RAND Research Topic: Nuclear Disarmament 2012-05-24T14:57:13Z Copyright (c) 2012, The RAND Corporation RAND Corporation http://www.rand.org/topics/nuclear-disarmament.html Dissuading Iran from the Bomb and Avoiding War http://www.rand.org/commentary/2011/12/02/PSE.html Dec 2, 2011 Dec 2, 2011 By refusing to face more squarely the probability that Iran will eventually acquire a nuclear weapons capability, the American and Israeli governments actually reduce their ability to dissuade Iran from crossing that threshold, writes James Dobbins. An Attack Would Only Strengthen Iran's Influence http://www.rand.org/commentary/2011/11/16/USNEWS.html Nov 16, 2011 Nov 16, 2011 Reaction to a strike against Iran among neighboring populations would be almost uniformly hostile. The sympathy thereby aroused for Iran would make containment of Iranian influence much more difficult for Israel, for the U.S., and for the Arab regimes currently allied with Washington, writes James Dobbins. The Multilateral Path To Disarming North Korea http://www.rand.org/commentary/2005/02/16/AWSJ.html Feb 16, 2005 Feb 16, 2005 Published commentary by RAND staff. A Thaw Between Giants http://www.rand.org/commentary/2003/08/03/TBS.html Aug 3, 2003 Aug 3, 2003 commentaries by RAND Staff: insightful commentaries on current events, published in newspapers, magazines and journals worldwide. Don't Open the Door to Russia Yet http://www.rand.org/commentary/2001/11/13/LAT.html Nov 13, 2001 Nov 13, 2001 Published commentary by RAND staff. The Cooperative Threat Reduction Program: Taking Care of the Cold War's Deadly Legacy http://www.rand.org/pubs/external_publications/EP19950604.html Dec 31, 1994 Dec 31, 1994 <p>Despite difficulties implementing the Cooperative Threat Reduction (CTR) Program, the danger of nuclear proliferation from the Former Soviet Union requires continued funding of this initiative.</p> Selective Nuclear Options in American and Soviet Strategic Policy http://www.rand.org/pubs/reports/R2034.html Dec 31, 1975 Dec 31, 1975 Whatever behavior the Soviets might pursue in a nuclear crisis, the desirability of maintaining a U.S. selective options strategy need not hinge exclusively on the course and outcome of future developments in Soviet nuclear planning. Flexibility is a valuable asset to have whatever the other side does. Selective Nuclear Operations and Soviet Strategy http://www.rand.org/pubs/papers/P5506.html Dec 31, 1974 Dec 31, 1974 Discusses Soviet doctrinal views on nuclear targeting restraint, the Soviet public reaction to the U.S. pursuit of limited nuclear options, and possible private Soviet attitudes regarding selective nuclear employment. Although they publicly reject the feasibility of controlled nuclear warfare and dwell heavily on massive nuclear operations with an implied endorsement of preemption, the Soviets are currently acquiring a force posture capable of more measured applications of force as well. Good Disarmament -And Bad http://www.rand.org/pubs/external_publications/EP19610501.html Dec 31, 1960 Dec 31, 1960 <p>This paper, which appears in slightly different form and under the title Some things to Think and Some to Do in the April 1981 issue of The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, is adapted and condensed from Mr. Katz's portion of a public debate on Disarmament and Security held in Santa Barbara, Calif., in April 1960. The author argues that there are several roads to, and several kinds of, disarmanent.</p> Gregory S. Jones http://www.rand.org/about/people/j/jones_gregory_s.html <em>Adjunct</em><br>A.B. in biology, University of Chicago Lance Kim http://www.rand.org/about/people/k/kim_lance.html <em>Adjunct Staff</em><br>Ph.D. in nuclear engineering, University of California, Berkeley; M.S./M.P.P. in nuclear engineering &amp; public policy, University of California, Berkeley; B.S. in nuclear &amp; mechanical engineering, University of California, Berkeley