Abstract

We investigate the feasibility of using a medium-powered (5kW) ground-based laser combined with a ground-based telescope to prevent collisions between debris objects in low-Earth orbit (LEO), for which there is no current, effective mitigation strategy. The scheme utilizes photon pressure alone as a means to perturb the orbit of a debris object. Applied over multiple engagements, this alters the debris orbit sufficiently to reduce the risk of an upcoming conjunction. We employ standard assumptions for atmospheric conditions and the resulting beam propagation. Using case studies designed to represent the properties (e.g. area and mass) of the current debris population, we show that one could significantly reduce the risk of more than half of all debris-debris collisions using only one such laser/telescope facility. We speculate on whether this could mitigate the debris fragmentation rate such that it falls below the natural debris re-entry rate due to atmospheric drag, and thus whether continuous long-term operation could entirely mitigate the Kessler syndrome in LEO, without need for relatively expensive active debris removal.

Abstract:

This paper describes a risk analysis approach for assessing the progress of another country's nuclear weapons program over time. To handle the dynamics inherent to nuclear weapons development, we embed a semi-Markov decision process into a Bayesian network. The Bayesian network accounts for distributions on the time to transition between possible states of the nuclear weapons program. Our approach enables analysis of the country's nuclear weapons program decisions by identifying how each decision maker would direct the program given the domestic, international, and security influences affecting the country. We demonstrate the model with a case study of Pakistan's nuclear weapons program.

Abstract:

By examining via a case study the political authority of US proliferation experts since the 1960s, this article contributes to nuclear weapons proliferation studies and to the growing literature on the role of expertise in democracies. First, it argues that policy choices are determined by an understanding of history and that approaching nuclear history as a history of nuclear weapons proliferation is a presumption shared by both US experts and policy makers. Second, it shows that this understanding of history, relying on the metaphorical use of the term proliferation (which was imported from biology), strongly distorts the facts. Third, the article shows that nuclear experts are plagued by a conservative bias as a result of this use of the proliferation metaphor. Instead of challenging the faulty proliferation narrative, most experts have backed it without question. Fourth, the legitimacy that experts lend to this view of history has important political effects: it provides an authoritative assessment of past policies and limits the possibility of political innovation. Policy initiatives tend to be restricted to changes in speed or intensity. The article suggests three changes that might restore room for informed political innovation in nuclear weapons policies.

Abstract:

This critical review of the new political science literature on the causes of nuclear weapons proliferation consists of four parts. The first section briefly presents what we know about which states developed nuclear weapons and which states started but abandoned weapons development programs. I highlight the problems that result from uncertainty about the accuracy and completeness of the data. The second and third sections review the literature on the spread of the technical capability to develop nuclear weapons. We still lack robust knowledge about the relationship between the development of civilian nuclear power programs and nuclear weapons acquisition. The next two sections review the literature on the demand for nuclear weapons. Comparative case studies and statistical studies have improved our understanding of the diversity of motives for weapons development and restraints, but serious gaps in our knowledge remain. The sixth section outlines alternative theories about the potential impact of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) on nuclear weapons programs decisions. Finally, I lay out a future research agenda to address the weaknesses in our current understanding of the causes of nuclear proliferation

Abstract

The case studies in this special issue demonstrate that the Obama administration's 2010 Nuclear Posture Review (NPR) and related nuclear policy initiatives encouraged a number of other nuclear weapon states to likewise reduce the role of nuclear weapons in their national security doctrines and helped pave the way with non-nuclear weapon states for a successful 2010 Review Conference of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. This article reviews the contributing authors' case study findings regarding key foreign governments that applauded the 2010 NPR and were receptive to President Barack Obama's vision of a world free of nuclear weapons as well as governments that remained skeptical about US disarmament and arms control initiatives. We conclude with an analysis of the lessons that should be learned from the 2010 NPR process: the need for consistent implementation of changes in nuclear weapons doctrine, improved coordination and consultation with allies and other states, and further global education about the likelihood and consequences of nuclear terrorism.

Abstract

Chinese commentators assessing the 2010 US Nuclear Posture Review (NPR) acknowledged a number of ways in which they felt it was "better" than the 2001 NPR but still found much to criticize and many reasons for concern regarding the review's implications for China and for strategic stability. They welcomed the reduction of US nuclear inventories and reliance on nuclear weapons, the commitments to seek ratification of the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty and to not conduct nuclear tests, the declaration that the United States would continue to reduce the role of nuclear weapons in deterring non-nuclear attacks, and a number of other points. Commentators generally devoted more attention to issues that were seen to have negative implications for China's deterrent (e.g., continued development of missile defense capabilities and advanced conventional weapons). Their assessments of the NPR were initially colored by the downturn in Sino-US relations in the months prior to the review's release but became more positive as the overall bilateral relationship improved.

"Alexander Betts is one of a handful of scholars who have mastered the complex field of Global Migration Governance. This large and impressive volume covers the topic from every conceivable angle, and it gets the difficult mix of empirical analysis and policy recommendation right. As the global conversation about migration governance continues over the coming years, this work will remain the standard reference."--Randall Hansen, Research Chair in Political Science, University of Toronto 

"An invaluable contribution to migration research and studies of global governance more broadly. Drawing on useful concepts derived from International Relations, the excellent contributions draw a picture of a multilayered, fragmented and yet quite encompassing set of formal and informal governance arrangements that mirror the diversity of challenges associated with global population flows."--Sandra Lavenex, Professor of International Politics, University of Lucerne 

Unlike many other trans-boundary policy areas, international migration lacks coherent global governance. There is no United Nations migration organization and states have signed relatively few multilateral treaties on migration. Instead sovereign states generally decide their own immigration policies. However, given the growing politicization of migration and the recognition that states cannot always address migration in isolation from one another, a debate has emerged about what type of international institutions and cooperation are required to meet the challenges of international migration. Until now, though, that emerging debate on global migration governance has lacked a clear analytical understanding of what global migration governance actually is, the politics underlying it, and the basis on which we can make claims about what 'better' migration governance might look like.

In order to address this gap, Global Migration Governance brings together a group of the world's leading experts to consider the global governance of different aspects of migration. The chapters offer an accessible introduction to the global governance of low-skilled labor migration, high-skilled labor migration, irregular migration, lifestyle migration, international travel, refugees, internally displaced persons, human trafficking and smuggling, diaspora, remittances, and root causes. Each of the chapters explores the three same broad questions: What, institutionally, is the global governance of migration in that area? Why, politically, does that type of governance exist? How, normatively , can we ground claims about the type of global governance that should exist in that area? Collectively, the chapters enhance our understanding of the international politics of migration and set out a vision for international cooperation on migration. 

Contents: 

1. "Introduction: Global Migration Governance", Alexander Betts 
2. "Low-Skilled Labour Migration", Christiane Kuptsch and Philip Martin 
3. "High-Skilled Labour Migration", Alexander Betts and Lucie Cerna 
4. "Irregular Migration", Franck Duvell 
5. "International Travel", Rey Koslowski 
6. "Lifestyle Migration", Caroline Oliver 
7. "Environmental Migration", Jane McAdam 
8. "UNHCR and the Global Governance of Refugees", Gil Loescher and James Milner 
9. "Internally Displaced Persons", Khalid Koser 
10. "Human Trafficking and Smuggling", Susan Martin and Amber Callaway 
11. "Remittances", Anna Lindley 
12. "Diasporas", Alan Gamlen 
13. "Root Causes", Stephen Castles and Nicholas Van Hear 
14. "Conclusion", Alexander Betts