But for the First Time Since maybe the 1980s, maybe even the 1960s, today were confronting a real possibility that Vladimir Putin might decide to use Nuclear Weapons in the war in ukraine. Terrifying possibility. This is a kind of wild eyed scenario that used to be able to read about only in the back pages of obscure rand reports, but its here in real life right now today. So the book were talking about today arrives at exactly the right time. The book is called winning and losing the Nuclear Peace and its about the decadelong effort to reduce Global Nuclear dangers. And were fortunate of the author Michael Krepon here with us to talk about it today. Michael is the cofounder and distinguished senior fellow at the stimson center. He cofounded the stimson center. In 1989 after working the executive branch and on capitol hill. He received the Carnegie Endowment award for Lifetime Achievement in nongovernmental work to reduce Nuclear Dangers in 2015. For people like me, thats like being voted into the hall of fame. Hes the author of 23 books about nuclear stability, arms control and international security. Michael, your book reminds me a lot of like Michael Jordans six nba championship. An incredible feat, no question, but you are in the hall of fame already, and you didnt need this book in order to do that. But it really is i think the definitive book on the history of arms control, so congratulations on it really tremendous achievement. Let me start our discussion today by playing devils advocate. And ill start with a question i think that is on probably everybodys mind, which is a conflict in ukraine, and the possibility of might turn into a nuclear conflict. We have in this case a seemingly unhinged autocrat in Vladimir Putin whose invaded his neighbor. He has visions of returning to a period where the borders of his country were much more expansive than they are today. He doesnt seem to respect international norms. Would we be any worse place today to stand up to somebody like this if we had more arms control and fewer Nuclear Weapons over the past ten or 20 years . What do you think . Well, thanks to that kind introduction, todd. One of the most important things we who care about this work and do is to teach the history, and thats one of the things todd does at uva. And he doesnt quite well. Ukraine is what happens when arms control is dismembered. Ukraine is, so far, the greatest victim of this dismemberment, this tear down of an amazing architectural structure that was built over decades to try to prevent the use of Nuclear Weapons. There are a couple of the architects in the room with us who helped build this structure. Thank you very much. The structure was built on a foundation in which states did not carry out aggressive war. You respected the territorial integrity and National Sovereignty of your neighbors. This whole edifice of arms control could not have been built otherwise. The edifice succeeded when the cold war ended all of the key elements of Nuclear Peace were in hand. We had them. We had achieved them through hard diplomatic labor. We had this agreement to respect ones neighbors. We had treaties that reduced these Nuclear Arsenals. Interruption for a pop quiz. How many Nuclear Weapons were manufactured since 1945 . Take a wild guess. [inaudible] 125,000. 125,000. 125,000. Not one of them has been used in warfare so far, and that happen because of this thing that we called arms control, as well as the thing we call deterrence. But deterrence is dangerous. Its supposed to be dangerous. Otherwise im not going to deter you. I need to threaten you. So deterrence as a standalone doesnt prevent Mushroom Clouds. It. Us in the direction of Mushroom Clouds. Its arm control that does appear and arms control is built on the foundation of respect for territorial integrity, reassurance, deterrence needs reassurance to succeed. Drawdowns of these arsenals. No battlefield use. Thats the norm that we live by. Its been a surprisingly successful war, and we have to extend it in this crisis and in the crises to come. No threatening military operations, thats part of the foundation of arms control. Structuring and restructuring Deterrent Forces so that they are less threatening. All of this was done. Decades of hard labor. Now we take it for granted. Its the most important unacknowledged success of the cold war. Arms control, no use. And we have thrown it away, lots of it. Weve thrown treaties aside as inconvenience. We prefer freedom of action. Weve thrown norms aside that were crucial to the Nuclear Peace. And its easy to blame Vladimir Putin for this. Hes miscreant number one. Aint nobody near him. But the United States also contributed to the teardown. We did, too. President george w. Bush, President Donald Trump felt that freedom of action was more important than these negotiated agreements, and here we are. I think ukraine is the consequence of the teardown. And we are in a tough spot right now. Lets dig in just a little bit to what were talking about when we talk about arms control. Ifad you come to my classes to teach my students about just what arms control means, and they are always surprised by the range of treaties and agreements