Bulletin of the American Physical Society
2007 APS April Meeting
Volume 52, Number 3
Saturday–Tuesday, April 14–17, 2007; Jacksonville, Florida
Session K5: Changing Role of Nuclear Weapons in Foreign Policy |
Hide Abstracts |
Sponsoring Units: FHP FPS Chair: Benn H. Tannenbaum, AAAS Room: Hyatt Regency Jacksonville Riverfront Grand 6 |
Sunday, April 15, 2007 1:15PM - 1:51PM |
K5.00001: History of Nuclear Weapons Design and Production Invited Speaker: The nuclear build-up of the United States and the Soviet Union during the Cold War is often portrayed as an arms race. Some part was indeed a bilateral competition, but much was the result of automatic application of technical advances as they became available, without careful consideration of strategic implications. Thus, the history of nuclear weapon design is partly designers responding to stated military needs and partly the world responding to constant innovations in nuclear capability. Today, plans for a new nuclear warhead are motivated primarily by the desire to maintain a nuclear design and production capability for the foreseeable future. [Preview Abstract] |
Sunday, April 15, 2007 1:51PM - 2:27PM |
K5.00002: History of U.S. Nuclear Weapons Doctrine and a Path Forward Invited Speaker: During the Cold War, the United States considered a number of approaches for living in a world with nuclear weapons, including disarmament, preventive war, the incorporation of nuclear weapons into military strategy, passive and active defense, and deterrence. With the failure of early approaches to disarmament, and the rejection of preventive war against the Soviet Union (and later, China), deterrence became central to key nuclear relationships, though arms control continued to play an important role. The nuclear nonproliferation treaty made preventing the further spread of nuclear weapons another central component of U.S. policy. The Bush Administration has tried to devise a new policy for the post-Cold War period. Their approach has three salient pillars. First, it is characterized by an overall skepticism toward multilateral agreements, on the grounds that bad actors will not obey them, that agreements can lead to a false sense of security, and that such agreements are too often a way for the Lilliputians of the world to tie down Gulliver. The March 2005 U.S. National Defense Strategy declared that U.S. strength ``will continue to be challenged by those who employ a strategy of the weak, using international fora, judicial processes and terrorism.'' Second, the Bush Administration declared its intention to maintain a military dominance so great that other states simply would not try to catch up. The 2002 National Security Strategy states that ``Our forces will be strong enough to dissuade potential adversaries from pursuing a military build-up in hopes of surpassing, or equaling, the power of the United States.'' Third, the 2002 National Security Strategy (reaffirmed by the 2006 National Security Strategy) moved preventive war (which the strategies called ``preemptive war'') to a central position, rather than deterrence and nonproliferation. In part this was because of the claim that certain ``rogue'' states, and terrorist groups, were not deterrable. This talk will sketch this history, discuss the approach of the Bush Administration in more detail and assess its successes and failures, and suggest the lines of a new approach to U.S. nuclear weapons policy for the coming decades. This approach will follow that outlined in George Bunn and Christopher Chyba (eds.), ``U.S. Nuclear Weapons Policy: Confronting Today's Threats'' (Brookings, 2006, 340 pp.). [Preview Abstract] |
Sunday, April 15, 2007 2:27PM - 3:03PM |
K5.00003: The Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty: A Perspective from the National Laboratories Invited Speaker: A brief history of the de facto and formal treaties pertaining to nuclear weapons will be reviewed leading to a broader discussion of the recent Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. The role of the National Laboratories (primarily Livermore and Los Alamos) in both the technical and policy aspects of those treaties will be described. The debates within the Laboratories as well as the framework for testimony of individual Laboratory staff and other members of the scientific community will also be discussed. [Preview Abstract] |
Follow Us |
Engage
Become an APS Member |
My APS
Renew Membership |
Information for |
About APSThe American Physical Society (APS) is a non-profit membership organization working to advance the knowledge of physics. |
© 2024 American Physical Society
| All rights reserved | Terms of Use
| Contact Us
Headquarters
1 Physics Ellipse, College Park, MD 20740-3844
(301) 209-3200
Editorial Office
100 Motor Pkwy, Suite 110, Hauppauge, NY 11788
(631) 591-4000
Office of Public Affairs
529 14th St NW, Suite 1050, Washington, D.C. 20045-2001
(202) 662-8700