President Trump outside the Pentagon, with Vice President Pence and Secretary of Defense Mattis. Photo: Brendan Smialowski / AFP / Getty Images

The Trump administration last Friday released its Nuclear Posture Review, the first since President Obama's in 2010, raising three big questions.

Why it matters: The chances of nuclear weapons being used are the highest they've been since the Cuban missile crisis. Now is the time for a serious public debate before Congress and the Trump administration decide on a new policy.

  1. How much is enough? The NPR calls for updating and augmenting the U.S. nuclear arsenal of 4,500 operational warheads in response to advances by Russia, China, North Korea and Iran. The projected cost is roughly $40 billion a year over three decades, or at least $1.2 trillion in total. This isn’t chump change, especially given competing demands for dollars at the Pentagon and across the federal budget.
  2. What new options? Development of low-yield nuclear weapons is another pillar of the NPR. But it's an open question whether they would increase the odds of a nuclear war by lowering the threshold, or decrease them by providing a credible retaliation threat that would enhance deterrence by giving us an option short of all-out conflict.
  3. When to use? Per the review, the U.S. might use nuclear weapons under "extreme circumstances" in response to “significant non-nuclear strategic attacks,” including chemical and biological attacks and cyberattacks against U.S. infrastructure or other high-value targets. Whether the U.S. should be the first to use nuclear weapons in any conflict is a critical strategic decision.

Go deeper

Dave Lawler, author of World
3 mins ago - World

Special report: Trump's hopes of nuclear deal with Putin come down to the wire

Illustration: Lazaro Gamio/Axios

A surprise offer from Vladimir Putin has the U.S. and Russia once again circling a potential pre-election nuclear deal.

The big picture: The last treaty constraining the U.S. and Russia, New START, is due to expire on Feb. 5, 2021, two weeks after the next U.S. presidential inauguration. For the first time since the height of the Cold War, the nuclear guardrails could come off.

The cliffhanger could be ... Georgia

Illustration: Sarah Grillo/Axios

It hasn't backed a Democrat for president since 1992, but Georgia's changing demographics may prove pivotal this year — not only to Trump v. Biden, but also to whether Democrats take control of the Senate.

Why it matters: If the fate of the Senate did hinge on Georgia, it might be January before we know the outcome. Meanwhile, voters' understanding of this power in the final days of the election could juice turnout enough to impact presidential results.

Amy Harder, author of Generate
6 hours ago - Energy & Environment

Climate change goes mainstream in presidential debate

Photo illustration: Aïda Amer/Axios. Photo: Olivier Douliery-Pool/Getty

The most notable part of Thursday’s presidential debate on climate change was the fact it was included as a topic and assumed as a fact.

The big picture: This is the first time in U.S. presidential history that climate change was a featured issue at a debate. It signals how the problem has become part of the fabric of our society. More extreme weather, like the wildfires ravaging Colorado, is pushing the topic to the front-burner.