that we call arms control. Can you talk just a little bit about what all of that means . What kind of treaties are there . What do they cover . What in your mind falls under the umbrella of arms control . L, we naturally think about treaties when we think about arms control. We have treaties that first curtailed and then stopped Nuclear Testing. Those were hugely important treaties. We needed them at the outset because testing in the atmosphere was a Public Health hazard. Radioactive traces and mothers milk and childrens teeth and cancer rates. So we had to stop Nuclear Testing in atmosphere. That was the first important treaty. And then we stopped Nuclear Testing everywhere else. That was in 1996. So a decades long project. We have treaties that controlled. That was really hard, strategic forces, and then reduced them by 85 as the cold war was ending. We had treaties governing the disposition of conventional forces, and that was one of the treaties early on that Vladimir Putin tossed aside as being terribly inconvenient. It was a treaty that would have prevented, if honored, what hes doing today in ukraine. But arms control is more than just treaties. Its about channels of communication. When this work started, it actually started in the eisenhower administration, the very first conversation between u. S. And soviet negotiators. That was so strange, so hard to do, and it became routinized. Yeah, were going to talk. We have a guy in the audience who talked to the soviets about a treaty to ban intermediate range Nuclear Forces. You know, the kind of missiles that are now threatening ukraine. That was another treaty that went by the wayside. So channels of communication were crucial. Hotlines. They could be used in a crisis. Norms. Norms are a big part of arms control, and some of these norms, the most important one of all, you do not use Nuclear Weapons on a battlefield. That norm isnt enshrined in the treaty that nuclear arms states have signed. And yet they have honored it, so far. Its a crucial norm. I would want to come back to this norm, because the rebuild requires this norm, and a few other things as well. So arms control is treaties, multilateral as well as bilateral. Norms, communication channels, all of which at up to reassurance. Weve got a have reassurance as long as we have Nuclear Weapons because the weapons are so damn dangerous. Arms control provides the reassurance. Thats a a great i think overview of just how broad decided of arms control really is. Bilateral treaties, you have global treaties, test restrictions, restrictions on building weapons this book is such a comprehensive history of the development of all those tools. Its a wonderful read. What do you consider as the most important pillars of that edifice as you call it, that large structure of arms control. It got identify one or two treaties at a really the hallmarks come the keys weve only seen some treaties as you say being discarded, the intermediate range Nuclear Forces treaty, the inf treaty, in part because it was the first treaty between the United States and the soviet union that actually instead of just capping, actually reduced the size of the two cited Nuclear Arsenals. What are the key pillars of this regime . Well, theres a treaty that hasnt entered into force, but it is being respected by all major powers and regional powers. Its crucial. Its the comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban treaty. So its the one i said was negotiated in 1996. This was during the bill clinton administration. This is a crucial pillar because every test of a Nuclear Weapon is like a declaration of utility. Its a declaration of military. Look how strong i am. Dont mess with me. Did you catch the reverberation of the underground test your seismometers certainly picked it up. And you picked up the preparations for the test, too, so check that test out. We dont test any. Its crucial that we extend this norm. Nuclear safety, our Nuclear Future depends on extending the norm of no testing, and even more important, a norm of no use. Nuclear weapons have not been used in warfare since 1945. Now, that is amazing. Nobody, nobody predicted that. At the onset of the nuclear age. People were expecting Nuclear Explosions as late as 1983 in the cold war. We had a big crisis. It was so big that, and so dangerous because people didnt even realize it was happening. Thats another story. But we are facing another test. The size of this ukraine crisis is big as crises go. And we have had a few. Weve got to get through this without tests, without use, and i think we can, but you take nothing for granted. Treaties and norms are the foundations of the old architecture of arms control. And we lived by these pillars. Some of them are down. The pillar of respecting the territorial integrity and National Sovereignty of your neighbor, that pillar is down with ukraine, and thats why putin has to lose this war, and he will you lose this war. The question is will the lose it without using Nuclear Weapons . Hes going to lose it and we have a chance to rebuild this pillar, and weve got to do some more building as well. The new building is going to look a little different than the old