Dear MEL Topic Readers,
Nuclear Posture Review: US wants smaller nukes to counter Russia
The US has revealed a plan to develop a more practical, easy-to-use, or feel-less-guilty, nuclear weapon in order to be competitive with Russia, its archrival in nuclear armament race. It says the new weapon is much smaller, only as powerful as the atomic bomb dropped on Nagasaki.
Deterrence is the most common justification for nuclear armament among the already-nuclear-armed nations. They say they need to stay ahead of, keeping up with, or catching up to their rivals. They try to keep their nuclear armament capabilities as powerful as and as practical as their potential enemy. They’ve been increasing or decreasing the number of warheads and the strength of the power, as well as developing and modernizing the launch and delivery capabilities. This race doesn’t seem to stop forever in the name of deterrence and national security.
Will the matching force be the only way to hold back the other? If so, why not eliminating all the nuclear weapons in the first place?
Read the article and think about the difference between the disciplines of the Nuclear Proliferation Treaty and practices of the Nuke-armed nations.
No comments:
Post a Comment