How Trump’s History of ‘Proliferation Pessimism’ Presaged His 2025 Iran Strike

In a new article published in the global security policy journal The Washington Quarterly, Associate Professor Rachel Whitlark explores how U.S. President Donald Trump’s long-held views on nuclear proliferation made his June strike on Iranian nuclear facilities foreseeable.

Whitlark’s 2021 book, All Options on the Table, argues that a leader’s long-held personal beliefs about nuclear weapons can help us predict how they will act in executive office, should they encounter an adversary attempting to acquire nuclear weapons.

In the article, Whitlark traces Trump’s belief system back decades. She notes that in a 1985 interview, Trump called nuclear proliferation "the greatest problem of the world” and expressed a particular fear of a "Third World madman getting the bomb.”

This "proliferation pessimism," and Trump’s general perspective on the dangers of nuclear weapons and global proliferation, Whitlark says, was consistent. In his 2000 book, Trump praised Israel’s 1981 preventive strike on Iraq’s nuclear reactor, stating, "they did what they had to do to survive." By 2011, his focus had turned to Iran, writing that its program "must be stopped by any and all means necessary."

Whitlark notes that we are entering a new age in which nuclear weapons once again pose a significant threat, but this time with multiple states possessing such arms — a significant complication compared to the bipolar Cold War conflict.

“It is, therefore, worth paying careful attention to what future leaders think about nuclear weapons in world politics long before they enter national executive office, as these issues are likely to loom large moving forward,” Whitlark writes.

What Homer’s 'Iliad' Has to Say About the Real Dangers of Military AI

The debate about artificial intelligence in warfare is missing a critical element, argues Professor Jon R. Lindsay: the timeless, irrational, and often dark human emotion that drives so much conflict.

In a new article for the journal Minds and Machines, Lindsay suggests that Homer’s epic poem, the Iliad, provides a better framework for understanding the true risks of military AI than debates over software and policy.

Much of the discussion around military AI, Lindsay notes, focuses on the “rational alignment of AI means with human ends,” such as ensuring weapons follow rules of engagement. However, he says this viewpoint overlooks that war is often driven by human passions such as rage, status, fear, and revenge.

Lindsay points to the central figure of the Iliad, Achilles. His devastating wrath — first at his commander over a matter of pride, and later in a grief-fueled quest for vengeance — dictates the course of the war. These motivations are not strategic or rational, but deeply human. Lindsay suggests that AI will not eliminate these "Homeric judgments," but instead will become a powerful amplifier for them.

“The true horrors of battlefield AI come less from the misalignment of machines,” Lindsay writes, “and more from the Homeric judgment of the warriors who wield them.”

EU Struggles to Adapt Trade Policy in a More Dangerous World

Professor Alasdair R. Young discusses the European Union’s efforts to adapt g its trade policy to the world’s new, more aggressive, geopolitical environment for an article in the journal Comparative European Politics.

For decades, Young says, the EU viewed economic interdependence as overwhelmingly positive. But a series of unanticipated shocks from the U.S., China, and Russia has exposed how those ties can create vulnerabilities.

Young, associate dean for faculty development in the Ivan Allen College of Liberal Arts and the Nunn School’s Neal Family Chair, says the EU’s response has been uneven. Some tools to enhance its economic security were created, but they were weakened by member states’ reluctance to cede control, while efforts to develop offensive capabilities, like unilateral export controls, stalled completely. Young says internal divisions are the primary obstacle, concluding that the EU’s ability to adapt “is more limited the further it intrudes on core state competences” like security and foreign policy.

Pentagon's 'Economic Blind Spot' Threatens National Security, Says Former NATO Commander

The U.S. Department of Defense’s failure to integrate economics into military planning is a strategic blind spot that weakens national security, says Distinguished Professor of the Practice Gen. Philip M. Breedlove, NATO’s former commander.

In an article for the journal Survival, Breedlove argues that while adversaries such as China treat economic policy as warfare, the Defense Department operates without a chief economist or a unified economic strategy. This disconnect leads to misguided policies that trade long-term strength for short-term fixes, Breedlove says.

Breedlove says examples of issues caused by this approach include a monopoly on submarine construction that has caused massive cost overruns, threatening key alliance and blunt export controls on semiconductors that deprive U.S. firms of revenue for innovation and help China close the technology gap.

"Without harnessing economics as a weapon of war," he writes, "the Pentagon will continue trading future military strength for short-term expediency — an error China is counting on.”

Local Gender Quotas May Backfire for Women Seeking Higher Office, Study Finds

Associate Professor Anjali Thomas was part of a research group that found gender quotas in local elections in the North Indian state of Bihar didn’t increase voter support for female candidates in higher-level elections. Instead, they caused a backlash with certain groups of men — even those otherwise inclined to support women candidates, Thomas and her coauthors wrote in an article for Publius: The Journal of Federalism.

The research challenges the common assumption that local quotas create a positive "spillover effect" for women seeking state or national office, Thomas and her coauthors wrote.

"Overall, our research suggests grounds for pessimism regarding whether local gender quotas could ease the pathway for female candidates by changing voter attitudes,” they said.

The study, based on a survey experiment with nearly 2,000 voters in the North Indian state of Bihar, tested the "multilevel learning" theory — that voters exposed to effective female leaders at the village level would be more likely to support women for state office. However, Thomas and her coauthors found no evidence for this hypothesis, even when the local female leaders were well-educated or perceived as effective by citizens.

Instead, the study's results suggest that local quotas may lower support for female candidates among certain men. For men in male-dominated households, for instance, exposure to the quotas caused them to move from having no gender preference to actively preferring male candidates.

Among younger, "partially progressive" men who initially favored female candidates, being represented by an educated woman elected via a local quota erased their pro-woman preference entirely.

Thomas and her co-authors conclude their findings serve as a "cautionary note that local gender quotas should not be used as a stand-in for serious efforts to increase women's representation at higher levels of government." Instead, policymakers must anticipate and address the potential for voter backlash.