ABSTRACT
Nuclear arms control has typically pursued two objectives: strategic stability and disarmament. Strategic stability exists when adversaries are confident that disarming strikes are impossible. Disarmament is the process of reducing the size of nuclear arsenals. During the Cold War, these two objectives seemed compatible. The superpowers appeared to be locked in an unbreakable strategic stalemate, regardless of whether they engaged in an intense arms race or substantially reduced their forces. Arms cuts seemed safe. Today, however, the logic of nuclear arms control is being overturned by technological developments and the legacy of past force reductions. The greatly improved accuracy of conventional and nuclear weapons and leaps in remote sensing and other advanced technologies are rendering nuclear arsenals vulnerable to disarming attack as never before. Nuclear cuts in this “new era of counterforce” increase the vulnerability of arsenals to destruction. This has important implications for global nuclear arms control efforts and US nuclear force structure decisions.
