Nuclear Disarmament after New START
The purpose of this paper is to examine and propose concrete nuclear disarmament measures which should be taken following the entry into force of the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START) on February 5, 2011. This treaty is the first concrete outcome from the famous Prague address by President Barak Obama in April 2009 and there still remain many items which should be pursued and implemented. I will take up the issues of the further reduction of strategic nuclear weapons, the reduction of non-strategic nuclear weapons, the entry into force of the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT), the negotiation of a Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty (FMCT), and the consideration of a nuclear weapons convention. I will examine the circumstances surrounding each issue, and make proposals for their realization.
Reducing Tactical Nuclear Weapons in Europe
Control of US and Russian tactical nuclear weapons has remained an elusive goal since the end of the Cold War, despite the fact that these weapons are particularly attractive to nuclear terrorists and represent a major danger from the standpoint of early or accidental use. Meaningful progress will probably require a larger deal in which there are trade-off between US concessions on issues of interest to Russia and Russian concessions on tactical nuclear weapons. Two options merit serious consideration. The first entails the withdrawal of the small number of US tactical weapons that remain in Europe to jump-start a dialogue. The second option involves a package deal that would include Russian agreement to initiate negotiations on tactical nuclear weapons reductions in exchange for NATO agreement to discuss changes in the Conventional Forces in Europe Treaty. An optimal approach would be to launch a meaningful dialogue on tactical nuclear weapons in a separate forum, yet in parallel to the next stage of START negotiations.
The Internet and the Changing Beijing-Taipei Relations: Toward Unification or Fragmentation?
Information and its technologies facilitate the exercise of what has been called “soft power,” a concept that differentiates information from the conventional dimensions of “hard power,” which is mainly associated with military force and economic influence. Soft power, according to Nye, a former Assistant Secretary of Defense of the United States, means that “A country may obtain the outcomes it wants in world politics because other countries want to follow it, admiring its values, emulating its example, aspiring to its level of prosperity and openness. In this sense it is just as important to set the agenda in world politics and attract others as it is to force them to change through the threat or use of military or economic weapons.”1