-a-vis the prospect of peace? Is their strength comparable enough to induce restraint? Are their values compatible enough to encourage an agreed legitimacy? These are the challenges that we face. The balance of power must be maintained, but it is also necessary to attempt a strategic dialogue that prevents the balance of power from having to be tested. This is the key issue in our relationship. 25:10 George Shultz: And I take the occasion to particularly underline one of the things that Henry brought out in his testimony, that is the concern we must have about nuclear proliferation. As you remember in the Reagan period, we worked hard. President Reagan thought nuclear weapons were immoral, and we worked hard to get them reduced. And we had quite a lot of success. And in those days, people seemed to have an appreciation of what would be the result of a nuclear weapon if ever used. I fear people have lost that sense of dread. And now we see everything going in the other direction, nuclear proliferation. The more countries have nuclear weapons, the more likely it is one’s going to go off somewhere, and the more fissile materials lying around—anybody who gets fissile material can make a weapon fairly easily. So this is a major problem. It can blow up the world. So I think we have to get at it. And the right way to start is what Henry said, is somehow to be able to have a different kind of relationship with Russia. After all, Russia and the United States have the bulk of all the weapons. 31:20 George Shultz: First, let me talk about the economy. What is happening as a result of these forces is de-globalization. This is already happening. This is not something for the future. The reason is that it’s becoming more and more possible to produce the things you want close to where you are. So the advantages of low labor costs are disappearing. And the more you produce things near where you are, the less you need shipping, and it has a big impact on energy, and it has a huge impact on the countries that are providing low-cost labor and a huge impact on places like ourselves which will wind up being able to produce these things near where we are. It’s a revolution. And a revolution in the economy has all sorts of security implications that need to be thought about. But this is a very big deal. 33:30 George Shultz: Robotics, 3-D printing, and artificial intelligence are driving manufacturers to reconsider not only how and what they make but where they make it. The world is on the very front end of a big shift from labor to automation. Robot sales are expected to reach $400,000 annually in 2018. This estimate does not account for the newly developed cobots, that is, collaborative robots. They assist human workers and, thus, dramatically increase human productivity. There are other things about all this that I won’t go into which underline it, but the new technologies are bringing manufacturing back to the United States. The United States has lost manufacturing jobs every year from 1998 to 2009, a total of 8 million jobs. Over the last 6 years, it regained about a million of them. With the cost of living no longer a significant advantage, it makes little sense to manufacture components in Southeast Asia, assemble them in China, and then ship them to the rest of the world when the same item can either be manufactured by robots or printed where it will be used. So this is a huge revolution taking place. It also underlines the enhanced ability to protect your intellectual property because you don’t have to ship it around. 35:35 George Shultz: You want to look at the dramatic improvements in nano-energetics, artificial intelligence, drones, and 3-D printing. They’re producing a revolution of small, smart, and cheap weapons that will redefine the battlefield. Open-source literature says nano-aluminum created ultra high burn rates which give nano-explosives four to ten times the power of TNT. The obvious result, small platforms will carry a very destructive power. Then you can put these small platforms on drones. And drones can be manufactured easily, and you can have a great many of them inexpensively. So then you can have a swarm armed with lethal equipment. Any fixed target is a real target. So an airfield where our Air Force stores planes is a very vulnerable target. A ship at anchor is a vulnerable target. So you’ve got to think about that in terms of how you deploy. And in terms of the drones, while such a system cannot be jammed, it would only serve to get a drone—talking about getting a drone to the area of where its target is, but that sure could hit a specific target. At that point, the optical systems guided by artificial intelligence could use on-board, multi-spectral imaging to find a target and guide the weapons. It is exactly that autonomy that makes the technologic convergence a threat today. Because such drones will require no external input other than the signature of the designed target, they will not be vulnerable to jamming. Not requiring human intervention, the autonomous platforms will also be able to operate in very large numbers. 38:48 George Shultz: I think there’s a great lesson here for what we do in NATO to contain Russia because you can deploy these things in boxes so you don’t even know what they are and on trucks and train people to unload quickly and fire. So it’s a huge deterrent capability that is available, and it’s inexpensive enough so that we can expect our allies to pitch in and get them for themselves. 40:10 George Shultz: The creative use of swarms of autonomous drones to augment current forces would strongly and relatively cheaply reinforce NATO, as I said, that deterrence. If NATO assists frontline states in fielding large numbers of inexpensive autonomous drones that are pre-packaged in standard 20-foot containers, the weapons can be stored in sites across the countries under the control of reserve forces. If the weapons are pre-packaged and stored, the national forces can quickly deploy the weapons to delay a Russian advance. So what’s happening is you have small, cheap, and highly lethal replacing large, expensive platforms. And this change is coming about with great rapidity, and it is massively important to take it into account in anything that you are thinking about doing. 54:10 George Shultz: Well, I read what I guess was an early version—somehow it was sent to me—of the national-security strategy. And I liked the beginning of it because it talked about our commitment to getting rid of nuclear weapons. But as you read on, it almost sounded a little bit as though there might be this or that occasion where we would use nuclear weapons. And this notion of using them that is spreading around is deeply disturbing to me. Video: Pinky and the Brain - The Really Great Dictator, March 6, 2011. Video: War on Iraq Breaking News - Shock & Awe Iraq, Sky News, October 20, 2006. Cover Art Design by Only Child Imaginations Music Presented in This Episode Intro & Exit: Tired of Being Lied To by David Ippolito (found on Music Alley by mevio)  

