Russia considering nuclear arms August 17, 2008
Posted by Emir in Current Events, Politics, World Affairs.Tags: america, baltic, nuclear, poland, Politics, russia, war
trackback
Russia is considering arming its Baltic fleet with nuclear arms, reports the UK’s The Sunday Times via Times Online (link). This of course entails nuclear warheads on Russian Federation submarines, cruisers and aircraft much like in the days of the Cold War.
The move has been reported to be in response to American plans for a missile defense shield in Europe, specifically with respect to Poland permitting components of the defense shield to be installed on its soil. Moscow, possibly viewing the missile shield as a threat has warned Poland that it could face a nuclear strike for such actions. According to Moscow, its Baltic fleet has suffered underfunding since the collapse of the communist USSR, but that is about to change.
Now I can of course go on reiterating the various news reports, but I am sure anyone who finds the time to read this blog is capable of reading those reports on their own. The entire affair is undoubtedly part of a much deeper issue with each side having their own reasons for their actions. However; I must say that the involved nations are playing an extremely dangerous game.
For what reason does the United States need to set up a missile shield over Europe? Just how bold can that nation be? Why does Poland need to permit foreign missile arms to be installed on its soil? Is it that much of a pushover? Or do they have some ulterior motive for permitting such an act? And finally, why does Russia regardless of its worries over the missile shield need to respond with the threat of nuclear attack of all the possible options?
This is of course the start of a very worrisome state of affairs. During the Cold War, the USA and USSR were preventing from ever actually escalating to nuclear warfare by what is known as MAD, short for Mutually Assured Destruction. Both countries were acutely aware that should one attack the other, an equal retaliation would be launched before any targets were even struck that would assure both suffer far worse than Japan did in the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. To this day, both the United States of America and the Russian Federation who now control most of the old USSR land and resources retain significant nuclear stockpiles.
With Russia’s economy experiencing steady growth and their Siberian region containing what is considered by many to be one of the world’s last vast oil reserves, Russia is poised to once again become a powerful adversary of the United States. A second cold war between these two highly armed nuclear powerhouses is not what the world needs.
Ever read the graphic novel The Watchmen? its soon to be released as a movie.. next year .
Basically , history was different in that an accident produced a super human with near god like powers that upset the balance between the US and russia.
This superman allowed the US to win the war in vietnam and could potentially stop 60% of russia’s nukes from being launched but ‘infinite destruction divided by anything , is still infinite destruction’ .
The missile defense shield will upset the balance of MAD, and cause even greater tension ,
i doubt russia will spend the money to build its military back to cold war strength though.
What will happen is alot of political maneuvering and threats, potentially more Georgia style incursions into former territory.
A 2nd cold war without much bloodshed could be good for the world… the 1st helped fund science, the space race , the internet and alot of technology.
if we could get nuclear fusion and a space elevator out of the 2nd… we’d be quite well off.
According to an old economist article , some scientific endeavors may never be done due to the cost involved, a situation like the cold war creates a bubble economy with unrealistic expetations , funding is pumped into the scientific endevour eg. Space race , Star Wars , and things that wouldn’t otherwise be possible come true.
at 12 billion a test reactor , Nuclear fusion is still uneconomical even with high oil prices….
And a space elevator would require hundreds of billions for no immediate economic benefit at all..
So thats my ‘cold war is good’ argument
That is actually an excellent point Jonathan, and in fact one that in concluding my entry with not being good for the world, I totally forgot!
You are quite right of course – a second cold war once it does not escalate into conflict can actually be the impetus for scientific advancement that otherwise would simply not happen.