building. Lets imagine that Vladimir Putin does decide to use Nuclear Weapons. I never promised to ask easy questions. Thinking about everything that youve just said about restoring norms, rebuilding the pillars that prevent the use of Nuclear Weapons, if you are advising president biden, how do you advise him to respond, if this does happen . This is so conjectural, todd. It depends, it would depend on where, how, whats the yield, whats the damage. There are a lot of this and or bots. But i want, i want to go out on a limb here and say he wont. I dont think he will. I dont think hes crazy. Hes calculating, hes counting, when he threatens to use he threatens with a purpose and we are not buying it. He wants us to jump, and we are not answering by asking how high. Hes threatening, and we are aiding militarily, economically, and through humanitarian measures a country and the people that are defending their homeland. And were not going to change our approach. I dont think. Our approach is working. The russian armey is being dismembered on the ground. And we are part of that, but we are doing it in a way that doesnt involve a direct confrontation. I think thats exactly right. So if, as i dont think he will, putin does create a Mushroom Cloud on ukrainian territory. One. It does not involve nato territory. I think we ought to do exactly what we are doing now that will lead him to lose this war without retaliation. Now, that is a position that, you may not agree with me. A lot of people wont agree with me. If you are a deterrent strategist by trade you wouldnt agree with me, because Nuclear Weapons dont deter unless you retaliate in kind. But i am thinking about how we get out of this, and we are in a position to. And i think this is it. We rebuilt by rejecting aggressive war. We rebuild by defeating aggressive war. We rebuild by clarifying that Nuclear Weapons are not useful on battlefields, and that Nuclear Threats are not useful. If we can make it through this crisis, its a terrible crisis, and the costs being incurred by ukrainians. My last and used to be crap and nitschke, by the way. My fathers family is from kyiv. So i have some skin in this game. He shortened the name so that we could make our way in the new world. As americanized u. S. Citizens. But i think if we hold steady we can get through this. And we can get through it in ways that we can rebuild. May be a related question. One of the things i love about this book is its not just, in fact, maybe not even primarily a case for arms control. Its a history here is a wonderfully woven story about the fits and starts that took place in the slow and gradual building of this armscontrol edifice. One of the lessons i took from it is that sometimes it required frightening events during the cold war, crises in berlin in the 50s and 60s, the cuban missile crisis, the purging two crises in europe in the 1980s. Sometimes required these events to put it bluntly, to scare people into understanding the value of arms control, to provide a political impetus for support for arms control. Its been a while since weve seen new armscontrol treaties. Our leaders just due to after relive andrea learned these lessons . And is the ukraine crisis one of these lessons that might create political pressure for a return to armscontrol . I deeply hope thats the case. I think its possible, but a bunch of things have to happen for this to occur. I dont think we can do business with Vladimir Putin. It was possible to do business with them after the cold war ended, believe it or not. He was willing to do business with us. He expressed some concerns that we disregarded decades ago. We expanded nato, just a little bit at first, and then a lot, and we kept getting closer and closer to russias borders. And then one of the really bad decisions that george w. Bush made was to push nato to agree in principle where ukraine and georgia would also become members. So he started pushing in 2007. And in 2008 thats when putin started blatantly violating this intermediate range Nuclear Forces treaty. That had been negotiated in the reagan administration, between reagan and gorbachev. Just waved it aside. And around 2007, 2008, by my reckoning, putin said i just cant play by the rules that the west is imposing. Im going to make my own rules, and they are going to suit me fine. And given what hes done in ukraine, i think hed not only has to lose, but it also has to go. But thats not a my business. Its not the u. S. Governments business. Its not natos business. It has to be the russian. Its russias business, whether or not they want to stay with a leader that has so ruined their army and their international standing. Even if he doesnt use nuclear or chemical weapons. I think the rebuild has to be post putin, but the ukraine crisis can really give us some propulsion. We kind of forgot about Nuclear Weapons for decades, which is a testament to the success of this thing that we call armscontrol. We had forgotten about Nuclear Weapons, until now. We remember them. And if we remind our leaders that reducing Nuclear Danger is pretty important to us and it doesnt come at the expense of protecting our environment, reducing Nuclear Danger does