Produced by the Monterey Institute's Center for Nonproliferation Studies

Proponents Say: Eliminate all U.S. and Russian Ballistic Missiles.

• Eliminating all ballistic missiles is the most effective way to avoid the threat of unauthorized or inadvertent launch. Each side would rely solely on bombers to deliver nuclear weapons, which take hours to reach their destination and can be recalled.
• Bombers are sufficient for deterring rogue states with WMD. The air defenses of these states could easily be destroyed, as Iraq's were during the 1991 Gulf War.
• Eliminating all ballistic missiles would likely result in large savings to the U.S. and Russian defense budgets.

Opponents Say: Missiles Remain Necessary for U.S. and Russian Defense Postures.

• This approach may be impractical because it would require massive and drastic changes in the configuration of U.S. and Russian nuclear forces, in particular, abandonment of the nuclear triad. The triad consists of bombers, land-based missiles, and submarine-based missiles. Both countries have considered this diversified approach fundamental to their security for decades.
• Russia would be unlikely to agree to give up all of its missiles, especially land-based missiles, because they are the most reliable element of its nuclear forces.