PALO ALTO, Calif. — A bipartisan group of former government officials, operating out of the unlikely base of the conservative Hoover Institution, is crafting an audacious strategy to rid the world of nuclear weapons.

The crusade, plotted out over the past two days at a closed-door conference on the Stanford University campus here, is being led by hard-nosed heavyweights from America’s foreign policy establishment, including two former secretaries of state, Henry Kissinger and George Shultz, as well as a former senator, Sam Nunn of Georgia. The campaign also has the backing of at least two presidential candidates, John Edwards and Senator Obama of Illinois, both Democrats.

“Reassertion of the vision of a world free of nuclear weapons and practical measures toward achieving that goal would be, and would be perceived as, a bold initiative consistent with America’s moral heritage,” the Hoover group said in a statement published in the Wall Street Journal earlier this year. “The effort could have a profoundly positive impact on the security of future generations. Without the bold vision, the actions will not be perceived as fair or urgent. Without the actions, the vision will not be perceived as realistic or possible.”

However, the fledgling campaign faces criticism from some policy analysts who say a drive to rid the world of nuclear weapons is misdirected and naïve.

“Is there any serious proposition that the nuclear genie can be put back into its centrifuge?” one skeptic, Michael Ledeen of the American Enterprise Institute, asked. “Someday, in another world. … Not in this world.”

Mr. Ledeen also said the focus on nuclear weapons, as such, was misplaced, because not all regimes who have them pose a similar threat. “I’m not worried about India. I am worried about Pakistan. I’m worried one day we’ll wake up and Iran’s got nuclear weapons,” he said. “Stop pretending it’s a general issue. It’s not a general issue.”

While the notion of eliminating nuclear weapons altogether may seem like a creature of pie-in-the-sky liberals, proponents of the idea note that it was championed by the hero of America’s conservative movement, President Reagan. “For the eight years I was president I never let my dream of a nuclear-free world fade from my mind,” Reagan wrote in his memoirs.

A Stanford physics professor who is one of the leaders of the renewed nuclear disarmament campaign, Sidney Drell, told The New York Sun recently that he was not surprised that the group’s plan was taking some flak. “When Reagan and Gorbachev first brought up getting rid of nuclear weapons in 1986, Jim Schlesinger, people like that, wrote furious objections, so it’s understandable. We’re trying to change things,” the professor said.

Other notables involved in the Hoover effort include two former ambassadors, Max Kampelman and Michael Armacost, a former judge and State Department official, Abraham Sofaer, and a former defense secretary, William Perry.

The group’s goals were set forth last fall at a conference held for the 20th anniversary of the Reagan-Gorbachev talks at Reykjavik. This week’s gathering was to be a hands-on session of about 35 to 40 experts aimed at addressing practical concerns about achieving a world free of nuclear weapons. “We’re going to be exploring the opportunities, the difficulties, and the obstacles to developing the idea further,” Mr. Drell said.

Proponents of the new anti-nuclear effort contend that it gains urgency from the proliferation of atomic weapons to rogue states and the looming danger of terrorists’ gaining control of nuclear devices. Supporters of the Hoover effort contend that by pressing for nuclear abolition, America would have greater leverage to impose sanctions on Iran, North Korea, and others. Critics and skeptics assert that the accelerating spread of such weapons renders pointless discussions about abolishing them.

“Unfortunately, this isn’t the time,” a former Defense Department official, Michael Rubin, said, noting the recent Israeli military strike targeting what may have been a new Syrian nuclear program. “We’ve less reason to trust and we’ve shown an inability to verify,” he said.

Organizers of the conference said they recognized that practical mechanisms to prevent cheating would be essential to the de-nuclearization effort. “We’re not doing this as an abstract statement of desirable objectives,” Mr. Kissinger told a dinner for participants Wednesday, according to the Stanford Daily. Attendees were also given a magnifying glass inscribed with Reagan’s signature and one of his famous sayings, “Trust but verify,” the newspaper said.

Some of the most strident objections to abolishing nuclear weapons are likely to come from small nations, such as Israel, who use the nuclear threat to keep larger enemies at bay. “It immediately gives great power to anybody with a big population who can suit up a big army,” Mr. Ledeen said. “For Israel or Pakistan to give up nukes, they would have to have a security guarantee from a bigger country. How are you going to provide that?”

“We should not go down the path where we force allies to make ill-advised concessions for the sake of some elder statesmen seeking to follow in the steps of Al Gore,” Mr. Rubin said.