Author: Ariel Conn

Legislation and Issues

Legislation and Issues

In our rich 50-plus-year history, Council for a Livable World has pushed for policies that will make the world safer from nuclear threats. Whether we are engaging on Capitol Hill or motivating our supporters around the country to contact their representatives, we are advocating for what our founder called “the sweet voice of reason” when it comes to the most dangerous weapons ever created.

It is easy to look at the threats posed by weapons of mass destruction and assume there is nothing you can do. But you can do something — in fact, the biggest successes in nuclear risk reduction were driven by everyday people demanding that their leaders step back from the nuclear brink.

You have the power to effect change in nuclear weapons policy by letting your Member of Congress know you care about these issues. You can identify your Representative/Senators by clicking here. And then call them by contacting the Capitol Hill Switchboard: (202) 224-3121.

You can also take action simply by reading more about these issues, talking about them with your friends, and sharing posts about them on social media. Follow the Council on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram to stay up-to-date on the latest nuclear weapons news.

Join our email list to be among the first to know when hearings and votes take place on these and other critical national security issues.

Finally, you can take action on these issues by using our forms to donate to our endorsed candidates beginning in roughly July of non-election years and occasionally for special elections.

See the full list of policies here.

Legislation & National Security Calendar

Legislation & National Security Calendar

The Council provides analysis of congressional legislation and other actions taken by members of Congress that impact national security and foreign policy. We also encourage members of Congress and their staff to consider the legislative analysis and research produced by the Council and our affiliated organization, the Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation.

National Security Legislative Calendar

Key National Security Legislation

Legislative Achievements

No First Use

No First Use

The idea is simple: we don’t need to use nuclear weapons first. We can protect ourselves and our allies without having to start a nuclear war. A “No First Use” policy would make clear that the purpose of the U.S. nuclear arsenal is deterrence, not nuclear war-fighting. A policy like this is just common sense. As President Reagan said, “A nuclear war can never be won and must never be fought.” Implementing a No First Use policy would make America and its allies safer by increasing clarity on how and when the United States would use nuclear weapons, and would reduce nuclear risks worldwide. Below, you’ll find a quick explainer as well as additional resources on No First Use. You can also view and download our factsheet.

What an NFU policy would do:

A No First Use (NFU) policy would make it the policy of the United States not to use nuclear weapons first, which means that nuclear weapons would only be used to respond to a nuclear attack against the United States or our allies. It would formalize that nuclear weapons are only for deterrence, not nuclear war-fighting.

An NFU policy would lower risks by assuring nuclear-armed adversaries that they don’t have to worry the United States will use nuclear weapons first during a crisis.

An NFU policy is also the logical extension of the powers given to Congress in the Constitution. Only Congress can declare war, and the unprovoked first use of a nuclear weapon would most certainly be a declaration of war.

What an NFU policy would not do:

An NFU policy would not limit the United States from taking retaliatory action against someone who launches a nuclear strike against it or its allies.

An NFU policy would not change the President’s ability to use conventional forces first under warranted circumstances.

An NFU policy is not about one particular President; it is about the United States taking steps to reduce global nuclear risks.

What is happening with NFU Policy?

Members of Congress have introduced multiple bills that would directly or effectively implement an NFU policy. Even if these bills garner widespread support in Congress, the current White House is unlikely to support this policy change. But this is not an issue that is confined to Washington. In fact, cities and states across the country have passed resolutions encouraging the federal government to support an NFU policy. Public support and action can help make an NFU policy a reality.

You have a voice on whether the United States should ever start a nuclear war. Get the latest on NFU by following @NoFirstUse on Twitter.

Learn more…

Missile Defense

National missile defense: defense theology with unproven technology.

Since programs were first launched in the 1950’s to build systems capable of intercepting incoming nuclear or conventional weapons, the United States has spent more than $250 billion on various missile defense programs. Despite decades of research, development, and testing, there remains no reliably effective anti-missile system to counter intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs). Systems to counter shorter-range missiles, such as the Patriot and THAAD missile defense programs, have been more successful in tests, but their utility is limited to smaller, regional coverage areas. In fact, the system designated to intercept ICBMs, known as the Ground-based Midcourse Defense (GMD) program, has been unsuccessful in six of its last 11 tests, including three of its last five. This failing test record is exacerbated by the highly scripted conditions of the tests themselves.

