Talk at Georgetown U Event on Tac Nuke Treaty

By Hans M. Kristensen

The Center on National Security and the Law and the Federal Legislation and Administrative Clinic co-hosted an event at Georgetown University Law Center on Tuesday, March 1st: Next Steps after New START: A Treaty on Tactical Nuclear Weapons.

The event included a keynote speech by Edward Warner, the Senior Advisor to the under Secretary of Defense for Policy.

I gave a briefing on the status of US and Russian nonstrategic nuclear weapons. Other panelists included Michael May, former director of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and now at Stanford University, Paul Dean from the Department of State, Madelyn Creedon with the Senate Armed Services Committee, and Tim Morrison from the office of Senator Jon Kyl. Dakota Rudesill from the Law Center moderated.

This publication was made possible by a grant from Carnegie Corporation of New York and Ploughshares Fund. The statements made and views expressed are solely the responsibility of the author.


One thought on “Talk at Georgetown U Event on Tac Nuke Treaty

  1. I support especially the deployment of nuclear weapons at sea. What Russia has too much, the U.S. has too little.

    There are too few CONUS facilities. Vulnerable, both against manmade and natural causes.

    Those B61 in Germany are grounded in the adolescent pissing-contest question “who won WW2?” Italy is a little different – I suspect they are aimed at Russia; cold warriors still @ work. The lack of a EU position on the question of U.S. nuclear weapons (and bases) in Europe is an embarrasment (but in a lot of ways oh-so comfortable).

    The Russian posture makes some sense – realistically the only enemy is China, and against China it would be strategic in any case.
    The other high numbers are based in the Russian character and the traditions of the defence establishment, not so much in actual military requirements.

    But on topic: Any treaty on tactical warheads needs to be global and open to whoever wants to join. That’s even more important than on the strategic side.

    From a practical standpoint there should probably be a soft/trust-based overall yield limit, and a hard/ISR-based delivery platform limit.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *