In 1962, Baby Boomer leaders stared into the abyss of nuclear war as the Cuban Missile Crisis unfolded, saved only by their belief in the prevailing doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD). Today, a new generation – hyper-connected, digitally fluent, and sceptical of Cold War logic – will soon inherit control of nuclear arsenals. Will they uphold the same strategic caution, or will a radically different worldview redefine nuclear deterrence?
The concept of nuclear deterrence is akin to a dynamic organism, evolving over time, resting on human perception – how leaders assess risks and responsibilities. Baby Boomers and Gen X, shaped by Cold War brinkmanship, largely trusted the logic of deterrence. Millennials and Gen Z, however, have grown up in an era of connectivity and non-traditional threats – climate change, cybersecurity, and pandemics – where nuclear risks seem distant. As they rise into policymaking roles, their shifting worldviews could challenge the stability of deterrence itself.
Generational brackets are debated, but typically divided into Baby Boomers (1946-64), Generation X (1965-79), Millennials (1980-95), Generation Z (1996-10) and Generation Alpha (2011-25). While older generations rationalised nuclear deterrence through realism and MAD logic, Millennials and Gen Z tend to prioritise human security and global governance. A 2023 survey by the Chicago Council on Global Affairs found that younger Americans are significantly less likely to view nuclear weapons as essential to US security. Whereas 68 per cent of Boomers supported nuclear deterrence, this number dropped to just 52 per cent among Millennials.
A digital scan of a photo distributed in 1970 by French authorities following the Licorne thermonuclear test in French Polynesia (Courtesy Pierre J./Flickr, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0)
A digital scan of a photo distributed in 1970 by French authorities following the Licorne thermonuclear test in French Polynesia (Photo courtesy Pierre J./Flickr, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0)
Technology is rapidly transforming the nuclear landscape. During the Cold War, nuclear command-and-control relied on human judgment and diplomatic backchannels. Today, artificial intelligence (AI), quantum computing, and cyber warfare introduce new vulnerabilities. Deepfake misinformation could manipulate crisis perceptions, while cyberattacks – such as the Stuxnet virus – highlight the potential risks to nuclear infrastructure. If future leaders turn to autonomous decision-making systems for nuclear strategy, miscalculations could become catastrophic.
In 2023, the Pentagon simulated a war involving AI, revealing that automated decision-making increased the risk of accidental escalation. As generational change hastens and digital-native leaders take control, their reliance on AI-driven analysis could alter the logic of nuclear deterrence, potentially increasing crisis instability.
If nuclear discourse is increasingly shaped by AI-generated content and fragmented media consumption, it could erode strategic stability in South Asia.
This generational shift in nuclear perceptions is not just a Western phenomenon. In Pakistan, home to at least seven million Gen Z individuals, media consumption heavily shapes foreign policy views. A Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung (FES) study on youth perspectives found that young Pakistanis primarily rely on television and social media – Facebook, Twitter/X, TikTok – for news. Such heavy dependence on social media, which projects algorithm-driven narratives to the masses, increases vulnerability of perceptions due to exposure to disinformation.
The study also found that Pakistani youth rank nuclear disarmament as a low-priority issue, further illustrating the shifting focus among younger generations as well as security concerns which are deterred through nuclear weapons. Nevertheless, if nuclear discourse is increasingly shaped by AI-generated content and fragmented media consumption, it could erode strategic stability in South Asia, especially given the region’s long-standing nuclear tensions.
If nuclear deterrence is to remain stable in the digital age, older generations must do more than just pass down doctrine – they must foster a new, adaptive nuclear culture. Future leaders must understand not just the mechanics of deterrence but its historical weight. Without having lived through the experience of the Cold War, Gen Z and Gen Alpha may not fully grasp the gravity of nuclear risks.
The paradox of deterrence is that nuclear weapons must always be available for use to remain credible, yet using them would be catastrophic. With generational attitudes shifting, policymakers must ensure that strategic cultures of nuclear-armed states are effectively transmitted to younger leaders. If Gen Z and Gen Alpha deprioritise nuclear weapons, they may unintentionally weaken the very structures that have prevented catastrophe for decades.
As the world navigates an era of digital and technological revolutions, policymakers must not only adapt but actively bridge the generational gap in nuclear thinking. The challenge is not just technological adaptation but the intergenerational transmission of nuclear wisdom – before it is too late.