At the center of this research is a fundamental question of the nuclear age: why states pursue military or coercive options against some programs while relying on diplomacy, continued sanctions, or acceptance toward others. My dissertation, The Politics of Nuclear Prevention: Strategic Choices in Proliferation Crises, develops a framework for explaining this variation through comparative case studies of Iran, North Korea, Iraq, and Libya, The project combines qualitative archival research with statistical analysis to trace how threat perception, alliance commitments, and domestic politics shape prevention strategies. 

The agenda connects to a braoder interests in coercive diplomacy, deterrence theory, alliance politics and the credibility of extended deterence commitments, and variation in U.S. foreign policy across Middle East and East Asia.