Hans Kristensen from the Federation of American Scientists joins us today to discuss the Trump administration’s Nuclear Posture Review.Hans Kristensen bio2018 Nuclear Posture ReviewFederation of American Scientists Nuclear Posture Review ResourceTexas National Security Review Policy Roundtable on the NPR See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

We’ve had nuclear weapons for more than 70 years. But we have never had a president quite as deranged as Donald Trump before and the result has made more people pay much closer attention to U.S. nuclear weapons policy than they did in recent years. We bring together this week a great panel to discuss the Nuclear Posture Review, Trump and how to save the world including Joe Cirincione, Jeffrey Lewis, David Sanger, Kori Schake and Rosa Brooks. One thought: implant the nuclear code in a kitten and make the president kill the kitten to get it before he can use the nuclear code. Another: Bury the nuclear code in a 10 page long memo and thus rest assured this president will never find it. Tune in!Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/deepstateradio. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Mark Perry joins me to discuss the recent Nuclear Posture Review, which some say represents a dramatic break with the past in terms of nuclear policy and the possibility of using nuclear weapons. How concerned should we be?

We’ve had nuclear weapons for more than 70 years. But we have never had a president quite as deranged as Donald Trump before and the result has made more people pay much closer attention to U.S. nuclear weapons policy than they did in recent years. We bring together this week a great panel to discuss the Nuclear Posture Review, Trump and how to save the world including Joe Cirincione, Jeffrey Lewis, David Sanger, Kori Schake and Rosa Brooks. One thought: implant the nuclear code in a kitten and make the president kill the kitten to get it before he can use the nuclear code. Another: Bury the nuclear code in a 10 page long memo and thus rest assured this president will never find it. Tune in! See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