protect our environment. So we can rebuild, but its up to us. Let me pivot to a different country, which is china. Russia is a hard problem obviously, but at the very least the United States has an ongoing armscontrol treaty, the new s. T. A. R. T. Treaty with russia, a long history of armscontrol with the soviet union and russia. China is a different story. We dont have any Nuclear Arms Control agreements or arms limitation agreements with china. Some observers are speculating that china will maybe triple the size of its Nuclear Arsenal in the next ten years or so, may have by 2030 more than 1000 Nuclear Weapons still fewer than the United States but thats a lot. What will it take for china to be persuaded that armscontrol is important . Will it take a Nuclear Crisis with china, like the one the u. S. Come once the u. S. And the soviet union had during the early years of the cold war to persuade chinese leaders that armscontrol the soluble . What you think . A could take a crisis over taiwan, it could. As todd said were looking at china having maybe 1000 Nuclear Weapons. Just to give you a point of reference, the United States has around 6000 still. Your that are deployed on missiles and submarines and ready to be loaded on bombers, but weve got a good number of those, too. So china has been pretty clear that they are not going to do armscontrol the oldfashioned way. The oldfashioned way, the old architecture was you do treaty, and the treaties were built around numbers. And china considers itself, and has reason to consider itself, as being in the top tier of states in this world, and then not going to agree to a treaty where they are on the second wrong of the numbers situation. So that really makes it hard to triangular treaties are hard anyway, especially when two out of the three parties collude with each other. So i think part of the new architecture involves some of the old treaties, but i dont see any time soon a new treaty involving china. And the United States and russia. So how do we bring china in . I think there are ways to do this. First of all, its very important to remember that china doesnt like to be the odd one out among the permanent five members of the u. N. Security council. It hates to be the only voice of negativity. It likes company, but if you can convince others to do what you think is the right thing to do, and theres only china hesitating, you might just be able to get china on board. This is how china joined this treaty weve been talking about advanced Nuclear Testing, the one that hasnt entered into force that is being respected. China tested only a fraction of the number of times that the United States and the soviet union tested. We have tested, there had been about 2000 of these tests during the worst stages of the cold war we and the soviets average one test every two weeks. Imagine that. That was in the late 50s. So china has tested 40 or so times and was way behind, and yet they signed up to this comprehensive treaty. They didnt want to be the odd man out. So if we approach, as part of this new architecture of armscontrol is normbased, you dont test, even though this treaty as entered into forms, you do not use Nuclear Weapons in warfare. You dont even threatened to use Nuclear Weapons in warfare. You avoid dangerous military practices. All of this was part of the old architecture, and we can carry this over. And i think thats the way to bring china in. I also think thats the way to bring pakistan and india in. And they are standing on the sidelines, too. So a normbased approach as being part of the rebuild, i think is crucial. When you were writing this book, youve had a long career in armscontrol. You covered the entire span in this book of the history of armscontrol. As i said this is the extraordinary comprehensive. Did anything surprise you in doing your research, reading about the history of the negotiation of these treaties, anything you didnt expect was that you didnt know . I was surprised about how much i had forgotten. Some of you may share that trait. I was surprised by things that i remembered, but remembered wrongly. There were a lot of those surprises. And i reminded myself something that i purposefully had forgotten. So i was an antiwar activist during the vietnam war. I did teach ins. I went door to door for eugene mccarthy. Theres a name that some of you will remember. Oh, i so disliked Lyndon Baines johnson. And in doing the research for this book i, i obviously know about the Voting Rights legislation, all the good things he did at home, but man, i still felt a grudge. Then i read about the origins of the nonproliferation treaty, which we havent talked about. Amazing. That pillar still exists. Its where 190 countries have signed up to a World Without Nuclear Weapons. They have committed to abstinence. That treaty was Lyndon Baines johnsons doing, and i reminded myself of that. And theres another foundational treaty we havent talked about that, too, the outer space treaty, which helps us, and is being under threat, but it helps us to keep the heavens free of warfare. That was Lyndon Baines johnson, too. So i gained a newfound appreciation, surprising appreciation, for Lyndon Baines