Here’s how it’s supposed to work: interceptors attempt to destroy an incoming ICBM traveling roughly 15,000 miles per hour, or about 20 times faster than the speed of sound. When the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) tests GMD, it assumes prime weather and lighting conditions — and, being a test, it knows the timing and other information that no enemy would provide. Nonetheless, most tests still fail.

GMD is also exceptionally expensive. The Government Accountability Office (GAO) assesses that the total cost of the program will be almost $70 billion — and that cost estimate will almost certainly increase. But despite the hefty price tag and poor test record, some lawmakers want to expand GMD without first proving that the system is effective.

Non-Proliferation Issues

Non-Proliferation Issues

Across the world, there are stockpiles of nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons that should be consolidated, secured, accounted for and destroyed.

These weapons or materials could fall into the hands of terrorists or be illicitly sold to other countries, groups, or individuals. A number of non‑proliferation programs, including the Cooperative Threat Reduction Program and the Global Threat Reduction Initiative, have helped countries dismantle weapons, disband nuclear programs and safeguard remaining weapons and materials. However, over the past four years, U.S. Defense Nuclear Non-Proliferation program funding has declined.

The Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation works to strengthen an international nuclear non-proliferation regime based on the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), secure and reduce all vulnerable nuclear weapons-usable material throughout the world, and halt the spread of materials and weapons of mass destruction to state and non-state actors.

Factsheets

Factsheets & Analysis on Non-Proliferation

In the News

Press & In the News on Non-Proliferation

Infographics

Infographics on Non-Proliferation

Recent analysis on non-proliferation

Articles and posts by the Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation about a variety of current non-proliferation issues.

Info about nuclear weapons by the Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation

Nuclear Weapons Issues

While the global stockpile of nuclear weapons has been significantly reduced since the Cold War, there are still an estimated 14,000 nuclear weapons in nine different countries — 93% of which belong to the United States and Russia. The United States is committed to spending up to $1 trillion over the next thirty years on an ambitious nuclear modernization plan updating all three legs — air, sea, and ground — of the nuclear triad.

Factsheets

Factsheets & Analysis on Nuclear Weapons

In the News

Press & In the News on Nuclear Weapons

Infographics

Infographics on Nuclear Weapons

Recent analysis on nuclear weapons

Articles and posts by the Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation about a variety of current nuclear issues.

Issues by the Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation

Nuclear Issues

Nuclear Issues

Read More
Continue Reading

Nukes of Hazard

Nukes of Hazard

Nukes of Hazard is the name the Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation uses for producing blog posts, podcasts and videos that are smart, factual and shareable. Follow us for this great content and our takes on the latest nuclear news on Twitter, Instagram, Facebook and YouTube.

Analysis of nuclear countries

Analysis of nuclear countries

There are nine nuclear-armed states: the United States, Russia, United Kingdom, France, China, India, Pakistan, Israel and North Korea.

The Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation specifically provides in-depth analysis of nuclear issues in the United States, Iran, North Korea, Russia, India and Pakistan.

Analysis of nuclear countries

Read More
Continue Reading

Doomsday Clock

The Doomsday Clock

The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists’ Doomsday Clock is a design that warns the public about how close we are to destroying our world with dangerous technologies of our own making. It is a metaphor, a reminder of the perils we must address if we are to survive on the planet.

When the Doomsday Clock was created in 1947, the greatest danger to humanity came from nuclear weapons, in particular from the prospect that the United States and the Soviet Union were headed for a nuclear arms race. The Bulletin considered possible catastrophic disruptions from climate change in its hand-setting deliberations for the first time in 2007.

Humanity continues to face two simultaneous existential dangers—nuclear war and climate change—that are compounded by a threat multiplier, cyber-enabled information warfare, that undercuts society’s ability to respond. The international security situation is dire, not just because these threats exist, but because world leaders have allowed the international political infrastructure for managing them to erode.

Learn more about the Doomsday Clock.