Tailored Assurance: Balancing Deterrence and Disarmament in Responding to NATO-Russia Tension
Proliferation Papers, No. 59, July 2018
The 2018 Nuclear Posture Review (NPR) called for tailoring assurance across America’s allies, including NATO, as part of an overall deterrence and assurance strategy.
NATO is currently dealing with several challenges: Russian hostility, growing pressure internally for nuclear disarmament or withdrawal of non-strategic US nuclear weapons, as well as the questioning of America’s credibility as a guarantor of European security. Since these sources of tension are not felt symmetrically across the 29 member states, it has become necessary to adapt assurance measures on a case-by-case basis by adjusting the military capabilities involved and the communication according to the needs of each country.
The purpose of this study is to identify the various options available to the United States to enable it to adapt capabilities, messaging strategies, and other tools, thereby providing more effective and consistent assurance in the face of the Russian threat. In order to respond effectively to a strategy aimed at accentuating the internal divisions of the Alliance, it is necessary to combine measures related to the “hardware” of NATO’s posture (nuclear weapons, investments, conventional forces etc.) and others related to its “software” (values, Alliance cohesion, communication, etc.).
Available in:
Regions and themes
ISBN / ISSN
Share
This page contains only a summary of our work. If you would like to have access to all the information from our research on the subject, you can download the full version in PDF format.
Tailored Assurance: Balancing Deterrence and Disarmament in Responding to NATO-Russia Tension
Security Studies Center
Heir to a tradition dating back to the founding of Ifri, the Security Studies Center provides public and private decision-makers as well as the general public with the keys to understanding power relations and contemporary modes of conflict as well as those to come. Through its positioning at the juncture of politics and operations, the credibility of its civil-military team and the wide distribution of its publications in French and English, the Center for Security Studies constitutes in the French landscape of think tanks a unique center of research and influence on the national and international defense debate.
From Corsairs to Private Military Contractors. Nonmilitary Maritime Actors and the Historical Continuities of Naval Warfare
Since late 2023, several Houthi attacks on commercial shipping have involved privately contracted armed teams conducting defensive engagements and coordinating immediate response efforts, often in the relative absence of regular naval forces during the immediate hostilities at sea. These cases highlight a strategic tension that increasingly confronts modern navies. On the one hand, they are expected to conduct persistent, low-intensity maritime security tasks such as counterpiracy, maritime policing, and the protection of commercial shipping. On the other hand, they face renewed pressure to prepare for high-intensity conflict against peer and near-peer adversaries amid the return of great power competition.
Framework Nation: A European Challenge and French Ambition
First appearing in the early 2000s, the framework nation concept follows several distinct rationales, whether it refers to a country assuming the leadership of a military operation, directing a multinational capability project, or commanding a permanent force structure. In every case, the country that takes on this role fully intends to derive from it additional politico-military influence.
The Nuanced Relationship Between Public Opinion and Foreign Policy
Public sentiment is something decision-makers must contend with, especially in democratic states. However, the extent to which public opinion shapes foreign policy varies. Three Council of Councils experts in France, India, and Nigeria reflect on how public opinion does—and sometimes does not—affect foreign policy decisions.
Taking the Pulse: Enough with the Annual NATO Summits, Already?
Over the past ten years, NATO has held almost as many summits as it did during the entirety of the Cold War. Are they still useful, or is it time to stop holding annual meetings?