This week the ladies of Bombshell return to regularly scheduled programming, re-introducing ourselves with our new Bombshell questions including everyone's favorite bars and least favorite books. Next we turn to our old friends Afghanistan and North Korea (wondering if we'll ever get a public debate on either), before wonking out to the Nuclear Posture Review and State of the Union address. Also, if you PT three times per day but don't log it in Strava does it even count, bro? Finally, a dazzling potpourri of pop-culture - even Radha weighs in.   Don't forget to send all your process valentines!  Bombshell Online Store   David D. Kirkpatrick, “Secret Alliance: Israel Carriers Out Airstrikes in Egypt, With Cairo’s O.K.,” New York Times Max Fisher, “In Afghanistan’s Unwinnable War, What’s the Best Loss to Hope For?,” New York Times Mia Bloom, January 27 Twitter status  Thomas Gibbons-Neff, “Training Quick and Staffing Unfinished, Army Units Brace for Surging Taliban,” New York Times Steve Inskeep, “U.S. Military Auditor Suggests The Afghan War Is Still At A Stalemate,” NPR Anna Fifield, “North Koreans have tasted freedom through the markets. Sanctions could put that at risk.,” Washington Post Victor Cha, “Victor Cha: Giving North Korea a ‘bloody nose’ carries a huge risk to Americans,” Washington Post David Nakamura, February 1 Twitter status James Acton, “Command and Control in the Nuclear Posture Review: Right Problem, Wrong Solution,” War on the Rocks Patrick Tucker, “No, the US Won’t Respond to A Cyber Attack with Nukes,” Defense One Patrick Tucker, “Strava’s Just the Start: The US Military’s Losing War Against Data Leakage,” Defense One    Produced by: Tre Hester   Theme Music: Future Teens – Jennifer Lawrence

This week the ladies of Bombshell return to regularly scheduled programming, re-introducing ourselves with our new Bombshell questions including everyone's favorite bars and least favorite books. Next we turn to our old friends Afghanistan and North Korea (wondering if we'll ever get a public debate on either), before wonking out to the Nuclear Posture Review and State of the Union address. Also, if you PT three times per day but don't log it in Strava does it even count, bro? Finally, a dazzling potpourri of pop-culture - even Radha weighs in.   Don't forget to send all your process valentines!  Bombshell Online Store   David D. Kirkpatrick, “Secret Alliance: Israel Carriers Out Airstrikes in Egypt, With Cairo’s O.K.,” New York Times Max Fisher, “In Afghanistan’s Unwinnable War, What’s the Best Loss to Hope For?,” New York Times Mia Bloom, January 27 Twitter status  Thomas Gibbons-Neff, “Training Quick and Staffing Unfinished, Army Units Brace for Surging Taliban,” New York Times Steve Inskeep, “U.S. Military Auditor Suggests The Afghan War Is Still At A Stalemate,” NPR Anna Fifield, “North Koreans have tasted freedom through the markets. Sanctions could put that at risk.,” Washington Post Victor Cha, “Victor Cha: Giving North Korea a ‘bloody nose’ carries a huge risk to Americans,” Washington Post David Nakamura, February 1 Twitter status James Acton, “Command and Control in the Nuclear Posture Review: Right Problem, Wrong Solution,” War on the Rocks Patrick Tucker, “No, the US Won’t Respond to A Cyber Attack with Nukes,” Defense One Patrick Tucker, “Strava’s Just the Start: The US Military’s Losing War Against Data Leakage,” Defense One    Produced by: Tre Hester   Theme Music: Future Teens – Jennifer Lawrence

On this week's episode of the Defense & Aerospace Business Report podcast, sponsored by Bell Helicopter, a Textron company, we discuss the possibility of a second government shutdown in 2018, the US Defense Department's 2018 Nuclear Posture Review, Ernst & Young's audit of the Defense Logistics Agency, UPS' Boeing 747 order and more. This week's guests include Gordon Adams, PhD, American University professor emeritus and Stimson Center distinguished fellow, Ron Epstein, PhD, of Bank of America Merrill Lynch, Todd Harrison of the Center for Strategic and International Studies, and Sash Tusa of Agency Partners.

