Graham Allison ("The Cuban Missile Crisis at 50," July/August 2012) seems to believe that U.S. President John F. Kennedy's handling of the Cuban missile crisis was an unalloyed success.

A nuclear-armed Iran would not make the Middle East more secure, argues Colin Kahl; it would yield more terrorism and pose a risk of a nuclear exchange.

U.S. and Israeli officials have declared that a nuclear-armed Iran is a uniquely terrifying prospect, even an existential threat. In fact, by creating a more durable balance of military power in the Middle East, a nuclear Iran would yield more stability, not less.

When it comes to Iran's nuclear program, then, the United States and its allies should get out of the way and let Iran's worst enemies -- its own leaders -- gum up the process on their own.

Carter's update to his July/August 2006 essay "America's New Strategic Partner?"

Preventing Catastrophic Nuclear Terrorism makes clear what is needed to reduce the possibility of nuclear terrorism. It identifies where efforts have fallen short in securing and eliminating nuclear weapons and weapons-usable nuclear materials, and it offers realistic recommendations to plug these gaps in the U.S. and international response.

Diplomacy on the Iranian nuclear dispute picks up new intensity. So do reports of a preemptive Israeli attack on Iran.

Washington’s disclosure of an Israeli air strike on a suspected Syrian nuclear reactor has raised questions about both Syrian and U.S. motives in the region.

Washington’s latest revisions to its stance on North Korea nuclear-disarmament talks, experts say, threatens to undermine counter-proliferation efforts.

North Korea’s missed deadline on its denuclearization pact and new tough rhetoric revive concerns about the regime’s sincerity and stability.

The war of words between Washington and Tehran has given way to glimmers of diplomacy. Is a thaw on the horizon?

Iran now says it has industrial-scale enrichment capabilities, a claim that faces skepticism, but if true, may jeopardize talks with the UN Security Council and further isolate Tehran.

Tehran will negotiate but not renounce its right to enrich uranium, leaving policy experts divided on how to deal with the prospects of a nuclear-armed Iran.

Nuclear terrorism and its prevention preoccupy the U.S. military, intelligence community, and diplomatic corps. But experts say the country should be doing more to lessen chances of an attack.

Diplomacy over how to handle Iran's nuclear program is stalled in the UN Security Council because of Russian and Chinese concerns that sanctions may be invoked. There are growing calls to avoid a divisive debate over sanctions and circumvent the UN by using economic levers against Iran.

Iran's decision to restart uranium enrichment raised the nuclear stakes again this week as conflicting statements from Tehran on its willingness to remain bound by the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty raised new questions.

Michael A. Levi and Micah Zenko say nuclear terrorism, however unlikely, is one of the few prospects that could truly devastate the USA, and there are still steps that the U.S. can take to reduce the odds of a catastrophic attack.