Roundtables

Emerging technologies possess the potential to transform military competition and the international system in an uncertain, potentially destabilizing fashion. Are there ways to capture the benefits of these new technologies without unleashing catastrophic dangers? What insights and lessons can we glean from history—particularly from the Cold War experience the United States had with nuclear weapons—to help us navigate the challenges of today and tomorrow’s new technologies? This essay examines the concept of strategic stability, and in particular, the important ideas from the foundational thinker of the nuclear age, Thomas Schelling. For decades, strategic stability has been offered as both the prized goal and the great accomplishment of America’s nuclear statecraft, with Schelling acknowledged as the idea’s father. Examined closely, however, questions, tensions, and even contradictions appear, both in Schelling’s work and in the use of strategic stability to describe America’s nuclear strategy and statecraft.

Emerging technologies developed since the end of the Cold War—and their proliferation to new actors—call into question the prospects for strategic stability in the twenty-first century. Strategic stability exists when rivals are mutually deterred and lack any rational incentive to escalate to nuclear use during conflict. Yet, as this issue’s Roundtable examines, emerging technologies—with their new knowledge and tools with the potential for enhancing military capabilities—are impacting stability in such ways that the assumptions of rationality and deterrence no longer hold. First, these emerging technologies may be able to achieve effects once reserved to nuclear weapons, creating incentives for preemption. Second, these technologies are proliferating horizontally across more states, complicating mutual deterrence. Third, such technologies affect the psychology of decision-makers during crises, undermining rationality. Just as these phenomena may undermine stability, however, adversaries may yet be able to use the very same technologies to restore the strategic balance, although how is not yet fully apparent.

Mara Karlin and Mathew Burrows review “The Insiders’ Game,” a book exploring how democratic elites—including legislators, military leaders, and civilian officials—constrain presidential decision-making in war.

The global nuclear order is undergoing rapid and complex transformations, driven by the expansion of arsenals, evolving doctrines, and the interplay of domestic and international politics. This roundtable brings together seven incisive essays that explore the shifting dynamics of nuclear security across six key regions—Europe, Latin America, the Middle East, South Asia, China, and the Korean Peninsula. From the cascading effects of U.S.-China competition to the domestic political drivers of nuclear policy in both democratic and authoritarian states, the contributors analyze how these forces are reshaping deterrence, alliances, and proliferation risks.

In this roundtable review of “War, States, and International Order: Alberico Gentili and the Foundational Myth of the Laws of War,” the contributors engage with Vergerio’s analysis of canon-making by suggesting ways to broaden its historical scope and highlighting what limits interdisciplinary dialogue.

In this roundtable review, Mark Pomar, Kathryn Stoner, Carol Saivetz, Natasha Kuhrt, and Onur İşçi offer their thoughts on Sergey Radchenko’s new book, “To Run the World: The Kremlin’s Cold War Bid for Global Power.” These contributors offer a diverse range of perspectives on Soviet foreign policy — and implications for Russian policy today. Plus, Radchenko offers a response.

In this roundtable review, Michael Kofman, Dara Massicot, Cynthia Roberts, and Michael Petersen discuss Dima Adamsky’s new book, “The Russian Way of Deterrence: Strategic Culture, Coercion, and War.”

In his book, “Command: The Politics of Military Operations from Korea to Ukraine,” Lawrence Freedman highlights why an understanding of politics is a central component of military leadership. In this roundtable review, Jason Dempsey, Raphael Cohen, Susan Bryant, and Sonya Finley consider the lessons that leaders can draw from Freedman’s book and the importance of a political sensibility that allows commanders to navigate complex military and political environments.

Conducting a post-mortem review after a war is an important but fraught exercise. In “The Inheritance: America’s Military After Two Decades of War,” Mara Karlin draws on her experience as a policymaker and academic to assess the legacy of the post-9/11 wars for the military and society and identify lessons for the future. In this roundtable review, our contributors consider Karlin’s analysis and draw on their own expertise to examine the legacy of 20 years of war.