Nuclear policy
Paragraphs
Cover of the report 'Accelerating Decarbonization in China and USA through Bilateral Collaboration'

In October 2021, Stanford University’s Precourt Institute for Energy, Stanford Center at Peking University, and Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center’s China Program partnered with Peking University’s Institute of Energy to organize a series of roundtables intended to promote discussion around how China and the United States can accelerate decarbonization and cooperate with one another to meet their carbon neutrality goals by mid-century. The thematic areas included U.S.- China collaboration on climate change, global sustainable finance, corporate climate pledges, and the opportunities and challenges for the acceleration of decarbonization in both countries in general, as well as specifically for the power, transportation, and industry sectors.

The roundtable series brought together leading American and Chinese current and former officials, and experts in the public and private sectors working on energy, climate, the environment, industry, transportation, and finance. This report reviews the key themes and takeaways that emerged from the closed-door discussions. It builds on the “U.S.-China Joint Statement Addressing the Climate Crisis” released by the U.S. Department of State on April 17, 2021 and shares some common themes with the “U.S.-China Joint Glasgow Declaration on Enhancing Climate Action in the 2020s” released on November 10, 2021.

This report further identifies more concrete and additional promising areas for accelerated decarbonization and bilateral collaboration, as well as the obstacles to be tackled, including institutional, political, and financial constraints. This report could serve as a basis for concrete goals and measures for future U.S.-China cooperation on energy and the climate. It also highlights the contributions universities can make to the global energy transition. The roundtable series identifies areas most critical or potent for bilateral collaboration, paving the way for concrete action plans at the national, local, and sectoral levels. Section 1 offers a brief overview of the acceleration of decarbonization in the U.S. and in China. Section 2 identifies the opportunities and challenges of U.S.-China cooperation on climate change. Sections 3-7 delve into specific promising areas for accelerated decarbonization and opportunities and hurdles for bilateral collaboration in corporate, finance, power, transportation, and industrial sectors.

This report is not a comprehensive review of all the relevant areas pertaining to decarbonization in China and the U.S. and bilateral collaboration on climate change. For example, this roundtable series focused on climate mitigation. Another strategy to respond to climate change is adaption, which we reserve for potential future discussion in a separate report. Additionally, the focus of this report is on energy. Important measures such as reforestation as a carbon sink are reserved for separate discussions. The views expressed in this report represent those of the participants at the roundtable series and do not necessarily represent the positions of the organizing institutions. Chatham House rules were used throughout the roundtables to facilitate open and frank discussion, so views are not attributed to individual participants

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Policy Briefs
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
Stanford Energy
Authors
Jean C. Oi
Paragraphs

In this chapter from Alliances, Nuclear Weapons and Escalation: Managing Deterrence in the 21st Century,  Oriana Skylar Mastro argues that there are several reasons to suspect that the nuclear dynamics between the US and China are different from those that existed between the Soviet Union and the US during the Cold War. For one, China’s approach to nuclear weapons is fundamentally different from the US and Soviet approaches of assured destruction capability. Instead, China’s policy of assured retaliation with a no-first-use pledge, designed to deter nuclear attack and coercion, reduces the strategic importance of nuclear weapons in the bilateral relationship.

Mastro notes that the great power nuclear relationship also impacts US allies differently. She points out that European countries are committed to collective defence, but no North Atlantic Treaty Organization – style construct exists between US allies in Asia. Additionally, key US European allies such as France and the United Kingdom have their own nuclear capabilities while Asian allies rely exclusively on the US to deter nuclear attack against their countries.

Her chapter evaluates the role that nuclear deterrence plays in the US–China strategic relationship. It lays out the pathways to conflict and the implications for nuclear use, evaluates how allies influence nuclear dynamics (the conditions under which nuclear weapons would most likely be used and how) and explores how escalation to nuclear conflict may affect US allies in the region depending on their level of involvement in the contingency. In doing so, Mastro highlights that, when it comes to nuclear use, there is a sizeable difference between what is possible (the operational realities) and what is plausible (the strategic logic behind potential use).

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Book Chapters
Publication Date
Subtitle

From Alliances, Nuclear Weapons and Escalation: Managing Deterrence in the 21st Century, edited by Stephan Frühling and Andrew O’Neil, published 2021 by ANU Press, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australia.

Authors
Oriana Skylar Mastro
Book Publisher
Australian National University Press
Authors
Ryan A. Musto
News Type
Commentary
Date
Paragraphs

China is ready to rock with the Treaty of Bangkok.

