Joel Petersson Ivre explores how Japanese and Korean understandings of strategic stability contribute to increased nuclear salience in East Asia. While both countries seek to keep the United States involved in the region, their hedging strategies differ: Japan prioritises keeping the United States engaged, while South Korea shows greater interest in credible alternatives to a significant US presence in the region. As nuclear salience rises in both countries, driven by alliance negotiations and regional threats, it risks undermining crisis stability, arms race stability, and non-proliferation efforts in East Asia.
