Posturing for great power competition: Identifying coercion problems in U.S. nuclear policy

Abstract

The United States has adjusted its nuclear posture recently by adding nonstrategic weapons to its arsenal and raising the prospect of nuclear retaliation for nonnuclear attacks against command-and-control systems. Critics argue the former change is too dangerous due to the discrimination problem, while the latter change is too draconian due to the proportionality problem. I argue instead that new capabilities introduce a magazine depth problem, while new threats introduce an opportunistic aggression problem. This suggests that changes in force structure are not as dangerous as critics suggest, while changes in declaratory policy are more dangerous than they realize.