What would a U.S. nuclear test accomplish? (One Decision)

“We Would Be Opening the Door for Them to Close the Gap”

This week, former MI6 Head Sir Richard Dearlove and Christina Ruffini sit down with Corey Hinderstein, former Deputy Administrator for Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation at the National Nuclear Security Administration. 

Our guest breaks down President Trump’s latest comments on resuming nuclear testing and shares insight on U.S. nuclear test readiness, policymaker consensus, and the future of arms control treaties. 

TUNE IN

🎙️Episode Highlights

A decision in the benefit of progress?

The White House has the world’s fastest supercomputer for modeling nuclear weapons performance—and an extensive history of nuclear testing, still “extremely relevant” today. 

Would resuming testing uniquely contribute to the United States' scientific progress? Corey Hinderstein argues that this isn't the case. 

“We know more about our nuclear weapons now than we ever did while we were doing nuclear testing.”

TUNE IN

A decision in the benefit of safety?

The entire U.S. nuclear weapons complex, Hinderstein says, bears the responsibility of the always/never principle. The weapons "must always work as designed when called upon, and must never work unless called upon."

This responsibility is taken "extremely seriously" by the directors of the three national laboratories. One of their most important duties is to assert confidence in the readiness of the nuclear arsenal in an annual, data-driven letter to the President. 

“If we really started the preparation for an underground nuclear test, it would most likely be a demonstration. It would be sending a political message, and not necessarily a helpful one.”

TUNE IN