The 350-Kiloton Elephant in the Room

Why the American public should be talking about nuclear weapons.

Nuclear weapons are the 350-kiloton elephant in the room that we as Americans simply do not give enough thought or attention. As long as the United States and other nations possess nuclear arms, they will remain relevant and a healthy debate about what we should do with them is essential. Whether or not we all agree on the issues is irrelevant. Nuclear weapons were perhaps the quintessential Cold War issue and even with that conflict decades in the past, that does not make them irrelevant. Present circumstances make the arsenal as relevant today as it was then.



A World Gone MAD No Longer

Why a robust missile defense must be a centerpiece in U.S. security strategy 

Ian Williams

Homeland missile defense is not about Democrat versus Republican. It is not about creating a “boondoggle” to feed our defense industries. It does not “destabilize” the international system, nor will cutting it help usher in a world without nuclear weapons. Missile defense is about protecting the United States and its allies against ballistic missile threats that may not always be deterred by promises of retaliation.


A general view of a meeting with European Union foreign policy chief Ashton and Iranian Foreign Minister Zarif in Vienna

Options and Objectives for the Iranian Nuclear Negotiations


Given the advanced state of the Iranian nuclear program, it seems that there are few feasible options for preventing Iran from acquiring a weapon. No deal would prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear state, but it’s still possible to slow progress and shrink the breakout window. Given the circumstances, the best option going forward would be to negotiate a long term, invasive inspection regime into all current and future nuclear facilities. This would provide the U.S. and its allies with critical insight into Iran’s program and allow advanced warning of breakout potential. Further, the United States should ensure that robust ballistic missile defense programs are in place to counter the threat of Iranian missiles, which are unlikely to be part of a new comprehensive agreement. Sanctions must also be fully leveraged to gain concessions from the Iranian government.



Why The United States Should Not Cut Funding for Israel’s Missile Defense Systems


As the world has seen in the past few weeks, Israel has been under attack again by the terrorist group Hamas with a deluge of rockets, mortars, and missiles from the Gaza Strip. Fortunately for Israel, it is armed with its short-range anti-rocket system known as Iron Dome. Iron Dome, which was deployed in 2011, is designed to intercept very short-range rocket threats between two and forty-five miles. Iron Dome’s selective targeting system and radars detect and destroy incoming projectiles that threaten population centers by utilizing Tamir interceptors. In addition to the Iron Dome, Israel currently has an X-Band radar system and is developing a short/medium-range system called David’s Sling, the Arrow Anti-Missile System, and a higher-altitude missile defense system. All of these projects are progressing with the technological assistance and funding of the United States.


The Missile Defense Agency's Flight Test 06b Ground-Based Interceptor launches from Vandenberg Air Force Base.

GMD System Succeeds in Intercept, Fails to Satisfy Staunch Critics


This Sunday the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) along with U.S. Air Force 30th Space Wing, the Joint Functional Component Command, Integrated Missile Defense, U.S. Northern Command and the U.S. Navy conducted its first successful test of the Ground Based Midcourse Defense (GMD) system since 2008. The test is a major milestone in proving that the GMD is a viable option for the protection of the U.S. homeland from a limited ballistic missiles attack. Yet despite the success of the test, stubborn critics of the system refuse to acknowledge the advances made and the nature of the threat. The national missile defense system is a complicated engineering feat that demands regular testing. While intercept failures may be discouraging, it is important to note that the data collected presents an opportunity to correct the issues that caused those failures. While some would call the threat of a ballistic missile attack by North Korea “exaggerated”, there is currently no reliable way to measure just how advanced that threat is. Failing to plan for the worst could prove disastrous.