August 7, 2005
Los Angeles Times
By Xiaohui (Anne) Wu, Former Associate, International Security Program/Project on Managing the Atom, 2007–2010; Former Research Fellow, International Security Program/Project on Managing the Atom, 2004–2007
"...A collapsing China would ripple through the entire Asia-Pacific region and possibly send it into chaos. The world economy would lose a powerhouse.
Conversely, a vibrant Chinese economy would lift more citizens out of poverty and, if that happens, an appreciation for democracy will rise because it flourishes with economic development rather than with continuing poverty, as demonstrated in developed areas of China...."
August 6, 2005
Center for American Progress
By Graham Allison, Director, Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs; Douglas Dillon Professor of Government, Harvard Kennedy School
On August 6, 1945, the United States carried out the first attack with nuclear weapons, against the Japanese city of Hiroshima. The weapon would fundamentally alter the face of conflict, and shape strategic thinking for subsequent generations. If strategists couldn't always agree on what force posture the United States should adopt, there was consistently broad agreement that the spread of nuclear weapons posed a fundamental threat to United States national security.
August 3, 2005
The Irish Times
By Thomas J. Wright, Former Research Fellow, International Security Program, 2004-2007
The legacy of Hiroshima: The bombing of Hiroshima 60 years ago accelerated the end of the second World War. But it also ushered in a new era in world history. Tom Wright explores how the nuclear bomb transformed military thinking with the advent of the terrifying strategic concept of Mutually Assured Destruction.
Does the spread of democracy really contribute to international peace? Successive U. S. administrations have justified various policies intended to promote democracy not only by arguing that democracy is intrinsically good but by pointing to a wide range of research concluding that democracies rarely, if ever, go to war with one another.
American Political Science Review, issue 3, volume 99
By Sebastian Rosato, Former Research Fellow, International Security Program, 2005–2006
July 28, 2005
Los Angeles Times
By Juliette Kayyem, Lecturer in Public Policy
It was President Bush himself who insisted on calling it a global war on terror. He wanted to indicate that this was not just another piddling law enforcement action, but an all-out, full-scale military response to Sept. 11 that would involve U.S. troops around the globe. But now, apparently, a decision has been made that the language of war isn't working for him anymore. So in recent days, the "global war on terror" has been shelved in favor of the "global struggle against violent extremism."
July 26, 2005
By Matthew Bunn, Professor of Practice; Co-Principal Investigator, Project on Managing the Atom
Testimony of Matthew Bunn before the Subcommittee on Strategic Forces, Committee on Armed Services, U.S. House of Representatives, 26 July 2006
July 22, 2005
By Elaine Kamarck, Lecturer in Public Policy
"Terrorism is not a law-enforcement problem. It is much more serious than a numbers racket in the South Bronx. But so far the record is clear. Smart cops stop terrorists, smart weapons don't. Maybe the front lines of the war on terror should be the precinct houses of every big city in the Western world.
We should spend more money and more time making the average experienced cop on the beat part of our war on terror...."
July 20, 2005
Worst Weapons in Worst Hands: U.S. Inaction on the Nuclear Terror Threat Since 9/11, and a Path of Action
By Ashton B. Carter, Former Co-Director, Preventive Defense Project, Harvard & Stanford Universities, Dr. William J. Perry, Former Co-Director, Preventive Defense Project, Secretary Madeleine K. Albright, Graham Allison, Director, Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs; Douglas Dillon Professor of Government, Harvard Kennedy School, Samuel R. Berger, General Wesley K. Clark, Former Senior Advisor, 2001-2009, Preventive Defense Project, Tom Donilon, Senior Fellow, Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, John D. Podesta, Susan E. Rice, General (ret.) John M. Shalikashvili, Former Founding Senior Advisor, Preventive Defense Project, Amb. Wendy R. Sherman, Dr. Elizabeth D. Sherwood-Randall, Former Founding Senior Advisor, Preventive Defense Project and Dr. James B. Steinberg
The gravest threat facing Americans today is a terrorist detonating a nuclear bomb in one of our cities. The National Security Advisory Group (NSAG) judges that the Bush administration is taking insufficient actions to counter this threat.
July 18, 2005
Delman, Prendergast, Graham Join Belfer Center Team