Matthew Kroenig
Affiliate, Project on Managing the Atom
Contact:
Website: http://www.matthewkroenig.com/
Experience
Matthew Kroenig is an assistant professor in the Department of Government and the Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University. Dr. Kroenig’s research explains the strategic incentives that drive nuclear-capable states to provide sensitive nuclear assistance to non-nuclear-weapon states. His other research focuses on international security, nuclear proliferation, parliaments, soft power, terrorism, and civil war.
He is the author of The Handbook of National Legislatures (Cambridge University Press, 2008). His writings on international security issues have appeared in such publications as Security Studies, Foreign Affairs, Foreign Policy, Democratization, the Washington Post, and Newsday.
He has held academic fellowships from the National Science Foundation, the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at Harvard University, the Center for International Security and Cooperation at Stanford University, and the Institute on Global Conflict and Cooperation at the University of California.
Dr. Kroenig has also served as a strategist on the policy planning staff in the Office of the Secretary of Defense where he authored the first-ever, U.S. government-wide strategy for deterring terrorist networks. For his work, Dr. Kroenig received the Office of the Secretary of Defense’s Award for Outstanding Achievement. He is a term member of the Council on Foreign Relations.
November 2009
"Beyond Optimism and Pessimism: The Differential Effects of Nuclear Proliferation"
Working Paper
By Matthew Kroenig, Affiliate, Project on Managing the Atom
Matthew Kroenig examines the effect of the spread of nuclear weapons on international politics. He proposes a theory of nuclear proliferation that examines the differential effects of nuclear proliferation. Kroenig argues that the threat nuclear proliferation poses to a particular state depends on that state’s ability to project military power. This article contributes to our understanding of the consequences of nuclear proliferation and contains important implications for nuclear nonproliferation policy.
AP Photo
May 28, 2009
"Look at the Bright Side"
Op-Ed, USA Today
By Matthew Kroenig, Affiliate, Project on Managing the Atom
"Others worry that North Korea, with its economy in shambles, will sell nuclear materials to earn hard currency. However, my research demonstrates that countries transfer nuclear technology for strategic, not economic, reasons. It is extremely unlikely, for example, that North Korea would sell nuclear technology to terrorists because of potentially devastating consequences. If the terrorists used those weapons on the U.S., it could spur massive retaliation against North Korea. The upside for the U.S.? It's much easier to deal with a country motivated by realpolitik than one blindly willing to trade away its security for a few bucks."
April 1, 2009
"A Strategic Approach to Nuclear Proliferation"
Journal Article, Journal of Conflict Resolution, issue 2, volume 53
By Erik Gartzke and Matthew Kroenig, Affiliate, Project on Managing the Atom
Gartzke and Kroenig examine why states acquire nuclear weapons, why they engage in nuclear cooperation, and explore the relationship between nuclear weapons possession and a variety of security and diplomatic outcomes. This list does not cover the full range of possible nuclear proliferation issues that could be subjected to scholarly scrutiny, but they offer several advantages for our research. First, these outcomes are substantively important. Second, they can be measured, allowing them to quantitatively analyze nuclear proliferation across cases and over time. Third, this list covers a broader range of outcomes than are considered in the existing literature.
April 1, 2009
"Importing the Bomb: Sensitive Nuclear Assistance and Nuclear Proliferation"
Journal Article, Journal of Conflict Resolution, issue 2, volume 53
By Matthew Kroenig, Affiliate, Project on Managing the Atom
Matthew Kroenig's article "Importing the Bomb: Sensitive Nuclear Assistance and Nuclear Proliferation" argues that sensitive nuclear transfers are an important determinant of nuclear proliferation. In broader terms, Kroenig finds strong support for a supply-side approach to nuclear proliferation. States that are better able to produce nuclear weapons, due to either international assistance or domestic capacity, are more likely to do so.
February 2009
"Exporting the Bomb: Why States Provide Sensitive Nuclear Assistance"
Journal Article, American Political Science Review, issue 1, volume 103
By Matthew Kroenig, Affiliate, Project on Managing the Atom
Why do states provide sensitive nuclear assistance to nonnuclear weapon states, contributing to the international spread of nuclear weapons? Using a new dataset on sensitive nuclear transfers, this paper analyzes the determinants of sensitive nuclear assistance. Dr. Kroenig first describes a simple logic of the differential effects of nuclear proliferation, which is used to generate hypotheses about the conditions under which states provide sensitive nuclear assistance. He then shows that the strategic characteristics of the potential nuclear suppliers are the most important determinants of sensitive nuclear assistance. Explanations that emphasize the importance of economic motivations do not find support in the data. This paper presents a new approach to the study of the spread of nuclear weapons, focusing on the supply side of nuclear proliferation.
AP Photo
March/April 2008
"Power House"
Magazine or Newspaper Article, Foreign Policy, (Inbox Section), issue 165
By Matthew Kroenig, Affiliate, Project on Managing the Atom
"When Kenya convulsed with violence after its flawed election in late December, many expressed surprise that one of Africa’s most stable countries could so quickly fall victim to ethnic hatred. But political scientists Steven Fish and Matthew Kroenig noted something else: a feeble legislature. Despite the opposition winning twice as many legislative seats as the president’s party, opposition members still took to the streets. Why? Because they wanted the only office that has any power in the country: the presidency...."
AP Photo
January 9, 2008
"Kenya's Real Problem (It's Not Ethnic)"
Op-Ed, Washington Post
By M. Steven Fish and Matthew Kroenig, Affiliate, Project on Managing the Atom
"Like Kenya, Benin and Ghana are ethnically divided countries that have experienced closely fought and possibly flawed presidential elections in recent years. But Benin and Ghana have stronger legislatures, so the losers in presidential elections have less fear of being politically excluded. They have reacted to defeat by using their sway in parliament to control the president, and they have not resorted to mass violence."
