Nuclear threat
Since the end of the Cold War, it has become increasingly apparent that nuclear weapons remain a dangerous danger to humanity. They are capable of destroying entire cities and regions, with devastating consequences for the health of people worldwide. They have the potential to bring about global economic collapse and a period of climatological disaster known as “nuclear winter.” Nuclear weapons kill millions directly and cause incalculable suffering through their impact on agriculture, environment, climate, and social development. The devastation witnessed in Hiroshima and Nagasaki is an ongoing reminder that the ultimate solution to the nuclear threat must be nuclear disarmament.
Although explicit nuclear threats are uncommon, implicit ones have been the default position of states possessing nuclear weapons for decades. In fact, such a threat is the basis of the doctrine of deterrence: if you attack us, we will respond with nuclear warheads.
In the wake of the Ukraine crisis, George Perkovich, a senior fellow at Carnegie and expert on Russian nuclear policy, has been working on an important project to create a clear definition of what qualifies as a nuclear threat. He says that to qualify as a nuclear threat there needs to be both a verbal statement projecting nuclear strength and a material action to support it.
This is a crucial project because miscalculations during a crisis or conflict can lead to a nuclear conflict. It is also possible that terrorists may acquire nuclear weapons, a risk that could be reduced by agreeing to a no-first-use policy among all nuclear-weapon States and ensuring that all fissile materials are kept under strict control, with no more than what is needed for peaceful purposes.