ABSTRACT
The efforts of countless who have addressed the nuclear problematique since the early 1940s prompts distinct humility. Public discourse is further distorted by the odd asymmetry between abolition and nonproliferation. Objectively, proliferation damages the projects of both nuclearists and denuclearizers. Nuclearists and denuclearizers can agree that proliferation harbors dangers, should be discussed, and should be thwarted. The object of denuclearization research, then, is to probe the risks and uncertainties of a zero nuclear weapon (ZNW) regime, making reasoned argument about the type and degree of risks associated with specific conditions and design choices, and showing how those risks could be addressed. Once denuclearization is on the public agenda, are ambitious mutual reassurance, active ongoing politics to avoid challenges to the ZNW regime once it is in place, and winning agreement to the two elements of collective security, authoritative decision and the means of enforcement, to be called upon should politics fail.