johnson. Let me ask one more question and then i would like to involve the audience in asking you about the book. Raise your hand, all of you, who were born after the end of the cold war and the fall of the soviet union, lets in 1992. How. How many were born after 1992 . One hand, literally one hand. I find this in my classes as well, teaching it at the university of virginia. Students are not particularly aware of the history of armscontrol, feel largely ambivalent about it, dont have any particular commitment to views one way or the other about whether its important for deterrence and for nuclear stability. But the last chapter of your book is called revival. Revival, reinvigorating armscontrol. To do that seems to require also reinvigorating attention and passion in the next generation of people who will advocate for arms control, go doortodoor, join public service, work at the state department, the defense department, in government, making these things happen. How do you do that . What is your view and how to reinvigorate interest in armscontrol, not just among those who study Nuclear Weapons like you and me, but among the broader public . Well, thats why your work, todd, is a crucial, and other people like you and thank you. Fortunately i have good books to assign to my students. [laughing] that was my job. People whose job is to be in classrooms is crucial, just crucial. It is important for younger folks to remember or learn nuclear history. Weve lived it, most of us in this audience. And we need transmission. So, and we need transmission at a time when we are just completely overloaded. Its hard to do, but im counting on it. And im counting on it in classrooms like yours. One thing im struck, im retired, but i do keep an award in, and in my field, armscontrol field, theres so much young talent, it stuns me. There are people are joining, we are rebuilding right now. The ranks are being rebuilt. And thank god there are also foundations in this world that support this work. Because thats whats sustained me. Thats whats enabled me to write that book. The Foundation World matters greatly in this work, and the ranks are thinning. We are going to need help there, too. But im convinced, im absolutely convinced, that we can succeed. And what convinces me is that its way too dangerous if we dont. Its way too dangerous. And the dangers will become very, very obvious, if they are not already obvious with ukraine. So we can succeed, just like previous generations succeeded. We succeed day by day. Every day, everyday without a nuclear test, test, every day without a Mushroom Cloud is a good day. It extends these norms, makes it harder for anybody to break them. They can still be broken, but there are a lot of people out there, including young people, who were working and nongovernmental organizations, who are working in the executive branch, who are working on capitol hill, who are committed to success. Hes got that going for us, and it really counts. Well, thank you. I would like to ask questions of the audience. Were just a little over ten minutes for questions. So ill call on you and someone will bring a microphone a rent to you. I only have two rules about q a. One is please keep your questions brief. A little context is okay but please be brief. Secondly, all questions in any question mark. [laughing] and what you think about what had just that does not count as a question. Maybe thats three rules. Lets go right here in front of me. Right here. Thank you. Please wait for the microphone so our viewers online can hear you also. Right here, yes. Thank you for that inspirational talk. It was amazing. My question is, you said that you dont think Vladimir Putin is crazy, but do you think that he could become drunk on power and put into a corner where he feels he doesnt have any other choice . Yeah, that, that is the big question right now because hes losing. And the longer his troops stay in ukraine, the more he will lose. And i suspect, this is dawning on him, and is not the kind of guy who loses gracefully. So this is a tough corner, for sure. There are a lot of smart people, including within the Biden Administration, which i think is handling this crisis very well, there are a lot of smart people seized on the problem of an exit strategy for the end this carnage. , is likely to be one that leaves everybody unhappy. And its likely to be one that is unfair. But its crucial that Nuclear Weapons not be used in this war. I think it can be done. Next question right upfront here. Right here. Second row. Thank you. In terms of the wildcards, countries that want to join the nuclear club. Are there any checks and balances outside nuclear arms treaties, referring to iran and north korea . Yes. The biggest check on iran is the thought that saudi arabia will follow, and perhaps turkey, and maybe eventually egypt. So iran has been working on Nuclear Capabilities for decade decades. It hasnt gone very fast, and it has stayed short of some very important markers in terms of the enrichment level and extent of enriched uranium that it possesses. That can be used to make bombs, and in terms of the design of the weapons themselves, which is not an easy problem. And