In a rare appearance at the special online summit for the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) on Nov. 22, China’s President Xi Jinping announced that China is prepared to sign the protocol of a 1995 agreement that establishes Southeast Asia as a nuclear-weapon-free zone. Under the agreement, known as the Bangkok Treaty, 10 regional states renounce the right to nuclear weapons in any form within the ASEAN zone. If it joins the treaty, China would agree not to use or threaten the use of nuclear weapons within the zone or against its members. It would make China the first nuclear-weapon state to adhere.

Read the rest at Lawfare Blog 

Hero Image
The flags of Association of Southeast Asia Nations (ASEAN) members in ASEAN headquarter at Jalan Sisingamangaraja No.70A, South Jakarta, Indonesia. From left the flags of: Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, Philippines, Singapore, Thail
The flags of Association of Southeast Asia Nations (ASEAN) members in ASEAN headquarter at Jalan Sisingamangaraja No.70A, South Jakarta, Indonesia. From left the flags of: Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, Vietnam.
Gunawan Kartapranata, https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:ASEAN_Flags.jpg
All News button
1
Subtitle

President Xi Jinping recently announced that China wants to adhere to Southeast Asia’s nuclear-free zone “as early as possible" to become the first nuclear state to join the pact. Musto finds that Xi wants to act now in order to distract from China’s nuclear build-up and, more importantly, counter the AUKUS security partnership.

Authors
News Type
Commentary
Date
Paragraphs

Listen on the BBC The Inquiry

Hero Image
BEIJING, CHINA - OCTOBER 01: Chinese rocket launchers are seen at a parade to celebrate the 70th Anniversary of the founding of the People's Republic of China in 1949 , at Tiananmen Square on October 1, 2019 in Beijing, China.
BEIJING, CHINA - OCTOBER 01: Chinese rocket launchers are seen at a parade to celebrate the 70th Anniversary of the founding of the People's Republic of China in 1949 , at Tiananmen Square on October 1, 2019 in Beijing, China.
Kevin Frayer / Getty Images
All News button
1
Subtitle

Following a recent test in China, Cameron Tracy talks to the BBC about a new breed of hypersonic missiles and whether they will make the world a more dangerous place.

Authors
News Type
Commentary
Date
Paragraphs

Look up! The ghosts of space weapons past have once again darkened our cosmic doorway. Recently Britain’s Financial Times reported that China flight-tested a new breed of space weapon when it launched a massive “Long March” rocket tipped with a nuclear-capable, hypersonic glider. The missile briefly entered orbit before descending on its target, which it missed by roughly two dozen miles. The report suggested that the test was evidence that China has “made astounding progress on hypersonic weapons and [is] far more advanced than US officials realised.”

Read the rest at The Washington Post

Hero Image
Chinese flag flying above orbital carrier rocket
7th China International Aviation and Aerospace Exhibition To Kick Off (November 2008)
Stringer/Getty Images
All News button
1
Subtitle

China flight-tested a new breed of space weapon when it launched a massive “Long March” rocket tipped with a nuclear-capable, hypersonic glider. But history tells us why the test isn’t a cause for panic.

Authors
Ryan A. Musto
News Type
Commentary
Date
Paragraphs

China is furious about the new AUKUS security partnership. Under the deal announced on September 15, the United States and United Kingdom will help Australia acquire a fleet of nuclear-powered submarines to counter China’s influence in the Indo-Pacific. A day after it became public, China’s Foreign Ministry spokesman Zhao Lijian blasted the pact as “extremely irresponsible” and one that “undermined regional peace and stability.” 

Read the rest at The Diplomat

Hero Image
Image of the earth Bernt Ove Moss / EyeEm
All News button
1
Subtitle

China is tapping into broader anti-nuclear sentiment in the region to attack Australia’s nuclear submarine deal.

Authors
News Type
Commentary
Date
Paragraphs

Abstract

What role does the international audience play in nuclear crises? Scholars of nuclear crises and deterrence have treated nuclear crises as dyadic interactions between two sides. However, states do not only interact with each other during a nuclear crisis. They also signal to a third actor—the international audience. There are two reasons for this. First, states care about their international social reputation and want to be perceived as responsible and legitimate actors. Second, there are material benefits to states maintaining a good social reputation with the international audience, which possesses the leverage to reward, condemn, and sanction. States thus attempt to leverage this power of the international audience to apply diplomatic pressure on their adversary during nuclear crises. They also engage in costly signaling and strategic restraint to ensure that the international audience considers their actions legitimate during the crisis. I use original qualitative evidence from the Kargil War (1999) between India and Pakistan to demonstrate this dynamic. Incorporating the international audience as a critical third actor during nuclear crises has important academic and policy implications for the study of nuclear crises and their management.

