Ivana Nikolić Hughes: AI Meets Nuclear Weapons - New Nuclear Arms Race

Summary

Ivana Nikolić Hughes argues that nuclear weapons are becoming more dangerous and politically relevant, even as public attention to them has faded.

AI and nuclear escalation

Hughes warns that combining nuclear command systems with AI could increase the risk of accidental escalation. AI systems can make errors, and a reported study found that three AI models chose tactical nuclear use in 95% of the scenarios tested and strategic nuclear signaling in 76%. She also cites reports of AI systems bypassing safeguards and hacking government systems, raising concerns about possible interference with nuclear command and control. In a crisis, even a false warning could prompt human leaders to act within minutes.

Global consequences of nuclear war

Nuclear war would have global consequences, not only for the countries directly involved. Fires caused by nuclear detonations could send soot into the atmosphere, block sunlight, and disrupt food production. Hughes cites research suggesting that even a limited India–Pakistan nuclear war could leave billions of people facing starvation. A large US–Russia exchange, she says, could severely damage the ozone layer. Radiation fallout would add to the harm.

Deterrence and the risk of miscalculation

The speakers discuss how nuclear deterrence is increasingly dismissed as “blackmail,” while threats by one’s own side may be framed as deterrence. Hughes argues that all nuclear-armed states use their arsenals as leverage, whether or not they detonate them.

She recalls Cold War near-misses—including the Cuban Missile Crisis, Stanislav Petrov’s decision not to escalate after a false warning, and the Able Archer exercise—as evidence that nuclear catastrophe was avoided partly through luck, not simply because deterrence reliably worked.

Hughes is alarmed by contemporary threats and talk of possible wars with nuclear powers. During an active conflict, cyberattacks or mistaken intelligence could be interpreted as a nuclear strike, making escalation more likely. She also warns that policies such as launch-on-warning and reliance on vulnerable intercontinental ballistic missiles can compress decision-making into a matter of minutes.

Proliferation and disarmament

Hughes sees both the expansion and modernization of existing arsenals as dangerous. She is particularly concerned about the roughly 12,500 nuclear warheads held by nine states, and says that attention to potential new nuclear states can distract from the much larger arsenals already in existence.

She calls for renewed disarmament efforts, including reducing arsenals, adopting no-first-use policies, and abandoning launch-on-warning. Countries will not give up nuclear weapons through threats alone, she argues; disarmament requires credible security arrangements and respect for the UN Charter.

International frameworks and public engagement

Hughes says existing international frameworks should be revived and used, including the Non-Proliferation Treaty and the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons. She argues that nuclear-armed states have failed to meet their disarmament obligations and that public engagement is essential.

Her goal in describing nuclear-war scenarios, she says, is not simply to frighten people, but to make the stakes clear enough to motivate action. She sees some hope in renewed calls for negotiations among the United States, Russia, and China, while emphasizing that progress will require compromise and a broader international security architecture.

Presenters and contributors: Glenn Diesen (host); Ivana Nikolić Hughes (guest).