Nuclear Issues

130 Items

Acting Secretary of Defense Mark Esper arrives in Washington, D.C. to prepare for an upcoming trip to Europe to talk with the United States' NATO allies, June 24, 2019.

Andrew Harnik (AP)

Analysis & Opinions - The Boston Globe

War with Iran Will Cost More Than the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars

    Authors:
  • Rosella Cappella Zielinski
  • Neta C. Crawford
| June 24, 2019

Like the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, war with Iran would entail vast economic, budgetary, and environmental costs, argues Linda J. Bilmes. And this is to say nothing of the potential human costs—so why, then, is the United States slipping closer and closer to making the same mistakes it did 16 years ago?

How Saudi Arabia and China Could Partner on Solar Energy

AP/Andy Wong

Analysis & Opinions - Axios

How Saudi Arabia and China Could Partner on Solar Energy

| Jan. 24, 2019

Last May, Chinese solar panel manufacturer LONGi signed an agreement with Saudi trading company El Seif Group to establish large-scale solar manufacturing infrastructure in Saudi Arabia. The deal came several months after the Trump administration's imposition of global tariffs on imports of Chinese solar panels and cells.

Cpl. Edward Chin of the 3rd Battalion, 4th Marines Regiment, covers the face of a statue of Saddam Hussein with an American flag before toppling it in downtown in Baghdad on Wednesday, April 9, 2003. (AP Photo/Jerome Delay, File)

AP Photo/Jerome Delay, File

Analysis & Opinions - Sydney Morning Herald

The Monstrous Strategic Mistake That Took Us to War in Iraq

| Mar. 20, 2018

John Howard’s decision to commit thousands of Australian troops to the invasion of Iraq 15 years ago ranks as one of the two great failures of Australian foreign policy since the Second World War.

The other is Menzies’ decision to send forces to Vietnam. Both cases represented an abysmal failure of Australian political leadership, driven by an unnecessary capitulation to strategically foolhardy decisions by the US administrations of the time.

Both decisions were taken without independent Australian analysis of the legitimacy of American war aims, the credibility of American military strategy to both win the war and secure the peace, as well as the long-term consequences for Australian national interests.

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

Elizabeth Sherwood-Randall on Office Hours

| Feb. 01, 2018

Elizabeth Sherwood-Randall (@LSRTweets), former Deputy Secretary of Energy and Belfer Center Senior Fellow, talks with Aroop Mukharji (@aroopmukharji) about the mystery surrounding the Energy Department’s National Laboratories, the smart grid, the U.S. nuclear arsenal, energy sources of the future, and her favorite energy bar.

teaser image

Newspaper Article - Harvard Gazette

Fears of National Insecurity

    Author:
  • Christina Pazzanese
| 10/17/2017

From sharply rising tensions with a nuclear North Korea and decertification of the Iran nuclear deal to China’s growing global assertiveness and the State Department pullback from projecting American values, such as democracy and human rights, around the world, the United States faces urgent national security challenges.

In a panel discussion Monday evening at Harvard Kennedy School (HKS) moderated by MSNBC host Rachel Maddow, former members of President Obama’s cabinet described what they see as a fraying of alliances, a loss of credibility with allies and enemies, a stepping back as a leader on human rights and democracy, and a relinquishment of diplomacy as a critical component of national security.

U.S. Secretary of Energy Ernest Moniz and Head of the Iranian Atomic Energy Organization Ali Akbar Salehi, left, meet at an hotel in Vienna, July 9, 2015

AP

Analysis & Opinions - Scientific American

How International Cooperation in Research Advances Both Science and Diplomacy

| Apr. 27, 2017

"The partial budget blueprint released by the White House recently will put U.S. leadership in science and technology at serious risk if Congress goes along. In addition to the obvious damage that would result from the proposed $5.8 billion cut at NIH, the $2 billion cut in applied energy R&D, the $900 million cut in DOE’s Office of Science, the abolition of ARPA-E, and the research cuts at NOAA and EPA, a less immediately obvious potential casualty would be U.S. scientific cooperation with a wide variety of other countries on a wide variety of topics."