to the best, at least in terms of the Information Available to us publicly, they havent really even begun to do. The agreement they signed up to in the Obama Administration shipped out 98 of their enriched uranium and placed their most sensitive facilities under onsite inspections by and International Agency for 15 years. And some of the obligations they undertook were of indefinite duration. Now, if that country is really in a hurry to get the bomb, it doesnt agree to a 15 year hiatus. And i truly, as i dont know what the disposition of this new agreement might be, the one that the Biden Administration is trying to put together after the Trump Administration walked away from the last one without anything better to put in its place. But i suspect the new agreement, if there is one, will face the same barrage of criticism as a last one, will be as hard to get through the congress as the last one, and that wont really be the most important barrier to Iranian Nuclear ambition. The most important barrier, in my view, is the recognition, and if we, the iranians go there, i think people will, to, who are our primary competitors in this region. Im not talking about israel. We know israel has capability already. Well, im not talking, im talking about competitors within the islamic world. Those are the competitors that matter most to iran. Weve got time for one more question. Lets go in the back there. Keep your hand up. There you go, thank you. Thats all right. This is a question both from Michael Krepon and other people in the audience, too, if they heard the statement, but its my understanding that high level russian, perhaps the chief of the general staff, wrote an article relatively recently that mentioned that if russia were to undertake a military action and it were to be ground down to some stage that it reached inertia, one way out for the russians might be to use a Nuclear Weapon and drop, and use it in an uninhabited area. Im wondering if youve heard of that. Wasnt statement made . Im not aware of the statement, but im aware of the thinking behind it. I hope and expect that putin will ask himself this question. Because i dont think hes lost his faculty. If i detonate a Mushroom Cloud in a losing cause, a Mushroom Cloud that wont change my grievous losses, i cant stay in this country. I i might be able to hold on to locations that i possessed before i waged this war. There may be a few slivers in addition. But the longer i stay, the more my position crumbles. And if i contemplate the use of a Nuclear Weapon, i will be the only person in Human History who has waged an aggressive war and used a Mushroom Cloud against a country that voluntarily gave back to my country the Nuclear Weapons the soviet union left behind when the soviet union dissolved. The same country, by the way, that my predecessor, boris yeltsin, provided security assurances to in return for giving back those Nuclear Weapons. Security assurances that its territorial integrity and National Sovereignty would be respected. Do i want to be that guy . You i want to find myself in the lowest rung of dantes inferno . I think hes capable of making the right decision. I could be wrong, but whether im right or i am wrong we continue to help ukraine with military assistance, economic assistance, and humanitarian assistance. Its the right thing to do. Its the moral thing to do, and its the thing on which the architecture of arms control can be rebuilt. Well, i think thats a wonderful and hopefully optimistic note to end on. I have one final appeal for all of you, which is to please buy the book. Winning and losing the nuclear as a set a wonderful read in education, in just a few pages. We make it easy for you. You can walk to the back of the room and buy buy a copy. Michael will be available for signing books immediately after our event, but please join me in thanking Michael Krepon for being here today. [applause] if you are enjoying booktv, then sign up for newsletter using the qr code on the screen to receive a schedule of upcoming programs, author discussions, book festivals and more. Booktv every sunday on cspan2 or anytime online at booktv. Org, television for serious readers. Middle and high school students, its your time to shine. You are invited to participate in this years season camp studentcam documentary competition in light of the upcoming Midterm Election picture yourself as a newly elected member of congress. We ask vicious competitors what is your top priority and why . Make a five to six minute video that shows the importance of your issues from opposing and supporting perspectives. Dont be afraid to take risks with your documentary. Be bold. Most 100,000 in cash prizes is a 5000 grand prize. Videos must be submitted by january 20, 2023. Visit our website at studentcam. Org for competition rules, tips, resources and a stepbystep guide. Weekends on cspan2 are an intellectual feast. Every saturday American History tv document americas stories stories and on sunday boov brings you the latest in nonfiction books and authors. Funding for cspan2 comes from these Television Companies and more including
comparemela.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.