The paradox of an impoverished state developing and exporting increasingly capable missile systems bears witness to the steady increase in the number and capabilities of secondary, often less developed, proliferation suppliers. This “secondary proliferation” is largely unaffected by traditional nonproliferation tools, although in some cases they may slow, raise the financial or political cost of, or otherwise stigmatize development of weapons of mass destruction. This article addresses both the supply motivations and the behavior of the three most significant secondary suppliers (Russia, China, and North Korea), as well as the various U.S. policy responses designed to mitigate these activities.
READ MORE >>