Nuclear safety can be a formidable subject: The ramifications appear inconceivable, yet the hazard is genuine. Nonetheless, some academics flourish through the intense examination of the planet’s most perilous arms. This includes Caitlin Talmadge PhD ’11, an MIT educator who is a member of the Institute’s distinguished cohort of nuclear safety authorities.

Talmadge, who became part of the MIT faculty in 2023, has emerged as a notable academic in security studies, undertaking thorough inquiries into the practical capabilities of militaries and how they are shaped by political dynamics.

Earlier in her professional journey, Talmadge investigated the military strengths of armies governed by authoritarian regimes. However, for a significant part of the previous decade, she has concentrated on specific aspects of nuclear safety: When do conventional conflicts heighten the risk of nuclear deployment? Under what conditions will nations escalate nuclear threats?

“A situation that has captivated my interest is one in which the execution of a conventional conflict genuinely heightens certain nuclear escalation risks,” Talmadge explains, mentioning that military actions may exert pressure on an opponent’s nuclear capacities. “There are numerous other instabilities globally. But I’ve become quite intrigued by what it signifies that the U.S., unlike during the Cold War when there was more of a bipolar rivalry, now confronts multiple nuclear-capable opponents.”

MIT serves as a natural intellectual haven for Talmadge, who holds the title of Raphael Dorman and Helen Starbuck Associate Professor in MIT’s Department of Political Science. She is also affiliated with MIT’s Security Studies Program, a long-standing home to several of the Institute’s nuclear specialists, and is a core member of the recently established MIT Center for Nuclear Security Policy, which fosters academic research and collaboration with nuclear safety officials.

“I believe conversation between practitioners and scholars is crucial for both parties,” Talmadge states, who participated on the Defense Policy Board, a group of external experts that directly counsels senior Pentagon leaders, during the Biden administration. “It’s essential for me to conduct research that addresses real-world challenges. Additionally, we at MIT train future practitioners. We sometimes brief current practitioners, engage with them, and gain insights into the complex issues they face. That interaction is mutually advantageous.”

Why coup-proofing undermines armies

From a young age, Talmadge was intrigued by global occurrences, particularly military actions, while being raised in a family that nurtured her inquisitiveness about the world.

“I was fortunate to have parents who fostered those interests,” Talmadge remarks. “Education was a significant value in our household. I also had excellent teachers.”

Talmadge obtained her BA at Harvard University, where her enthusiasm for international relations and military strategies deepened.

“Before college, I didn’t even know the phrase security studies,” she notes. “However, during my college years, I became very engaged in examining the issues arising from the Soviet nuclear legacy.”

Subsequently, Talmadge worked at a think tank before opting to pursue graduate studies. She hadn’t fully committed to academia, as opposed to potentially working in Washington policy arenas. But while completing her PhD at the Institute, she recalls, “it became clear that I truly enjoyed research, and I genuinely loved teaching. And I adored being at MIT.”

Talmadge is quick to acknowledge MIT’s security studies faculty for their scholarly support, mentioning the encouragement from numerous faculty members, including Barry Posen (her dissertation mentor), Taylor Fravel, Roger Peterson, Cindy Williams, Owen Cote, and Harvey Sapolsky. Her dissertation explored the combat efficacy of armies led by autocrats.

This research evolved into her 2015 publication, “The Dictator’s Army: Battlefield Effectiveness in Authoritarian Regimes,” released by Cornell University Press. In this work, she investigates how utilizing a military for domestic “coup-proofing” constrains its effectiveness against external threats. For instance, during the Iran-Iraq war of the 1980s, Iraq’s military improved in the later years of the conflict after coup-proofing strategies were abandoned, whereas Iran’s army deteriorated over time as it became increasingly focused on internal opposition.

“We typically consider militaries as being structured for external conventional conflicts, but autocrats employ the military for regime-protection purposes, and the more you customize your military for those tasks, it can be increasingly challenging to amass combat power against an external adversary,” Talmadge explains.

Since the publication of that book, even more examples have surfaced globally.

“That might explain why the Russian invasion of Ukraine was so ineffective in 2022,” she adds. “When you’re a personalist dictator and partition the military so that it cannot be strong enough to usurp you, and direct the intelligence services inward rather than towards Ukraine, it limits what your military can accomplish. It was not the sole reason in 2022, but I believe the authoritarian nature of Russia’s civil-military relations has contributed to Russia’s unexpectedly poor performance in that conflict.”

On to nuclear escalation

Following her PhD from MIT, Talmadge took on a role at George Washington University, where she taught from 2011 to 2018; she then joined the faculty at Georgetown University before returning to MIT. For the last decade, she has continued to investigate conventional military actions while also analyzing the connection between those operations and nuclear threats.

One aspect concerns conventional military strikes that could impair an opponent’s nuclear capabilities. Talmadge is examining why nations employ military strategies that pose threats to adversaries in a book that is currently in development; her co-author is Brendan Rittenhouse Green PhD ’11, a political scientist at the University of Cincinnati.

The book delves into why the U.S. has occasionally embraced military strategies that escalate nuclear pressures on adversaries. Historically, these escalatory postures have been seen as unintentional, arising from aggressive military planning.

“In this book, we present a different argument, which posits that often these escalatory dangers are intentionally embedded in force posture by civilian [government leaders] who sometimes have strategic motives,” Talmadge asserts. “If you’re my adversary and I wish to deter you from initiating a conflict, it may be advantageous to persuade you that should you ignite that conflict, you’ll ultimately find yourself cornered by nuclear options.”

This reasoning may clarify why numerous countries adopt military postures that appear perilous, and it could provide insights into how future wars involving the U.S., Russia, China, North Korea, India, or Pakistan might play out. It further implies that containing nuclear escalation risks necessitates greater focus on civilian decisions, not merely military actions.

While immersed in research, writing, teaching, and engaging with peers in her field, Talmadge is confident she has found an ideal academic home, particularly with MIT’s initiatives in her area being enhanced by the Stanton Foundation contribution to establish the Center for Nuclear Security Policy.

“We’re immensely thankful for the Stanton Foundation’s support,” Talmadge states. “It’s extraordinarily energizing to be in a place brimming with talent and continually learning from those around me. It’s truly remarkable, and I do not take it for granted.”

She adds: “At times, it feels a bit surreal to be here because I’m entering the same spaces where I have memories as a graduate student, but now I’m the professor. I have a touch of nostalgia. However, one of my main motivations for coming to MIT, aside from the excellent faculty colleagues, was the students, particularly the opportunity to work with the PhD students in the Security Studies Program, and I have not been let down. It does not feel like labor. It’s a delight to strive to have a positive impact in assisting them in becoming scholars.”