Read the rest at Global Studies Quarterly

Hero Image
man with glasses smiling
All News button
1
Subtitle

What role does the international audience play in nuclear crises? Scholars of nuclear crises and deterrence have treated nuclear crises as dyadic interactions between two sides. However, states do not only interact with each other during a nuclear crisis. They also signal to a third actor—the international audience.

Authors
Rose Gottemoeller
News Type
Commentary
Date
Paragraphs

Emerging and disruptive technologies spell an uncertain future for second-strike retaliatory forces. New sensors and big data analysis may render mobile missiles and submarines vulnerable to detection. I call this development the “standstill conundrum”: States will no longer be able to assure a nuclear response should they be hit by a nuclear first strike. If the nuclear weapons states can manage this vulnerability, however, they might be able to escape its worst effects. “Managing” could mean shoring up nuclear deterrence; it could mean focusing more on defenses; or it could mean negotiating to ensure continued viability of second-strike deterrent forces.

Read the rest at Texas National Security Review

Hero Image
rocket launched over the ocean defense.gov
All News button
1
Subtitle

Emerging and disruptive technologies spell an uncertain future for second-strike retaliatory forces. New sensors and big data analysis may render mobile missiles and submarines vulnerable to detection. I call this development the “standstill conundrum”: States will no longer be able to assure a nuclear response should they be hit by a nuclear first strike.

Paragraphs
Cover of North Korean Conundrum, showing a knotted ball of string.

Read our news story about the book >> 

North Korea is consistently identified as one of the world’s worst human rights abusers. However, the issue of human rights in North Korea is a complex one, intertwined with issues like life in the North Korean police state, inter-Korean relations, denuclearization, access to information in the North, and international cooperation, to name a few. There are likewise multiple actors involved, including the two Korean governments, the United States, the United Nations, South Korea NGOs, and global human rights organizations. While North Korea’s nuclear weapons and the security threat it poses have occupied the center stage and eclipsed other issues in recent years, human rights remain important to U.S. policy. 

The contributors to The North Korean Conundrum explore how dealing with the issue of human rights is shaped and affected by the political issues with which it is so entwined. Sections discuss the role of the United Nations; how North Koreans’ limited access to information is part of the problem, and how this is changing; the relationship between human rights and denuclearization; and North Korean human rights in comparative perspective.

Contents

  1. North Korea: Human Rights and Nuclear Security Robert R. King and Gi-Wook Shin
  2. The COI Report on Human Rights in North Korea: Origins, Necessities, Obstacles, and Prospects Michael Kirby
  3. Encouraging Progress on Human Rights in North Korea: The Role of the United Nations and South Korea Joon Oh 
  4. DPRK Human Rights on the UN Stage: U.S. Leadership Is Essential Peter Yeo and Ryan Kaminski
  5. Efforts to Reach North Koreans by South Korean NGOs: Then, Now, and Challenges Minjung Kim
  6. The Changing Information Environment in North Korea Nat Kretchun
  7. North Korea’s Response to Foreign Information Martyn Williams
  8. Human Rights Advocacy in the Time of Nuclear Stalemate: The Interrelationship Between Pressuring North Korea on Human Rights and Denuclearization  Tae-Ung Baik
  9. The Error of Zero-Sum Thinking about Human Rights and U.S. Denuclearization Policy Victor Cha
  10. Germany’s Lessons for Korea Sean King
  11. Human Rights and Foreign Policy: Puzzles, Priorities, and Political Power Thomas Fingar

Desk, examination, or review copies can be requested through Stanford University Press.

June 2022 Update

The Korean version of The North Korean Conundrum is now available, published by the Database Center for North Korean Human Rights (NKDB). Purchase the Korean version via NKDB's website >>

To mark the release of the Korean version of the book, APARC hosted a book talk in Seoul jointly with the Database Center for North Korean Human Rights, on June 9, 2022.
Watch NTD Korea's report of the event:

View news coverage of the event by Korean Media:

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Books
Publication Date
Subtitle

Balancing Human Rights and Nuclear Security

Authors
Robert R. King
Gi-Wook Shin
Book Publisher
Shorenstein APARC
Subscribe to Nuclear policy