Safeguarding This and Verifying That: Fuzzy Concepts, Confusing Terminology, and Their Detrimental Effects on Nuclear Husbandry

Words and concepts may have remarkable power, especially in international matters where subtleties and ambiguities in meaning can have major implications for treaty interpretation and compliance. In the diplomatic and political sphere, ambiguity has its benefits, such as for attaining consensus or strategic gain. Fuzzy concepts may thus be embraced purposefully by international players to achieve policy goals. While deliberate fuzziness may therefore have a role in the international political arena, inadvertent ambiguity should be avoided for technical arms control. When it comes to actually planning and implementing practical nuclear arms control efforts, inaccuracy and incorrectness can only confuse and lead to misunderstandings—potentially with detrimental effects on long-term nuclear security. Moreover, as an important input to political arms control discussions, technical inaccuracy may stand at risk of blurring opportunities for sound political action, thereby limiting the fulfillment of the true potential of specific arms control measures. Morten Bremer Maerli is a researcher at the Norwegian Institute of International Affairs (NUPI). He has been working on nuclear nonproliferation assistance to Russia since 1995. Dr. Roger Johnston, CPP, heads the Vulnerability Assessment Team in the Applied Monitoring and Transparency Laboratory at Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL).