On Sunday, Nov. 20, 1983, I left my college dorm to visit my parents’ home in the suburbs of Oxford, Ohio. That evening, along with some 100 million other Americans, we witnessed two hours of stunning television that would mobilize the nation, as well as some of its leaders, to take meaningful steps to reduce the nuclear danger.
The Defense Department unexpectedly announced plans to develop a new variant of the B61 nuclear gravity bomb.
Israel used its Arrow-3 missile defense system to shoot down a ballistic missile.
The experience of the Cold War teaches us that an unconstrained arms race has no winners, only losers. Leaders in Beijing, Moscow, and Washington need to engage in nuclear risk reduction talks, negotiate sensible and verifiable reductions of their arsenals, and refrain from building new destabilizing types of weapons rather than proceed down the dangerous path of unconstrained nuclear competition.
For the bipartisan commission charged with recommending how the United States should deal simultaneously with two nuclear-capable adversaries, the “answer to an arms race is an arms race.”
Forty-eight states, concerned about Iran’s export of missiles and drones to Russia and other countries, affirmed plans to work to limit the transfers.
After long resisting, the United States delivered ATACMS, which Ukraine’s president said were used successfully on the battlefield.
The U.S. Defense Department says nuclear, chemical, and biological threats have changed and increased significantly since 2014.
The House and Senate versions of the 2024 defense authorization act zero out the Biden administration request for R&D on the ARRW system.
China Continues Nuclear Buildup