On today's episode of Loud & Clear, Brian Becker and John Kiriakou are joined by Greg Mello, the executive director of the Los Alamos Study Group, and Kevin Kamps, the Radioactive Waste Watchdog at the organization Beyond Nuclear.The Trump Administration announced its Nuclear Posture Review, which calls for a major upgrade in the US nuclear arsenal, including more new nuclear weapons, and smaller tactical nukes that would be used on the battlefield. The policy is a violation of longstanding international agreements and could lead to a new arms race. Days after the release of the sco called Nunes memo the Democrats are insisting on the release of their memo, which might be considered a minority rebuttal, but it’s time to take a look at the big picture. What does this whole incident say about the FBI, its power, its capacity for abuse and misconduct, and the history of an organization that has played such a decisive role in American politics over many, many decades. Brian and John speak with Dave Lindorff, an investigative reporter, a columnist for CounterPunch, and a contributor to Businessweek, The Nation, Extra! and Salon.com; And by David Cobb, campaign manager of the 2016 Jill Stein/Ajamu Baraka presidential campaign.A Russian warplane was shot down over Syria on Saturday, killing the pilot. The surface-to-air missile was fired by al-Qaeda rebels, a dangerous development as the Trump Administration brags that it has defeated ISIS in Syria. Mark Sleboda, he is an international Affairs and Security Analyst, joins the show.Today marks the 15th anniversary of the speech by then-Secretary of State Colin Powell to the United Nations Security Council that laid out the US path to war against Iraq. Powell had told the UN definitively that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. That was not true, and the lie led to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people. Medea Benjamin, co-founder of Code Pink, joins Brian and John.This week we’ll look at the worst and most misleading headlines. Steve Patt, an independent journalist whose writings can be found at lefti.blogspot.com, joins the show.The hosts then talk about the latest news of the day regarding the so-called Nunes Memo, the Democrats’ minority memo, and a recently declassified referral from the Senate Judiciary Committee about a criminal accusation against Christopher Steele, the author of the now-infamous Steele Dossier. In a setback for leftist former president Rafael Correa, the yes campaign succeeded on all questions in yesterday’s referendum in Ecuador pushed by current President Lenin Moreno, who is accused of betraying the “Citizens Revolution” movement that brought him to power. Independent journalist Denis Rogatyuk joins the show.

On this episode of Fault Lines, hosts Garland Nixon and Lee Stranahan analyze the Nunes Memo. What does it reveal about FISA (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act) warrants; bias and other issues with the procedures and practices of the Department of Justice—including the FBI—and domestic surveillance in general? What impact will the memo have? Garland, Lee, and guests discuss the Nunes Memo, recent Amtrak crashes—in context of Trump's infrastructure plan, plus the current state of immigration rights and the DREAMers as another government shutdown looms. They'll also review Trump's newly announced Nuclear Posture Review within the context of his overall foreign policy. They also discuss a possible backlash against the #MeToo movement that's been exposing sexual harassment and rape.Scheduled Guests and Notes: (Show 7-10 AM ET MON, FEB 5)Jamie Lovegrove - Political Reporter for The Post and Courier | Topic: Learning the Facts about the South Carolina Amtrak Crash w/ Reporter @jslovegrove 7:40am - 8:00amDarlene Brown - CEO DivineEmpowerment.org | Topic: Monday Motivation 8:00am - 8:20amKyle Smith - Film Critic for the NY Post & Critic-at-Large for National Review @rkylesmith | Topic: Is a Male Backlash Brewing Against the #MeToo Movement? 8:20am - 8:40amPaul Kawika Martin - Peace Action Senior Director for Policy and Political Affairs | Topics: Trump's foreign policy & Nuclear Posture Review 9:00am - 9:20amLiana E. Montecinos - former DREAMer, President of the David A. Clarke Law Latinx Student Association | Topics: Conference & programs for immigrants 9:20am - 9:40amSharyl Attkisson - Investigative Journalist for Full Measure News | Topic: Emmy Award Winning Investigative Journalist @SharylAttkisson on the FBI, DOJ & FISA Court 9:40am - 10:00am

