Non-proliferation

Experts analyze critical dimensions of Israel’s strikes relevant responses, covering nuclear diplomacy; strategic, security, and regional implications; and international law.

Whether newly announced ceasefire actually leads to end hostilities will not change the new reality: a comprehensive agreement is less likely now than before the bombing

An expert policy and legal assessment of the U.S. strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities and what comes next.

Experts who advised a president on use of force answer a full range of basic questions on the conditions under which action against Iran would be lawful, and what options Congress…

The constellation of forces in Israel, the United States, and beyond complicates efforts to find an off-ramp to the war.

The Trump administration should focus on messaging pragmatic objectives for a deal and de-emphasizing U.S. efforts to exert “maximum pressure” on Iran while talks are ongoing.

Stepping away from NATO would reduce U.S. leverage over European allies, potentially leading to more nuclear-armed states.

The United States will uphold its leadership in non-proliferation by refraining from unnecessary and destabilizing nuclear tests.

We asked leading experts what questions the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources should focus on in Wright’s confirmation hearing.

Trump faces a significant challenge in addressing Iran's nuclear program, but he also has an opportunity to reduce its proliferation risks.

US presidents of both parties have agreed for 60 years on the need to stop the spread of nuclear weapons. Trump has signaled he’s not so sure.

A decade after a major UN human rights report, abuses are escalating, and they are integrally connected to the country's nuclear program.