Nuclear Issues

7 Items

Russian President Boris Yeltsin, left, American President Bill Clinton, Ukrainian President Leonid Kuchma, and British Prime Minister John Major sign the Budapest Memorandum on Dec. 5, 1994.

Marcy Nighswander/Associated Press

Book Chapter - Ibidem Press

Damage Control: The Breach of the Budapest Memorandum and the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Regime

| March 2021

The Memorandum on Security Assurances in Connection with Ukraine’s Accession to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), signed in 1994 by Ukraine, and the three NPT depositary states, the United States, United Kingdom and Russian Federation, is not a ratified, legally binding treaty, but a set of high-level political commitments. Its significance is in explicitly linking Ukraine’s sovereignty and security to the NPT, and the basic bargains enshrined in it. The NPT’s depositary states gave Ukraine security assurances in exchange for Kyiv’s renunciation of the world’s third largest nuclear weapons arsenal. Moscow’s manifest violation of this deal when it invaded Ukraine in 2014 not only eroded European security. It has also undermined the rationale of the international nonproliferation regime. While not directly related to the question of the North-Atlantic Alliance’s enlargement, Russia’s disregard for the NPT’s logic has, since 2014, escalated Ukrainian critique of NATO’s insufficient engagement in Eastern Europe, during the last quarter of a century.

Baku, Azerbaijan, at night

Book Chapter

Iran's Role in the South Caucasus and Caspian Region: Diverging Views of the U.S. and Europe

| July 2003

This paper is part of a larger project that examined how different stances on regional issues can impact bilateral U.S.-European relations.

Since the Soviet breakup and the subsequent independence of the states of the South Caucasus (Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia), Europe and the United States have conducted very different policies toward the new states in the greater Caspian region. Moreover, Europe and the United States view Iran's policies and the desired role that Tehran should play in the region in diverging ways.

Cooperative Denuclearization: From Pledges to Deeds

Book - Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard Kennedy School

Cooperative Denuclearization: From Pledges to Deeds

| January 1993

"CSIA's research on cooperative denuclearization began during the August 1991 putsch against Mikhail Gorbachev. To those of us familiar with nuclear weapons, their construction, and command and control, and with the looming revolution about to sweep the then–Soviet Union, it was plain that a new and unprecedented danger to international security was emerging. An appropriate policy response to this new form of nuclear threat could not be fashioned from traditional Cold War tools of deterrence, arms control, and military preparedness alone. Safety could only be sought through new policies emphasizing cooperative engagement with the new states, new leaders, and military and industrial heirs of the former Soviet Union...."

teaser image

Book - Washington Institute for Near East Policy

Partners in Need: The Strategic Relationship of Russia and Iran

In this incisive Policy Paper, Caspian Basin specialist Brenda Shaffer presents a comprehensive overview of how Russia and Iran view each other, providing a detailed explanation of why Russia does not share all U.S. concerns about Iranian actions. Using her rich command of the Russian literature on Iran, the author argues that because Russia views its relations and cooperation with Iran as vital to national security, it will not jeopardize those relations for the sake of short-term material incentives or out of fear of U.S. condemnation.