The Case for More Nuclear Allies by Jasen Castillo

Nuclear deterrence depends on convincing adversaries that escalation could become dangerously costly. But as the United States extends that protection across Europe and East Asia, can its allies continue relying on the American nuclear umbrella—or should countries like Germany, Japan, and South Korea develop nuclear forces of their own?In this episode of Buffer State, Sasha Stern and Reed Smith sit down with Jasen Castillo, Associate Professor and Co-Director of the Albritton Center for Grand Strategy at Texas A&M University, to discuss nuclear deterrence, coercion, military effectiveness, the nuclear triad, and the risks created by America’s global security commitments.Castillo explains why deterrence depends on capability, credibility, and communication; the difference between punishment and denial; and what the wars in Ukraine and Iran reveal about coercion, sanctions, deep strikes, and military power.The conversation also examines why vulnerable regimes pursue nuclear weapons, why the United States maintains nuclear forces across land, air, and sea, and why protecting allies requires a larger and more complex arsenal than defending the United States alone.Castillo ultimately raises a controversial possibility: if America’s allies cannot rely indefinitely on U.S. protection, more of them may need nuclear weapons of their own.What do you think: would more nuclear-armed allies make the world safer—or more dangerous?Topics Include:00:00 Introduction01:40 How deterrence works09:12 Ukraine and the realities of modern war18:28 Deep strikes, propaganda, and attrition24:09 Iran, North Korea, and nuclear survival35:44 Why America maintains the nuclear triad44:36 The cost of defending America’s allies52:29 The case for more nuclear allies58:20 Predictions and the future of deterrence