Skip to main content

Global Security Engagement A New Model for Cooperative Threat Reduction (2009) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:

5 Cooperative Threat Reduction 2.0: Implementation Checklist
Pages 117-122

The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.


From page 117...
... • Develop a clear strategy and country-region priorities, taking into account resources available across the government and through nongovernment and international partners. The strategy should include the following: o rapid response capability as well as the capacity to implement longerterm programmatic efforts o specific ways that CTR 2.0 can support both traditional arms control and nonproliferation treaties as well as new multilateral and international security instruments o involvement of a wide range of government, nongovernment, and international partners from the outset o consideration of other strategies for the same country or region, for example, from Unified Combatant Commands, the U.S.
Read the entire page →
From page 118...
... government contracting mechanisms to assess what is required and where flexibility can be introduced o review current USG CTR programs to see which ones already implement elements of CTR 2.0 and can be used as models • Continue working with established partners and identify new partners– develop a "habit of cooperation." o demonstrate partnership by beginning new program engagements with information sharing, joint identification of risks and opportunities, col
Read the entire page →
From page 119...
... Increase financial contributions and additional commitments to CTR programs and projects from Russia and other partner countries, as appropriate, as evidence that the programs and projects reflect national priorities and will be sustainable.
Read the entire page →
From page 120...
... national security. Developing a New Generation of Global Security Engagement Experts The committee was not asked to consider the issue of staffing, but believes that it is important to the overall discussion of future programs. The initial set of government officials, scientists, and engineers who created CTR 1.0 have mentored new staff over time, but the nature of CTR programs is highly technical, and in general, the academic specialties of science and security have been poorly integrated into program staffs.
Read the entire page →
From page 121...
... Providing training and interagency exchange opportunities that help define a career path may also help attract new talent to the CTR area. As it is, the policy offices at the Departments of Defense, State, and Health and Human Services and other agencies are staffed by dedicated professionals, but there are too few professionals to do the job that is required under CTR 2.0.
Read the entire page →

Key Terms

  • global security
  • security engagement
  • partner countries
  • senior officials
  • security reform

  • implementation checklist
  • former soviet
  • government accountability
  • initial set
  • include work

  • joint identification
  • list provides
  • increase financial
  • staff colleges
  • additional commitments

  • help define
  • appropriate transparency
  • engagement experts
  • career path
  • establish strong

  • program engagements
  • strong ctr
  • eliminate nuclear
  • ctr partner
  • information sharing

  • university capstone
  • review current
  • program models
  • international partners
  • service institute


    • This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
    More information on Chapter Skim is available.