Difficult deterrence decisions

Drell replies: I agree that the steps in my article “cannot be carried out unilaterally or bilaterally” with Russia. I emphasized the need to make the goal of a world without nuclear weapons into an international diplomatic initiative at the highest level.

However, I disagree with Lewis Glenn’s claim that our best option is to maintain a large number of nuclear weapons capable of massive retaliation in response to a nuclear attack. Our gravest danger today, due to the global spread of nuclear technology, is that dangerous hands, including suicidal terrorists, will acquire these horrific weapons. Reliance on thousands of them for deterrence based on massive destruction is becoming decreasingly effective and increasingly hazardous. A better path is for nuclear powers, led by the US and Russia, who own most of the nuclear weapons, to work internationally to prevent nuclear proliferation and initiate practical steps listed in my article toward an ultimate goal of zero weapons for all. Difficult yes, but far superior to the alternatives.