Re-evaluating the ethical considerations surrounding the possession, threat of use, and potential use of nuclear weapons in the 21st century raises foundational questions about the overall utility of the U.S. nuclear arsenal. Given that no other nation has demonstrated a tangible willingness to utilize these weapons, leaving major powers postured primarily in response to one another, can the United States "disarm to win," and what would be the global and strategic effects if the U.S. were the first country to disarm?
A central mechanism of this policy debate is the proposal for the United States to adopt a stated "No First Use" (NFU) nuclear policy. This topic analyzes the strategic benefits and drawbacks of an NFU policy in the context of evolving security threats and rapid technological advancements. Specifically, what impact would a U.S. policy of "No First Use" have on our allies and extended deterrence commitments, and would such a declaratory shift necessitate fundamental changes to U.S. military force structure?
Taking partial disarmament or posture reduction to its logical conclusion, the land-based leg of the nuclear triad faces a pivotal existential question. In a hypothetical scenario where the Sentinel is the country's last ICBM, what would U.S. strategic deterrence look like in a post-ICBM age? Ultimately, what national or international variables would need to change for the United States to move beyond needing or wanting ICBMs entirely?
- Bonnet, Yann, "The Atomic Bomb Was the Only Thing That Saved My Life: How US Museums Present the End of the Pacific War," SAASS thesis, 2025, 108 pgs.
- Bonnet tackles the ethical dimensions of nuclear weapons by demonstrating how deeply ingrained cultural myths actively suppress moral reflection on their use. He details how curators initially designed the Enola Gay exhibit to provoke thought on the moral dilemmas and human costs of the atomic bombings by including photographs of Japanese victims and questioning whether the strikes were strictly necessary. However, public backlash rooted in the "Greatest Generation" myth rejected this moral ambiguity, insisting on a binary "good versus evil" narrative that erased the ethical complexity of deploying weapons of mass destruction. To responsibly evaluate the potential use of nuclear weapons today, Bonnet recommends that modern museums and educational institutions present these historical ethical dilemmas dispassionately, allowing citizens and strategists to exercise critical thinking rather than relying on comforting, sanitized narratives.
- Carter, Lt. Col. Mark A., "Critical Reactions: The role of Crisis in Advancing Nuclear Science and Technology," SAASS thesis, 2025, 103 pgs.
- While addressing nuclear investment broadly through the lens of science, Carter justifies continued investment in the nuclear enterprise by highlighting its indispensable dual-purpose benefits. He points out that the same scientific foundations that underpin weapons also deliver critical breakthroughs essential to the American way of life, such as sterile insect techniques for sustainable agriculture, advanced medical diagnostics (like PET imaging and Technetium-99m), cancer-treating radiation therapies, and reliable consumer energy technologies. Carter concludes that robustly investing in and understanding nuclear science is non-negotiable for ensuring national security, economic stability, and public health, proving that the value of the nuclear enterprise extends far beyond mere deterrence.
- Lee, Maj. Ryan M., "Strategic Fallout: A Study of U.S. Public Opinion and Nuclear Weapons Policy," SAASS thesis, 2025, 116 pgs.
- Stutzriem, Maj. Stephen E., "Fending Off: How Nuclear Modernization is Critical to Deterrence in an Era of Multi-Polar Great Power Competition," GCPME thesis, 2024, 46 pgs.
- Vann, Lt. Col. Ray, "The US Military's Unwinnable War," AF Fellows Research, published in Global Security Review, April 2024.