The current concept of a ''revolution in military affairs'' (RMA) mainly characterizes the transformation of the US military to smaller, more lethal forces. It is driven by structural changes in the international system, the high investment in R&D and military expenditures by the US government, the dramatic advancements in information and communication technologies, and the integration of these military, doctrinal, and technological factors into new military structures and tactics. This current revolution in American affairs has been a capital-intensive evolution, and while these innovations have lead to tactical victories over opposing forces on the battlefield, it is not yet clear that they have contributed to stability in the larger strategic context. Indeed, even the tactical advantages are eroding as potential and existing opponents retool their own military doctrines. The strategic response runs the length of technological spectrum, from the development of countermeasures such as in the proliferation of WMD to the development of effective low-tech warfare strategies and tactics like IEDs detonated by cell phone. The proliferation of conventional weapons combines with the adaptation of new asymmetric tactics to offer a particularly grim forecast of the future. The Iraqi war demonstrates that the fog of war is not overcome, nor are wars fought with precision-guided munitions necessarily ''clean.'' In short, the sophisticated weapons and communications platforms of RMA are no panacea for the ills of the modern world. The key task for the globalized world is first and foremost to develop strategies to win the ''hearts and minds'' of people in zones of violent conflict. The inclusion of civil society is a basic element, and armed forces should seek the dialogue with the civil society before it comes to war. Moreover, efforts must be redoubled to develop new methods for effective arms control.

No abstract

No abstract

After the golden age of arms control, Russia and the United States are no longer engaged in arms control negotiations. The landmark Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty was officially terminated on 2 August 2019, and the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START) expires in February 2021. The continued political alienation between Russia and the West, combined with new military-technological developments, will undermine strategic stability. A new arms race is looming with severe implications for global nuclear disarmament, nonproliferation, and regional stability. Neither superpower seems to have a strategy for developing arms control and disarmament. On the contrary, both sides are pursuing costly programs to replace and modernize their Cold War strategic arsenals. A more ambitious approach is necessary for further reductions in nuclear arsenals and the extension of longstanding arms control commitments. The collapse of the INF Treaty could have been prevented by reciprocal inspections to verify treaty compliance. The United States and Russia can agree to extend New START to 2026 and to undertake a wider and structured discussion about what they could do to enhance strategic stability. Such a model must take into account third-country actors, missile defense, precision-guided conventional strike systems, and future actions in outer space and cyberspace. NATO and Russia need to launch a substantive dialogue on how to reduce the risk of hazardous military activities and to prevent military escalation caused by accidents and miscalculations. Other nuclear-armed states and their different types of delivery systems must be part of the disarmament process.

What: An international group of scientists reviewed the potential consequences of climate engineering and provided a first mapping of the problem landscape, identifying knowledge gaps and emerging research questions.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract