Event Summary

Join us in person or online as USITW presents insights from its work to date on nuclear weapons policy and messaging and discusses some of the points of tension and disagreement that have surfaced among the research findings.  Participants will have an opportunity to share their own experiences and observations about promoting policies to reduce and ultimately eliminate the nuclear weapons danger. Feedback provided by members of the Connect US community will help to make USITW's final products more useful and relevant to advocates working on nuclear policy issues. RSVP online.

Event Description

Background: President Obama's speech in Prague on April 5, 2009, in which he pledged "America's commitment to seek the peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons," was the most important statement about U.S. nuclear weapons policy in a generation. On July 6, President Obama and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev reached a preliminary agreement to cut the American and Russian nuclear arsenals by as much as a third while exploring options for cooperation on missile defense.

With Presidential leadership and bipartisan support from leading security experts, nonproliferation and disarmament advocates clearly have a unique opportunity to advance their arguments.  But the opponents of arms control are also marshaling their arguments and influence - and while the mainstream public is inclined to embrace the concept of nuclear arms reductions in the abstract, there are also deep-seated vulnerabilities and weaknesses in public thinking about nuclear weapons that could easily undermine the public's initial willingness to give progressive advocates a hearing on this issue.

Briefing: In the past six months, three separate research projects have examined public opinion and understanding about nuclear weapons policy, and what that implies for effective advocacy.  Research reports and messaging recommendations were produced by the Topos Partnership (for the Union of Concerned Scientists); Greenberg-Quinlan-Rosner (for the New America Foundation's Nuclear Strategy and Nonproliferation Initiative); and American Environics (for a coalition of foundations that focus on nuclear weapons issues).  While there are many areas of commonality among the research findings, there are also some notable differences.

How do these three sets of research findings "add up" for advocates looking to communicate more effectively about the need for lasting change in U.S. nuclear weapons policy?   The Peace and Security Initiative, The Stanley Foundation, and the Colombe Foundation asked U.S. in the World to synthesize and analyze the findings of the three projects, and to draft messaging guidance that translates the reports' findings into practical advice for a diverse community of advocates who share the broad goal of reducing the nuclear weapons danger.  USITW's analysis and messaging recommendations are due to be issued later this summer.

On July 16^th, USITW will present insights from its work to date and discuss some of the points of tension and disagreement that have surfaced among the research findings.  Participants will have an opportunity to share their own experiences and observations about promoting policies to reduce and ultimately eliminate the nuclear weapons danger.  Feedback provided by members of the Connect US community will help to make USITW's final products more useful and relevant to advocates working on nuclear policy issues.

Topics for Discussion:

Research suggests that public skepticism about the reliability of verification measures is an obstacle to support of arms control agreements.  How should we handle this advocacy challenge?

How does the specter of nuclear terrorism affect public thinking about nuclear weapons policy?

How do arguments for "going to zero" fare with the mainstream public, and can advocates who differ on making "zero" a priority find some strategic common ground on which to base their communications?

What and how extensive are the differences between communicating with policymakers and communicating with the public on this set of issues?

Resources

"Obama's Big Missile Test"
By Philip Taubman
New York Times, July 8, 2009
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/09/opinion/09taubman.html?_r=1

"Our Decaying Nuclear Deterrent"
By John Kyle and Richard Perle
Wall Street Journal, June 30, 2009
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124623202363966157.html

"Defending U.S. Leadership on Disarmament"
By James M. Acton, Pierre Goldschmidt, George Perkovich
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Proliferation Analysis, July 7, 2009
http://www.carnegieendowment.org/publications/index.cfm?fa=view&id=23354&prog=zgp&proj=znpp

Speakers