Campus commemorating the breakthrough and exploring the experiments longterm impact and defense has presented opportunities to engage scientist, are artists, policymakers and the public around a set of issues that grow from that original event 75 years ago. Now, this evenings discussion im particularly delight because it brings social science into the conversation in just the way it should be. Our panelists will be introduced in just a moment. Each is a scholar in International Relations and national security, and theyll offer different viewpoints on military decisions, the role of nuclear arms and the formation of alliances and aids and obstacles to nonproliferation efforts. This events sponsored be by television of social sciences at the university of shack and also sponsored by the center for International SocialScience Research at the institute of politic and the chicago project on security and threats. Now im going introduce or moderateow, steve edwards, steve will introduce the panelists when he comes up. Now, steve is currently Vice President and chief content officer at the wbez. He is as you well know an awardwinning journalist, producer and program host, he has covered everything from politic to pop culture. His work has appeared in bloomberg news, pbs and public Radio Station us. From 2012 to 2017, steve was the executive director at the university of chicagos institute politics. In that role hoe oversaw all programming and operational duties, including its acclaimed public event sneer, professional fellowships, career and Civic Engagement programs and the x files, podcast with david axelrod. So, edwards is definite lay university of chicago intellect. But not a university of shuck alum. He got his bachelors degree in Political Science in amherst college. Join me in welcoming steve edwards. Thank you. [applause] dean woodward, thank you for that bro ducks an introduction, its at honor to be back here at the university with all of you at such an important time for this conversation. Not only because of the history that were commemorating of the course of this year, thinking 75 years after the dawn of the Nuclear Age Began steps from where we are, but also the present realities in our geopolitics today and many of us watch very closely the announcement just a few days ago last week when our sister publication here at the university, the bulletin of the atomic scientists, moved the hand 30 seconds closer two minutes to midnight, the closest theyve been in more than 60 years. So im eager to hear the Insights Panel lests have on the fundamental question before us, safer or more dangerous world, Nuclear Weapons and todays global community, and we have a distinguished panel ifll begin on my far right, your left, by introducing them, each in order and then what well do is well have each of them talk for five minutes. That will bring insights into this question from their research. Well then move to questions among us, and then your questions for each of them as we go forth. So let me begin with bob robert pape, professor of Political Science at the university of chicago, specializing in International Security affairs. His publications include cutting the fuse, he explosion of global suicide terrorism and how to stop it. Dying to win, the Strategic Logic of suicide terrorism, bombing to win, air power and cornerings war, why economic sanction does not work, the Strategic Logic of suicide terrorism and many other articles average frequent contributor and an throes a vote of news and Media Outlets help taught at Dartmouth College before come thing to the university of chicago and he taught air power strategy for the u. S. Af school of advanced air power studies for three years, he received a ph. D from the university of chicago and graduate sim ma cum laude and Phi Beta Kappa from the university of pittsburgh. Next to robert pain is paul post, who is an assistant professor in the department of Political Science here at the university of chicago. A Research Affiliate of the peerson institute for the study of global conflicts he studied International Relations with a focus on International Security. The author of two books, the economics of war and organizing democracy. He is authored or coauthored academic papers in numerous journals and has been featured in various news outlets as well. He received his ph. D from the university of michigan am masters or of science from to the London School of economics and Political Science and a ba from miami university, and before coming to the university of chicago, he was an assistant professor in the department of Political Science at rutgers, and taught in the department of economics at the Ohio State University. Next to professor post is austin carson, an assistant professor of Political Science at the university of chicago, where he currently specializes in security and intelligence, and their relationship to International Relations theory. International security and global governance. At the core of his projects is an interest in understanding how government selective reveal and conceal what too and the juncture this creates between the front stage, quote, and the back stage, quote 0, International Politics ump his book analyzes covert forms of military intervention and theyre role in states pursuit of limit it ward. Other work assesses the politics of open secreted, the impact of publicity on international rules, Sensitive Information and International Organizations all of which will be in play here tonight waded watch ph. D in Political Science from the Ohio State University and has Research Fellowship at the Niehaus Center for global gov indian at princeton, the studiesy George Washington university a wood to Wilson Center in washington, dc. Next to professor carston is paul, an associate prefer of Political Science and tackty compare of the committee or International Relations. He codirects the program on International Security policy and program on Political Violence. His research focuses on Political Violence and International Security, particularly as many of you in south asia himself book, networks of rebellion, explaining insurgents cohesion and collapse, won several awards and has publicked widefully academic and policy journals. Finally next to professor is page pryce combe who is the numb clear proliferation fellow for the chicago project on security and threat here at the university. She recently received her phn Political Science from in the university of south carolina. Her research and teaching interests lie at the intersections of International Relations and compare of politics. She is broadly interested in our institutions affects the Foreign Policy of leader and mows specifically how they affect a leaders propensity for nuclear proliveation and explores the issues under which leaders reverse in programs and i working on a book and most recently was named one of the seven freshest perspectives on Nuclear Policy in 2017 bit the bulletin for the atomic scientists. Please welcome all of our panelists here tonight. Grade to have you with us. [applause] we are going to start on the far end with professor pain. The floor is yours. Thank you very much, staph, and thank you, dean woodward. Is especially fitting to have our ir faculty, especially the young ir faculty, commenting on the effect of Nuclear Weapons here the university of chicago and im delighted be part of it. Nuclear weapons inspire tremendous fear, not just among experts but widely in the public at large, and for good reason. When researching why japan surrendered, i had to wade through gory details of hiroshima and nag nagasaki two o atomic bombs killed over 200,000 people in lest than one minute. Todays Nuclear Weapons are even more destructive. No wonder the thought of Nuclear Attack evokes fear. Paradoxically, however, Nuclear Weapons are also a powerful force for peace. The treasure before the momming of Nuclear Weapons, from 1850 to 1945, was the classic era of great power politics. With numerous major wars among the great powers of the day. These wars were hugely destructive. In world war, 120 mental pipe died. World war ii was worse, over 50 Million People died. But since 1945, great power wars have come to a dead stop. The United States, china, germany, britain, france, the soviet union, now russia, have had their troubles and have even waged proxy wars but none of them have fought a shooting war against each other, major one in over almost 75 years. Now, what is the cause of this long great power peace . Is it the Democratic Peace . The idea that democracies dont fight each other . No. China and russia are not mature democracies. Are International Politic friday n general, now so peaceful that major powers no longer have Serious International crisises with each other . No. From berlin, taiwan and cuba during the world war, to ukraine today, major powers have experienced numerous crises that one might think would escalate at least to sustained conventional combat between their militaries but none have. In 75 years. Now, although other factors matter, Nuclear Weapons have probably done more than any other to vastly lower the risk of great power war. The existence of Nuclear Weapons does not stop crises but they serve as a powerful deterrent on the escalation of those crises. Why . The very fear that makes us anxious about Nuclear Weapons also serves as a brake on the outbreak of major power war. This fear is to great that even a whiff of nuclear gun power provokes tremendous pressures to deescalate a process cries. Consider last summer President Trump went through a sear of tweets and other moves that essentially played a game inform Nuclear Chicken with north korea. The game of chicken, you know this. Its famous from the movies when two High School Teenagers drive cars head on toward each other, daring each other to swerve. That is what President Trump did last summer, and that is why the fear of nuclear war has grown under the Trump Administration. Now, what has happened since . North korea, china, south korea, and even the United States, have taken steps to change the game. Instead of bombing north korea, were out in talking about north korean athletes at the Winter Olympics in seoul. In other words, as with numerous major power crises since 1945, a crisis among Nuclear Armed adversaries is generating tremendous pressure to dampen risks rather than escalate them. Now, so, does this mean all this worry has been for nothing and that the peaceful effects of Nuclear Weapons are so strong we should all just go home . Alas, no. The true danger related to Nuclear Weapons is strategic miscalculation, especially in a crisis. That is, that in the early stages of a crisis, individual political leaders will overplay their hand, bomb facility is with conventional wins, oblivious to to possibility of accidental or inadvertent Nuclear Proliferation, these i why an informed public debate is important to call attention to alternative pathways to resolve tension. Today no need is greater than with north korea. It is imperative to end the game of Nuclear Chicken. Not just for a few months but in a lasting way. Our goal should be to use the next month surrounding the Winter Olympics to stop playing the game of chicken and to deescalate on both sides. The best way to do that is to say, okay, you say were a threat. But were going to deescalate if you deescalate. We should be heading toward a straightforward deal. We should deescalate the military exercises that the United States and south korea have been conducting annually, every year, for years, to practice conquering every inch of north korea. In exchange, for north korea deescalating nuclear and missile tests. Starting at the olympics, lets put this deal squarely on the table, and truly change the game of Nuclear Chicken into a game of mutual deescalation and use the fear of Nuclear Weapons as a force for peace. Thank you. Thank you, professor pape. We religion now turn to paul post. Great. Thank you, steve. Thank you, dean woodward, thank you all of you for being here tonight. This is obviously a very important topic, and im excited to be up here with such a great panel of my colleagues. So theres two constants in International Politics since set 49. First one is the presence of Nuclear Weapons, and really that start before 1949. The second is the presence of the north atlantic treater organization, or nato, and as it so happens these two things are intimately tied together. As natos first secretary general famously remarked, to keep the purpose of nato is to keep the americans in to keep the russians out and to keep the germans down. Well, when it comes to the role of Nuclear Weapons in nato, that same threepart formula applies. That its about keeping american nukes deployed, keeping russian nukes deterred, and keeping german nukes denied. With respect to keeping american nukes deployed, this has been at the center of nato since the beginning. Its indeed why nato is called refers to itself as a Nuclear Alliance. From the stationing of b29 bombers in england during the late 1940s and 1950s, each of which was equipped with the bomb, to the forward deployment of Nuclear Forces controlled american controlled Nuclear Forces in germany, turkey, and even today, belgium, netherlands, other nato allies. Keeping american Nuclear Forces, american controlled Nuclear Forces, on the continent has been, again, foundational and fundamental to natos operation. That leads directly to the second purpose. Keeping russian nukes deterred. The idea is that by keeping american nukes deployed, in europe, it makes it that much less likely that russia would pant to tempt coercion, either by threatening a Nuclear Strike or even threatening with conventional strike. The reality is u. S. Nukes are safely stowed away in a sigh he in south dakota, russia might say theyre not really going to use them. They still have them. So maybe we can co kess but coerce but if theyre on the front line it creates a logic of use them or lose them, and the russians would be more likely to be deterred. Finally when it comes to keeping german nukeses denied, that was condition for germany to even enter nato in the 1950s. Had to not possess their own Nuclear Weapons. Throughout the cold war, that remained the issue and became even more important with the end offering the cold war. In fact in many ways this is why nato did not become less important with the collapse of the berlin wall but became more important. In order for gem now reunify it had to make a commitment to not acquire Nuclear Weapons and that was a commit. Signed on to by the other major powers in europe, the United States, england, france, and russia, and the way to do that was to mike sure that a unified germany remained p