The Obama administration announced restrictions in the U.S. use of nuclear arms on Tuesday, renouncing development of new atomic weapons and heralding cuts in America’s stockpile.

It also announced plans to pursue high-level bilateral talks with Russia and China to promote “more stable and transparent strategic relationships,” according to a Defense Department document.

The following is selected reaction to the move:

SPOKESWOMAN FOR U.N. SECRETARY-GENERAL BAN KI-MOON

“The Secretary-General welcomes President Obama’s reaffirmation of his commitment towards a nuclear-free world.”

“Following the recent successful conclusion of negotiations between the Russian Federation and the U.S. for a successor agreement to the Treaty on the Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms (START), the release of this new Nuclear Posture Review is a timely initiative in that direction.”

REPUBLICAN SENATORS JOHN MCCAIN AND JOHN KYL

“The U.S. has had a long-standing policy, embraced by administrations of both parties, of retaining all options to respond to an attack on it or its allies by any state using weapons of mass destruction.”

“In fact, one reason that we got rid of chemical and biological weapons is that we were told that we would always have the nuclear deterrent available. Unfortunately, the NPR released today confuses this long-standing policy.”

“The Obama administration must clarify that we will take no option off the table to deter attacks against the American people and our allies.”

LISBETH GRONLUND, UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS

“We applaud his decision to strengthen U.S. ‘negative security assurances’ by pledging that the United States will not use nuclear weapons against any non-nuclear weapon state that is a signatory in good standing of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty … However, the new policy does not go far enough to reduce the role of nuclear weapons.”

KEVIN MARTIN, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF PEACE ACTION, A U.S. ANTI-NUCLEAR WEAPONS GROUP

“The president’s Nuclear Posture Review, released today, appears to be too beholden to outdated Cold War thinking, and it doesn’t measure up to his vision of a nuclear-free world. It’s certainly better than the one released by the Bush administration, which called for the possibility of using nuclear weapons on non-nuclear states. The Obama administration reversed that.”

“President Obama also stated the U.S. would not build new nuclear weapons like those the previous administration wanted but Congress thankfully blocked. Nonetheless, the document leaves room for the possibilities of new warheads in the future.”

KIRK LEOPOLD, FORMER COMMANDER OF USS COLE AND SENIOR FELLOW AT MILITARY FAMILIES UNITED

“The president’s goal of a world free of nuclear weapons is a noble idea. Unfortunately, it remains unrealistic and naive in a world that has yet to embrace this notion.”

“As long as nations like North Korea and Iran continue to flout international agreements and other nations like Russia and China continue to improve and enhance their nuclear arsenals, the United States must retain the full and flexible use of nuclear weapons as a vital component of U.S. deterrent strategy.”

“In addition, the surety of our nuclear force must be modernized and maintained for the foreseeable future.”

DEMOCRATIC REPRESENTATIVE EDWARD MARKEY, FOUNDER OF HOUSE BIPARTISAN TASK FORCE ON NONPROLIFERATION

“This marks a sea change in America’s nuclear strategy. For too long, we have kept in place a stagnant Cold War era policy that failed to recognize the shifting geopolitical landscape.

“These long overdue changes in our nuclear policy will make us more secure by downgrading the role that nuclear weapons play in our defense and emphasizing that such weapons exist only to deter their actual use.”

TOM DONNELLY, DIRECTOR OF DEFENSE STUDIES, AMERICAN ENTERPRISE INSTITUTE

“The release of the Obama administration’s Nuclear Posture Review (NPR) is part of a larger set of policies that look to the past rather than preparing the United States for the nuclear future.”

“Arms-control advocates are as prone as any generals to refight the last war rather than prepare for the future. The quality of our nuclear forces — their modernity, flexibility and strategic utility — are now more important than the quantity.”

“Bilateral arms treaties do little to protect us in the emerging, multipolar nuclear environment. The threat of nuclear terrorism, as worrisome as it is, is not the only proliferation concern.”

SHARON SQUASSONI, DIRECTOR OF THE PROLIFERATION PREVENTION PROGRAM, CENTER FOR STRATEGIC & INTERNATIONAL STUDIES

“This NPR says we don’t need nuclear weapons to deter a wide range of threats, we need them to deter a narrow range of threat. And the focus is on improving conventional flexibility to deter threats that we would have previously deterred with nuclear weapons.

“So, it probably doesn’t go far enough to appease the most ardent nuclear disarmament advocates but that’s OK.”

(Reporting by Andrew Quinn; Editing by John O’Callaghan)