Alex WellersteinVerified account

(To put it another, simpler way: Whose behavior do you think would be changed if we had a NFU policy? Russia? China? North Korea? I doubt they'd act any differently, personally.)

So is there any situation, for any country, where a NFU policy is worth anything, or do you think it's worthless for all countries? If not always useless, why for the US, but not others?

Well, let's look at China. China had (maybe still has?) a NFU policy. They developed a force structure to match it (a small, hardened arsenal). Does that guarantee NFU in reality? Of course not. Does it reinforce a stated posture? Sure.

If the question is, "why is the US different?" the answer is: because the US is the only power in the world with a huge nuclear arsenal AND a huge conventional arsenal AND is feverishly working on BMD.

Which spooks countries like Russia and China, and spurs them to coming up with their own ways of "rebalancing" the equation (whether that means hypersonics or goofy long range nuclear-powered cruise missiles or whatever).

Now would a NFU reassure those countries that we are not trying to get into some position where we could wipe out their nuclear arsenals preemptively if we thought we wanted to or had to? I doubt it, not unless it was coupled with other policy changes.