Contrary to what those outside the Deep State may think, the U.S. government has recently undergone an explosion of creativity. Recently we have seen a National Security Strategy, a National Defense Strategy and a Nuclear Posture Review. Some think these are just empty academic exercises. But others, like our guests the Atlantic Council’s Christine Wormuth, Georgetown’s Rosa Brooks and Kori Schake, soon to be of the IISS, see more. They see divisions between senior officials. They see a president who doesn’t know what any of these documents say or mean. And, with a special eye on nukes, they see plenty of good reason to invest now in a used missile silo. Tune in!Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/deepstateradio. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

  You've may of the Doomsday Clock. This is a rubric created by the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists at the dawn of the nuclear age to demonstrate how close humanity is to nuclear annihilation. Midnight symbolizes doomsday -- and the closer the clock moves to midnight, the closer we are to nuclear war.   Well, on January 25th, the scientists behind the nuclear clock moved it a tic closer -- to two minutes before midnight. This is the closest the clock has been to the doomsday scenario since 1953. They cited the impetuousness of Donald Trump and Kim Jong Un as their rational. But adding to the growing concern over the possible use of nuclear weapons is also a new nuclear weapons policy that is being rolled out by the Trump administration. The world caught a glimpse of what this policy might be when a draft of a document called the Nuclear Posture Review was leaked to the press.  The nuclear posture review is a document that tends to be released in the early stages of an administration to set its over all nuclear weapons policy. And here, you will probably not be surprised to learn that Trump's nuclear policy review is likely to deviate from his predecessors in important ways.  On the line with me to discuss the Trump administration's emerging approach to nuclear weapons, nuclear deterrence and other key nuclear policy issues is Tom Countryman. He was a career diplomat who served for decades in various postings at the State Department and around the world. He most recently served as the Assistant Secretary of State for International Security and Nonproliferation until the very early days of the Trump administration. He is now the chair of the board of the Arms Control Association.  Countryman does a very good job explaining what is the same--and what is so different about Donald Trump's approach to the bomb. And in so doing, I think he offers some important insights into how some of the underlying logic of nuclear policy planners might rest on some faulty assumptions.      --- Please leave a review on iTunes. You can click this link or follow these instructions ---    Launch Apple's Podcast app. Tap the Search tab. Enter "Global Dispatches" in the search bar. Tap the blue Search key at the bottom right. Tap the album art for the podcast. Tap the Reviews tab. Tap Write a Review at the bottom.

Contrary to what those outside the Deep State may think, the U.S. government has recently undergone an explosion of creativity. Recently we have seen a National Security Strategy, a National Defense Strategy and a Nuclear Posture Review. Some think these are just empty academic exercises. But others, like our guests the Atlantic Council’s Christine Wormuth, Georgetown’s Rosa Brooks and Kori Schake, soon to be of the IISS, see more. They see divisions between senior officials. They see a president who doesn’t know what any of these documents say or mean. And, with a special eye on nukes, they see plenty of good reason to invest now in a used missile silo. Tune in! See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

On today's episode of Loud & Clear, Brian Becker and John Kiriakou are joined by Coleen Rowley, a former FBI special agent who in 2002 was named Time Magazine person of the year along with two other whistleblowers, joins the show.A former C.I.A. officer suspected by investigators of helping China dismantle United States spying operations and identify informants has been arrested. The reported collapse of the US spy network in China is described by the New York Times as one of the American government’s worst intelligence failures in recent years.A newly drafted United States nuclear strategy that has been sent to President Trump for approval will permit an expanded use of nuclear weapons. This document is called the Nuclear Posture Review. The following is a 30-minute except interview on the issue of nuclear weapons. The program was recorded one week ago in the studio of Radio Sputnik. Brian and John speak with Greg Mello, the executive director of the Los Alamos Study Group, and Kevin Kamps, the Radioactive Waste Watchdog at the organization Beyond Nuclear.House Republicans are proposing another stopgap spending measure that would ignore Democratic concerns over DACA, but would fund the Children’s Health Insurance Program, or CHIP, for the next six years. They look at whether the Democrats will be forced to choose children over immigrants to get a budget deal. Dr. Scott Tyson, the CEO of Pediatrics South and an advocate for the right to healthcare, joins the show.For 16 years, fighting in Afghanistan between US troops and the Taliban has stopped when winter descends. Under the new rules of engagement for the third US president to administer the Afghanistan war, the US and Afghan forces conducted an average of 15 airstrikes a day this December, compared with an average of 2 last December. Ann Wright, a retired United States Army colonel and former U.S. State Department official in Afghanistan, who resigned in protest of the invasion of Iraq, join Brian and John.The value of the dollar is down more than 15 percent versus the euro in the past six months, making exports cheaper and imports more expensive. It also could fuel inflation and prolong the stock market rally. But is this a bubble, and are the Trump Administration’s policies just kicking the can down the road? Daniel Sankey, a financial policy analyst, and Steve Keen, the author of “Debunking Economics” and the world’s first crowdfunded economist, join the show.Momentum is building for the outdoor Virginia Prison Reform Rally to be held from 2-3 p.m. Saturday, Jan. 20, at the Bell Tower on Capitol Square in Richmond, Virgnia. Margaret Breslau, Chairperson of the Coalition for Justice, joins Brian and John.On the same day that he refused to answer questions before the House Intelligence Committee, former White House senior advisor Steve Bannon was subpoenaed to testify before special counsel Robert Mueller’s grand jury. He has now reportedly agreed to an interview with Mueller rather than testify. They look at whether Bannon is a witness or a target. Daniel Lazare, a journalist and author of “The Frozen Republic,” “The Velvet Coup,” and “America's Undeclared War” joins the show.

A draft of the Trump Administration's Nuclear Posture Review has leaked -- and its a doozy.  Aaron and Jeffrey discuss the history of these reviews and recommendations to develop a new sea-launched cruise missile and a variable yield warhead for the Trident D5 submarine launched ballistic missile. Links of Note: The Huffpost article that originally leaked the document. The 2010 Nuclear Posture Review from the Obama administration. Support us over at Patreon.com/acwpodcast! Sponsored Links: Our sponsor this episode is ActionKit, a powerful suit of online campaigning tools. https://actionkit.com/wonk  

The Trump Administration is reportedly mulling the development of new "low yield" nuclear weapons in its Nuclear Posture Review. But is this really new? Or is it that we just don't trust the Trump Administration with sharp objects, let alone the bomb.   Jeffrey and Aaron discuss the recent history of proposals for new nuclear weapons, including low-yield ones, as well as how partisan framing and foreign perceptions may matter more than the technical reality.   Links of Note: Bryan Bender, "Trump review leans toward proposing mini-nuke," Politico, September 9, 2016.    Olga Oliker, Russia’s Nuclear Doctrine: What We Know, What We Don’t, and What That Means, CSIS, 2016.   Steven Young, "Just How New is the New, Nuclear-armed Cruise Missile?" UCS, 2016.    Lewis Dunn et al, Foreign Perceptions on U.S. Nuclear Policy and Posture, SAIC, 2006. 

Scott D. Sagan, The Caroline S.G. Munro Professor of Political Science and Co-Director, Center for International Security and Cooperation (CISAC), Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies, Stanford University, evaluates international response to the 2010 U.S. Nuclear Posture Review. The research was conducted by a team of distinguished social science researchers and was published in a special edition of the Nonproliferation Review. For more nonproliferation multimedia please visit CNS NukeTube at http://nuketube.tv. For more information on the Nonproliferation Review, please visit http://cns.miis.edu/npr/index.htm

President Obama's Nuclear Posture Review is drawing fire from both hawks and doves. How does it propose to deal with proliferation, the threat of terrorism and the ambitions of Iran and North Korea? Also, GM's loss following bankruptcy, and America's worst coal mining disaster in 25 years.