Taking the archers for granted: emerging threats to nuclear weapon delivery systems

References

• Abaimove, S. and Ingram, P., 2017. Hacking trident: a growing threat. London: British American Security Information Council (BASIC).
   Google Scholar
• Blair, B., 2010. Could terrorists launch America’s nuclear missiles. Time, 11 November.
   Google Scholar
• Board, D.S., 2013. Resilient military systems and the advanced cyber threat. January 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Borger, J., 2016. Nuclear weapons risk greater than in cold war says ex-pentagon chief. The Guardian, 7 January.
   Google Scholar
• Brams, S.J. and Kilgour, D.M., 1988. Deterrence versus defense: a game-theoretic model of star wars. International studies quarterly, 32 (1), 3–28. doi:10.2307/2600410
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burns, R., 2015. Former commander of US nuclear force urges taking missiles off high alert, citing cyberthreats. Associated Press, 29 April.
   Google Scholar
• Caylor, M., 2016. The cyber threat to nuclear deterrence. War on Rocks, 1 February.
   Google Scholar
• Center for Strategic and International Studies, 2015. Full spectrum missile defense. Available from: https://csis-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/event/151204_full_spectrum_transcript.pdf [Accessed 4 December].
   Google Scholar
• Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff, 2013. Joint integrated air and missile defense: vision 2020, 5 December. Available from: http://www.jcs.mil/Portals/36/Documents/Publications/JointIAMDVision2020.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Cimbala, S.J., 2014. Cyber war and deterrence stability: post-START nuclear arms control. Comparative strategy, 33, 3. doi:10.1080/01495933.2014.926727
   Google Scholar
• Cunningham, F.S. and Fravel, M.T., 2015. Assuring assured retaliation: china’s nuclear posture and U.S.-China strategic stability. International security, 40 (2), 8–50. doi:10.1162/ISEC_a_00215
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Director, Operational Test and Evaluation, 2014. FY2014 Annual Report, 332.
   Google Scholar
• Director, Operational Test and Evaluation, 2016. FY2016 Annual Report, 441.
   Google Scholar
• DoDD 3150.02, “DoD Nuclear Weapons Surety Program,” May 12, 2016.
   Google Scholar
• Freedberg Jr., S., 2015. DepSecDef explores new missile defense approach. Breaking Defense, 11 August.
   Google Scholar
• Fritz, J., 2009. Hacking nuclear command and control. Canberra, Australia: International Commission on Nuclear Nonproliferation and Disarmament.
   Google Scholar
• Futter, A., 2015. War games redux? cyberthreats, US–Russian strategic stability, and new challenges for nuclear security and arms control. European security, 1–17.
   Google Scholar
• Futter, A., 2016. The dangers of using cyberattacks to counter nuclear threats. Arms Control Today, July/August.
   Google Scholar
• Futter, A., 2018. Hacking the bomb: cyber threats and nuclear weapons. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Futter, A. and Williams, H., 2016. Questioning the holy trinity: why the U.S. nuclear triad still makes sense. Comparative strategy, 35, 4. doi:10.1080/01495933.2016.1222838
   Google Scholar
• Gartzke, E. and Lindsay, J., 2017. Thermonuclear cyberwar. Journal of cybersecurity, 3 (1), 37–48.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glaser, C.L. and Fetter, S., 2001. National missile defense and the future of U.S. nuclear weapons policy. International security, 26 (1), 40–92. doi:10.1162/016228801753212859
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goodman, W., 2010. Cyber deterrence: tougher in theory than in practice. Strategic studies quarterly, 4 (3), 102–135.
   Google Scholar
• Gray, C.S., 2013. Making strategic sense of cyber power: why the sky is not falling. Strategic Studies Institute and U.S. Army War College Press.
   Google Scholar
• Harrison, T. and Montgomery, E.B., 2015. The cost of U.S. nuclear forces: from BCA to bow wave and beyond. Washington, DC: Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments.
   Google Scholar
• Jensen, E.T., 2012. Cyber deterrence. Emory international law review, 26 (2), 773–824.
   Google Scholar
• Kaplan, F., 2016. Dark territory. New York: Simon and Schuster.
   Google Scholar
• Kofman, M., 2017. The Moscow school of hard knocks: key pillars of Russian strategy. War on the Rocks, 17 January.
   Google Scholar
• Krepinevich, A., 2012. Cyber warfare: A ‘nuclear option’? Washington DC: Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments.
   Google Scholar
• Kristensen, H.M. and Norris, R.S., 2016. Pakistani nuclear forces, 2016. Bulletin of the atomic scientists, 72 (6), 368–376. doi:10.1080/00963402.2016.1241520
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kristensen, H.M. and Norris, R.S., 2017. Indian nuclear forces, 2017. Bulletin of the atomic scientists, 73 (4), 205–209. doi:10.1080/00963402.2017.1337998
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kristensen, H.M. and Norris, R.S., 2018a. United States Nuclear Forces, 2018. Bulletin of the atomic scientists, 74 (2), 120–131. doi:10.1080/00963402.2018.1438219
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kristensen, H.M. and Norris, R.S., 2018b. Russian Nuclear Forces, 2018. Bulletin of the atomic scientists, 74 (3), 185–195. doi:10.1080/00963402.2018.1462912
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kristensen, H.M. and Norris, R.S., 2018c. Chinese Nuclear Forces, 2018. Bulletin of the atomic scientists, 74 (4), 289–295. doi:10.1080/00963402.2018.1486620
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kristensen, H.M. and Norris, R.S., 2018d. North Korean Nuclear Forces, 2018. Bulletin of the atomic scientists, 74 (1), 41–51. doi:10.1080/00963402.2017.1413062
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kugler, R., 2009. Deterrence of Cyber Attacks. In: F.D. Kramer, et al., ed.. Cyberpower and National Security. Dulles: National Defense University Press and Potomac Books, Inc., 309-342.
   Google Scholar
• Langer, R., 2013. To Kill a Centrifuge. Available from: http://www.langner.com/en/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/To-kill-a-centrifuge.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Lebovic, J.H., 2002. The law of small numbers and National Missile Defense. The journal of conflict resolution, 46 (4), 455–483. doi:10.1177/0022002702046004001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lewis, J., 2017. Is the United States really blowing up North Korea’s missiles? Foreign policy, 19 April.
   Google Scholar
• Libicki, M.C., 2009. Cyberdeterrence and cyberwar. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corp.
   Google Scholar
• Lieber, K. and Press, D.G., 2013. The new era of nuclear weapons, deterrence, and conflict. Strategic studies quarterly, Spring, 3–14.
   Google Scholar
• Lieber, K.A. and Press, D.G., 2006. The rise of U.S. nuclear primacy. Foreign affairs, 85 (2), 42–54. doi:10.2307/20031910
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lindsay, J., 2013. Stuxnet and the limits of cyber warfare. Security studies, 22, 3. doi:10.1080/09636412.2013.816122
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Long, A. and Green, B.R., 2015. Stalking the secure second strike: intelligence, counterforce, and nuclear strategy. Journal of strategic studies, 38 (1–2), 38–73. doi:10.1080/01402390.2014.958150
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Menn, J., 2015. U.S. tried stuxnet-style campaign against North Korea but failed. Reuters, 29 May.
   Google Scholar
• Missile Defense Agency, 2016. Available from: https://www.mda.mil/global/documents/pdf/testrecord.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Missile Defense Agency, 2018. Available from: https://www.mda.mil/about/mission.html.
   Google Scholar
• Office of the Secretary of Defense, 2018. Annual Report to Congress: Military and Security Developments Involving the People’s Republic of China, 2018.
   Google Scholar
• Page, L. 2008. Royal navy completes windows for submarines rollout. The Register, 16 December. 10.1080/14763140802255804
   Google Scholar
• Powell, R., 2003. Nuclear deterrence theory, nuclear proliferation, and National Missile Defense. International security, 27 (4), 86–118. doi:10.1162/016228803321951108
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Quackenbush, S.L., 2006. National missile defense and deterrence. Political research quarterly, 59 (4), 533–541. doi:10.1177/106591290605900403
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Quackenbush, S.L. and Drury, A.C., 2011. National Missile Defense and (Dis)Satisfaction. Journal of peace research, 48 (4), 469–480. doi:10.1177/0022343311402108
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reed, J., 2012. Keeping nukes safe from cyber attack. Foreign Policy, 25 September.
   Google Scholar
• Reed, T.C., 2004. At the Abyss: an insider’s history of the cold war. New York: Ballantine Books.
   Google Scholar
• Sanger, D.E., 2018. The perfect weapon. New York: Crown Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Sanger, D.E. and Broad, W.J., 2017. Trump inherits a secret cyberwar against North Korean Missiles. New York Times, 4 March.
   Google Scholar
• Senate, U.S., 2016. Vice Admiral J.D. Syring, Director, Missile Defense Agency: Statement before the Senate Armed Services Committee, Subcommittee on Strategic Forces, 13 April. Available from: http://www.armed-services.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Syring_04-13-16.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Snyder, G.H., 1961. Deterrence and defense. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sputnik International, 2016. Russia’s strategic Missile Forces to Go All-Digital by 2020. Sputnik International, 6 January.
   Google Scholar
• Stahl, L., 2014. Who’s Minding the Nukes. 60 Minutes, 27 April.
   Google Scholar
• Tucker, P., 2016. Hacking into future nuclear weapons: the US Military’s Next Worry. Defense One, 29 December.
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO), 2016a. DOD Needs a Plan to Address Risks Related to Its Central Logistics System. GAO-16-439, 14 April.
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO), 2016b. DOD Needs to Improve Reporting and Oversight to Reduce Supply Chain Risk. GAO-16-236, 16 February.
   Google Scholar
• U.S. House of Representatives, 2015. Hearing on National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016. Available from: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CHRG-114hhrg94227/pdf/CHRG-114hhrg94227.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• U.S. House of Representatives, 2017. Statement of Thomas H. Harvey II, Acting Assistant Secretary of Defense for Strategy, Plans, and Capabilities before the House Armed Services Committee, 7 June. Available from: http://docs.house.gov/meetings/AS/AS29/20170607/106064/HHRG-115-AS29-Wstate-HarveyT-20170607.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• U.S. House of Representatives, 2016. National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Conference Report to Accompany S. 2943). Available from: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CRPT-114hrpt840/pdf/CRPT-114hrpt840.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Naval Institute (USNI), 2015. Document: army-Navy Memo on need for Ballistic Missile Defense Strategy. Available from: https://news.usni.org/2015/03/19/document-army-navy-memo-on-need-for-ballistic-missile-defense-strategy.
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Senate, 2013. Hearing on U.S. Strategic Command and U.S. Cyber Command in Review of the Defense Authorization Request for Fiscal Year 2014, 12 March. Available from: http://www.armed-services.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/13-09%20-%203-12-13.pdf
   Google Scholar
• USCYBERCOM, 2018. JP 3-12, Cyberspace Operations. Available from: https://fas.org/irp/doddir/dod/jp3_12.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Weisgerber, M., 2015. Pentagon building Cruise Missile Shield to Defend US Cities From Russia. Defense One, 18 June.
   Google Scholar
• Weiss, G., 2015. Seeing 2020 America’s New Vision for Integrated Air and Missile Defense. Joint doctrine, 75 (1), 104–112.
   Google Scholar
• Zagare, F.C. and Kilgour, D.M., 2000. Perfect deterrence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar