By Daniel Nardini
As I write this, the election is not yet decided. What is definitely going to happen is that in the next five years America’s allies will have serious doubts in the United States’ ability to help make the world safe for democracy. The real contest is whether Kamala Harris or J.D. Vance will be the ones who hold power in the presidency. Yes, I did say J.D. Vance and NOT Donald J. Trump because in truth I have been watching the increasing decline of Trump, and it is BAD. Even if somehow he is propelled back into the White House, he is TOTALLY UNFIT TO RUN THIS COUNTRY. Then this will mean that Vance will be effectively running this country; that and the U.S. Congress if it can get its act together regardless if it is Vance or Harris.
What Harris and Vance have in common, besides being much younger candidates, is that they have a serious lack of experience in regards to foreign policy. This lack of experience, plus the fact that the economic order where the United States was dominant, is breaking down. These two people are complete unknowns in that world order, and this consternation is being felt and will be felt in the rest of the world for some time to come. Among those countries that have dynamic economies, and problems with neighbors, they may seek a dangerous solution in place of a United States that will not be as committed to providing aid and an alliance for their protection. During the Cold War, the United States provided both substantial aid and military alliances to those countries that were against the former Soviet Union and it allies. This is no longer the case.
And if the United States cannot and will not do so, there is only one terrible solution left. This is the development of nuclear weapons. This will be I think especially true for Ukraine in its current war with Russia. Ukraine’s independence and borders were supposed to be guaranteed in exchange with Ukraine giving up its nuclear arsenal. Because Ukraine gave up its nuclear arsenal, Russia was supposed to have recognized Ukraine’s 1991 borders. Since Russia has reneged on all of this, what is now to stop Ukraine’s not only building new nuclear weapons, but building a large arsenal of them?
When you think about it, Ukraine is not the only one that is considering this option. Other countries around Russia such as Poland, Finland and Sweden are most likely doing the same. All of these countries have more than enough technology and resources to build nuclear weapons. In their view, this may be the best option to maximize resources and deter the Russians from trying anything against them (at the rate Russia is going, it may collapse first, but we will see). Taiwan, South Korea and maybe even Japan (the country that had two of its cities bombed by nuclear weapons) may now be considering developing nuclear weapons to protect themselves against the might and power of China. Under the circumstances this may be justifiable, and I had actually been advocating this for 30 years because American military alliances may not be as rock-solid as portrayed. With a United States foreign policy that may not be as reliable as it was in the past, the option of nuclear weapons may be the only one left. Our world will become a more dangerous place, but ironically such nuclear weapons may also be the best guarantor of peace.
The Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons
By Daniel Nardini
What Harris and Vance have in common, besides being much younger candidates, is that they have a serious lack of experience in regards to foreign policy. This lack of experience, plus the fact that the economic order where the United States was dominant, is breaking down. These two people are complete unknowns in that world order, and this consternation is being felt and will be felt in the rest of the world for some time to come. Among those countries that have dynamic economies, and problems with neighbors, they may seek a dangerous solution in place of a United States that will not be as committed to providing aid and an alliance for their protection. During the Cold War, the United States provided both substantial aid and military alliances to those countries that were against the former Soviet Union and it allies. This is no longer the case.
And if the United States cannot and will not do so, there is only one terrible solution left. This is the development of nuclear weapons. This will be I think especially true for Ukraine in its current war with Russia. Ukraine’s independence and borders were supposed to be guaranteed in exchange with Ukraine giving up its nuclear arsenal. Because Ukraine gave up its nuclear arsenal, Russia was supposed to have recognized Ukraine’s 1991 borders. Since Russia has reneged on all of this, what is now to stop Ukraine’s not only building new nuclear weapons, but building a large arsenal of them?
When you think about it, Ukraine is not the only one that is considering this option. Other countries around Russia such as Poland, Finland and Sweden are most likely doing the same. All of these countries have more than enough technology and resources to build nuclear weapons. In their view, this may be the best option to maximize resources and deter the Russians from trying anything against them (at the rate Russia is going, it may collapse first, but we will see). Taiwan, South Korea and maybe even Japan (the country that had two of its cities bombed by nuclear weapons) may now be considering developing nuclear weapons to protect themselves against the might and power of China. Under the circumstances this may be justifiable, and I had actually been advocating this for 30 years because American military alliances may not be as rock-solid as portrayed. With a United States foreign policy that may not be as reliable as it was in the past, the option of nuclear weapons may be the only one left. Our world will become a more dangerous place, but ironically such nuclear weapons may also be the best guarantor of peace.