Editing Cox Report (section)

===Academia===
[[Richard L. Garwin]] remarked that stolen information regarding the W-70 and W-88 warhead would not appear to directly impair U.S. national security since to develop weapons based on this technology would require a massive investment in resources and not be in their best strategic interests with regard to their nuclear program.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.armscontrol.org/act/1999_04-05/rgam99.asp |title=Arms Control Association: Arms Control Today: Why China Won't Build U.S. Warheads |accessdate=February 7, 2016 |url-status=dead |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20051105021618/http://www.armscontrol.org/act/1999_04-05/rgam99.asp |archivedate=November 5, 2005 }} Richard Garwin, "Why China Won't Build U.S. Warheads, ''Arms Control Today'', April–May 1999.</ref>

An assessment report that was published by Stanford University's  Center for International Security and Cooperation said that the language of the Cox report "was inflammatory and some allegations did not seem to be well supported."<ref>M.M. May, Editor, Alastair Johnston, W.K.H. Panofsky, Marco Di Capua, and Lewis Franklin, [https://web.archive.org/web/20050220000227/http://iis-db.stanford.edu/pubs/10331/cox.pdf ''The Cox Committee Report: An Assessment''], Stanford University's Center for International Security and Cooperation (CISAC), December 1999.</ref>