Wanganui

Main Menu

  • Creative Destruction
  • Tax Haven
  • Terminal Value
  • First Theorem Of Welfare Economics
  • Debt

Wanganui

Header Banner

Wanganui

  • Creative Destruction
  • Tax Haven
  • Terminal Value
  • First Theorem Of Welfare Economics
  • Debt
Creative Destruction
Home›Creative Destruction›Russia is raising new nuclear threats – understanding the history of non-proliferation helps put this into context

Russia is raising new nuclear threats – understanding the history of non-proliferation helps put this into context

By Judy Grier
April 7, 2022
0
0

(The Conversation is an independent, nonprofit source of news, analysis, and commentary from academic experts.)

(THE CONVERSATION) During the 1960s, the Soviet Union and the United States came close to war because of the Soviet attempt to plant nuclear weapons in Cuba, 90 miles off the coast of Florida.

People in the United States feared a nuclear war. Children practiced nuclear drills hidden under their desks. Families have built nuclear bunkers in their backyards.

But later in the 20th century, nuclear war became less likely. Countries have pledged to reduce their stockpiles of nuclear weapons, or pledged not to pursue nuclear weapons in the first place.


Now, after decades of progress in limiting the buildup of nuclear weapons, Russia’s war on Ukraine has sparked renewed nuclear tensions between Russia and the United States.

On February 24, 2022, Russian President Vladimir Putin threatened that any country that interfered in Ukraine would “suffer worse consequences than you have faced in history.” Many experts and observers have interpreted this as a threat of nuclear attacks against the defenders of Ukraine.

A single nuclear weapon today in a major city could immediately kill between 52,000 and several million people, depending on the size of the weapon.

Understanding these new threats requires understanding efforts to reduce the number of nuclear weapons, prevent the spread of nuclear weapons to new countries, and the development or stockpiling of nuclear weapons in different countries.

I have worked and researched nuclear non-proliferation for two decades.

Convincing countries to reduce their stockpiles of nuclear weapons or to give up the pursuit of this ultimate weapon has always been extremely difficult.

A history of non-proliferation

The Soviet Union, United States, United Kingdom, France, Israel, and China had active nuclear weapons programs in the 1960s.

Countries have recognized the risk of nuclear war in the future.

Sixty-two countries initially agreed to what was called the “Grand Bargain” in 1967, a core part of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. One hundred and ninety-one countries eventually signed this treaty.

The agreement prevented the spread of nuclear weapons to countries that did not already have them in 1967. Countries with nuclear weapons, such as the United States and the United Kingdom, agreed to end their race for nuclear weapons and to work towards eventual disarmament, that is to say the destruction of all nuclear weapons.

This historic agreement laid the groundwork for agreements between the United States and the Soviet Union to further reduce their nuclear weapons and their means of delivery. It also prevented other countries from developing and testing nuclear weapons until the end of the Cold War.

Israel, India and Pakistan never joined the agreement due to regional security concerns. They all now have nuclear weapons. North Korea withdrew and developed nuclear weapons.

Other countries have given up their nuclear weapons or programs to develop them.

Some successes

Since the Cold War, major advances have been made to prevent countries from acquiring nuclear weapons and to drastically reduce stockpiles of nuclear weapons.

The global nuclear stockpile has been reduced by 82% since 1986, from a peak of 70,300, with almost all the reductions in the United States and Russia, which held the largest stocks at the time.

Globally, there are approximately 12,700 nuclear weapons today, of which about 90% are held by Russia and the United States, or between 5,000 and 6,000 weapons each.

There are several other nuclear-armed countries, and most of them have a few hundred weapons each, including China, the United Kingdom and France. New nuclear countries like India, Pakistan and Israel have about 100 each, while North Korea has about 20.

Beginning in the late 1960s, countries entered into more than a dozen legally binding agreements, known as treaties, that limited the acquisition of nuclear weapons by new countries and prohibited nuclear weapons testing. nuclear weapons, among other measures.

But they did not reduce the number of nuclear weapons with short-range missiles.

No agreement covers these weapons, which could also cause large-scale destruction and death. Russia’s short-range weapons could quickly destroy much of Europe.

The United States and Russia have always worked together to reduce nuclear weapons, despite numerous proxy wars in Korea, Afghanistan and Vietnam at the same time.

They have also jointly pressured Iran, North Korea and Libya to give up their efforts to develop nuclear weapons, with some success in Iran and Libya.

US-Russian cooperation declines

The US-Russian commitment to nuclear weapons changed when Russia forcibly annexed Crimea from Ukraine in 2014.

Russia built land-based missiles in Kaliningrad, a Russian enclave in the middle of Eastern Europe, in 2014.

[Understand key political developments, each week. Subscribe to The Conversation’s politics newsletter.]

The United States and NATO then accused Russia of violating a 1987 nuclear agreement on short- and medium-range land-based missiles. From Russia, these could travel between 500 and 5,500 kilometers (311 to 3,418 miles), hitting targets as far away as London.

The United States also terminated this agreement in 2019 due to Russian violations. However, there are no international nuclear agreements in Europe.

Yet the main strategic nuclear arms agreement, known as New START, remains in place and will remain so until at least 2026.

Impact of the war in Ukraine

While Putin has failed to follow through on his threat of a nuclear strike, the potential for a nuclear strike has meant that the US and NATO response to Russia’s attacks on Ukraine has landed far from direct engagement.

This is the first time that nuclear threats have been used by a country that has invaded another rather than defending a country.

It also marks a step backwards in international work to reduce the threat of nuclear war.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article here: https://theconversation.com/russia-is-sparking-new-nuclear-threats-understanding-nonproliferation-history-helps-place-this-in-context-180533.

Related posts:

  1. A maternity and clever loan
  2. Non – bank loans immediately on account
  3. 6 most important information about your loan to watch
  4. This is Why High Union Electronics (GTSM: 6266) Can Responsibly Handle Debt

Recent Posts

  • XPeng Stock: Anchored in Valuation, Not Speculation (NYSE: XPEV)
  • Balenciaga’s trashed sneakers divide opinion and tap into fashion history
  • US States Struggle to Replace Tax Revenue from Fossil Fuels | News, Sports, Jobs
  • MarketInk: Newsradio KOGO Wins Regional Edward R. Murrow Award
  • Scarlet Witch Fills Out The Original MCU Hulk Arc

Archives

  • May 2022
  • April 2022
  • March 2022
  • February 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • November 2021
  • October 2021
  • September 2021
  • August 2021
  • July 2021
  • June 2021
  • May 2021
  • April 2021
  • March 2021
  • February 2021
  • January 2021
  • December 2020
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • April 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • April 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • September 2018
  • December 2017
  • October 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • December 2016
  • August 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • October 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • November 2014
  • September 2013
  • August 2010

Categories

  • Creative Destruction
  • Debt
  • First Theorem Of Welfare Economics
  • Tax Haven
  • Terminal Value
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Privacy Policy