Nuclear Issues

Staffing gaps and significant personnel changes at the State Department have raised concerns about the direction of U.S. foreign policy, especially amid public statements by President Donald Trump concerning American alliances and positions on issues around the world. Ambassador Cameron Munter invites Ambassador Nicholas Burns to share his insights and ideas, including on timely topics such as the U.S.-Russia relationship following the re-election of Vladimir Putin, Transatlantic relations and changing perceptions about the future role of NATO, and a possible meeting between President Trump and his North Korean counterpart on nuclear nonproliferation and security.

Ambassador Burns was Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs under President George W. Bush. Prior to that assignment, he was also U.S. Ambassador to NATO. Currently, Burns is the Goodman Family Professor of the Practice of Diplomacy and International Relations at Harvard’s John F. Kennedy School of Government, and also director of The Future of Diplomacy Project.

Nick Burns tells CNBC that Trump should stick with sanctions and avoid military conflict with North Korea. "Right now there are no good military options beyond defense," he says. Burns also says the Trump administration could begin to impose secondary sanctions.

Professor Nicholas Burns appeared on CNN to speak about the week's chaos in the White House, as well as recent events in North Korea, Russia, and Venezuela. 

Professor Nicholas Burns and Future of Diplomacy Project Senior Fellow, David Ignatius, in conversation with Charlie Rose about the Trump administration on the national security stage.

In this January 19 New Atlanticist blog post, Atlantic Council staff writer, by Ashish Kumar Sen, interviews Harvard Kennedy School professor and former US diplomat, R. Nicholas Burns. Burns says that Iran nuclear agreement is positive for the United States, but Iran will continue to be a problem in a violent Middle East.

"...[K]eeping Iran at arm's length (or worse) reduces U.S. diplomatic leverage and flexibility. As long as U.S. Middle East policy remains fixated on its 'special relationships' with Israel, Saudi Arabia, and to some extent Egypt, these states will continue to take U.S. support for granted and ignore U.S. preferences more often than we'd like. But if the United States had decent working relations with every state in the region — including Iran — it could work constructively with any or all of them."

On June 23 and 24, twenty five experts met at Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government under the auspices of the Geopolitics of Energy Project at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs. The group, which included experts from academia, the financial sector, government, and the energy industry, spent an evening and the following full day discussing and debating the possible energy implications of a nuclear deal between the P5+1 and Iran.

In this op-ed, Professor Burns outlines his support for the Obama Administration’s framework agreement with Iran as a sensible step forward towards a final deal on June 30^th.  President Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry have had their faith in diplomacy justified by their progress in containing Iran’s ability to become a nuclear weapons state. But, they will need to set a high bar for the final agreement, particularly in ensuring that verification procedures are air tight. And, Professor Burns reminds, we Americans should remember that Iran needs a deal more than we do.

Burns goes on to suggest that Obama must now pivot quickly to exercise strong Presidential leadership with four key groups to gain the necessary domestic and international support to implement an agreement.  He must: 1) Win the battle ahead on Capitol Hill; 2) Make up with Bibi; 3) Circle the Wagons with our key Sunni Arab partners Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States; and 4) Keep together the coalition that sanctioned and negotiated with Iran (U.S., UK, France, Germany, China, Russia) in order to hold Tehran’s feet to the fire on an agreement.

"...[A]nyone who questions the special relationship or the role the lobby plays in preserving it is still likely to be accused of anti-Semitism (if a gentile) or self-hatred (if Jewish). The special relationship has rested to some degree on intimidation, and as noted most people don't like being bullied. The question, therefore, is whether this flap will turn out to be an isolated incident or whether more people will begin to say what they really think."

Iran and six world powers clinched a deal on Sunday curbing the Iranian nuclear program in exchange for initial sanctions relief. Sounds pretty good, but of course nothing is that simple and already Israel has called it a "historic mistake." Which is it? And what's going to happen next? Harvard Kennedy School professor and GlobalPost senior foreign affairs columnist, Nicholas Burns, weighs in.