The recent meeting between President Biden and Russian President Vladimir Putin offered a glimmer of hope in the form of a joint statement that “a nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought.” If they are serious about that, they should make substantial reductions in the nuclear arsenals of both sides as a step towards joining the international consensus in favor of eliminating nuclear weapons.
The Biden administration’s first Pentagon budget proposal is now slated to come out in early May. Rather than sticking with current levels of spending, the administration should craft a plan that reduces the Pentagon budget while freeing up funds for investment in other security priorities. Doing so would mark an important first step towards revising America’s approach to security and allocating resources accordingly.
Although Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles (ICBMs) are often touted as an essential part of the United States’ nuclear deterrence apparatus, they don’t actually make us safer.
With a price-tag of more than $1.2 trillion dollars, there’s intense debate about plans to overhaul U.S. nuclear forces. What many don’t realize is that there’s considerable money within this debate, and it’s coming from the very companies that will make billions if the United States upgrades its nuclear forces.
A progressive international agenda needs to begin with a frank assessment of the present strategic culture and connect domestic and global progressive priorities. Global threats such as climate change and nuclear weapons have not been prioritized, while national treasure is squandered in endless wars.
As President Obama left office in 2016, he warned the incoming President Trump that North Korea would be “the most urgent problem” that he would face. That problem remains today, and in many ways has worsened.