Miscellaneous News

Chevalier said:

No, given proximity, if japan and south korea get nukes, then Cuba gets nukes as well as access to Chinese and Russian satellite targeting.

Click to expand...

China’s Dangerous Nuclear Push​

To Temper Beijing’s Ambitions, Washington Should Threaten to Share Weapons With Japan and South Korea​

Click to expand...

Since the 1990s, Beijing has spurned Washington’s invitations to participate in nuclear arms control negotiations. Instead, it has expanded and modernized its arsenal: the country’s estimated 500 nuclear warheads are on track to double by 2030. China’s advances, along with North Korea’s, has had knock-on effects in the region. Despite U.S. security assurances, a majority of South Koreans now want their country to have its own nuclear weapons, and Japan’s long-standing aversion to the bomb is also eroding. Asia is now on track to see a destabilizing arms race in the years ahead.

Click to expand...

Washington must engage in tough, even coercive diplomacy, making it clear that Beijing faces a stark choice: participate meaningfully in substantive negotiations or brave a massive U.S.-backed nuclear buildup in its own backyard. And if Chinese leaders decline to do so, Washington could begin discussions with Seoul and Tokyo about nuclear-sharing arrangements, as well as move faster to update and enlarge its own arsenal, channeling investments to its nuclear weapons defense industrial base.

Click to expand...

Today, Washington should strengthen its missile defenses, and those of its allies, ramp up U.S. deployments of nuclear-armed submarines and nuclear-capable bombers, and pursue nuclear-sharing arrangements with Seoul and Tokyo. Just as such moves drove the Soviet Union to the bargaining table in the past, they could convince China to negotiate in the future.

Click to expand...

ESCALATE TO DE-ESCALATE​

The history of arms control demonstrates the value of coercive policies in getting states to agree to negotiations. During SALT I, the first round of Strategic Arms Limitation Talks, from late 1969 through the summer of 1972, the United States toyed with the idea of adding extra warheads to missiles, which convinced the Soviets to stay at the negotiating table. And U.S. President Ronald Reagan’s Strategic Defense Initiative, a project to build a missile-defense system in space, drove his Soviet counterpart, Mikhail Gorbachev, to entreat the Americans to engage in a series of summits. In the face of such provocations, Moscow had to choose between accelerating the arms race and pursuing arms control. On these occasions, Washington’s gambles paid off, compelling Moscow to back down.

Click to expand...

How would coercion work today? Although current U.S. policy discourages increased nuclearization, Washington could leverage the threat of arming South Korea and Japan to bring China to the negotiating table. If Beijing declined dialogue, it would risk a much greater nuclear threat in its own backyard. A nuclear Japan and South Korea would dial up the likelihood of misperception, miscalculation, and accidents, raising the stakes of nuclear catastrophe. Facing such a perilous reality, Beijing may well cave to U.S. pressure and enter into serious arms control talks. Of course, this strategy is not without risk. But low-risk efforts have failed to temper Beijing’s ambitions, requiring a new approach to arms control.

Click to expand...

Of course, the current U.S. administration would prefer to uphold the United States’ commitments under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, which prohibits nonnuclear weapons states from developing an arsenal, and maintain its deterrence posture with fewer nuclear weapons. But if Beijing continues to develop its arsenal, Washington will have no option but to abandon those commitments. Paradoxically, its best chance of sustaining the treaty may be to first adopt a position of dramatically enhanced nuclear strength.

Click to expand...

HARDBALL​

By emphasizing the consequences that await China should it continue to develop its arsenal, Washington could convince Chinese leaders to come to the negotiating table for broader talks. If Beijing does agree to serious negotiations, it must demonstrate good faith by allowing for greater transparency into China’s nuclear arsenal, posture, and plans. Eventually, such an arrangement could include Russia, once conditions are conducive, as well as France and the United Kingdom.

Click to expand...

In return, Washington might offer Beijing a commitment to help constrain proliferation in East Asia—for example, by working to persuade U.S. allies to abstain from developing their own nuclear capabilities. But for that to work, Washington must continue to demonstrate a firm commitment to extending deterrence through mechanisms such as the Nuclear Consultative Group, a forum for discussing nuclear issues with South Korea.

Click to expand...

Overbom said:

Extremely provoking and concerning article in Foreign Affairs. The hegemonic empire spirals down the abyss even further, and seems intent to drag the rest of the world with it


Time for Houthis and Palestinians to get nuclear weapons.

And, 10000 nuclear warheads, when?

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

China’s Dangerous Nuclear Push​

Click to expand...

bajingan said:

I think it's only a matter of time before the u.s start arming s.k and Japan with nukes. China should prepare for such eventualities
the day Japan and Sk got nukes should be the day Iran has nukes as well
I think that's how China should respond

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

Overbom said:

Extremely provoking and concerning article in Foreign Affairs. The hegemonic empire spirals down the abyss even further, and seems intent to drag the rest of the world with it


Time for Houthis and Palestinians to get nuclear weapons.

And, 10000 nuclear warheads, when?

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

China’s Dangerous Nuclear Push​

Click to expand...

ember said:

Why is the US so desperate to have a nuclear arms control deal?

Is it because
a) the US can't afford a nuclear arms race with China, or
b) the endgame for US planners is nuclear war with China, and they want to ensure that China has a limited arsenal of missiles

Click to expand...

AssassinsMace said:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

India looking to the future to steal Chinese assets after Europe is threatening to do it now. If it's okay for Europe, it must all right for India to do.

Click to expand...

ougoah said:

Exactly. The truth is somewhere in between. Although I would disagree with the racists' generalisations that non-white peoples have less creativity as some absolute truth. The reality is Chinese people can and are creative under similar and different circumstances. It's just that modern China's culture and society encourages conformity. Chinese people raised and living in the West often don't experience as much social pressure to conform and are often more likely to display creativity.

The issue they've missed is that conformity has its unique advantages too. Too much creativity, or rather too much of the "qualities" that encourage creativity is conversely often a bad thing for a society. Too many gender related debates produced.

On balance, China could probably loosen up a bit especially with regards to its higher end. With prosperity come social economic safety nets and people becoming more daring. This lever does however result in greater instability. China's gearing at the moment is arguably more effective than how the West is geared - way too much room for "creativity" and not enough for organisation and focus. China has a creative pool and it is able to extract some benefit of others doing this part for its own benefit too. The racists call this the "stealing" part of the equation lmao. In reality, it is able to offshore a lot of resource intensive risk taking. So China's very cunningly hedged its limited resources pretty well imo.

As for genetic basis. That's a major LOL. Chinese people are inherently as capable as any other human. There shouldn't be any doubt to this unless you're programmed to think with debilitating racism. As a note, Chinese should not underestimate Indians. It's not Indian intelligence or creativity that is lacking though. India is a much poorer organised society. It is simply not running even as effectively as Western nations post 2010s. Not to mention a much more severe lacking of material wealth which promotes industry, risk taking etc.

Westerners who believe in this exceptionalism are typically not well educated or knowledgeable about science, history and the inventions of mankind throughout existence. More importantly, how trade and sharing of knowledge and ideas have absolutely been to the benefit of separate groups.

Click to expand...

bajingan said:

I am not sure the u.s realize they don't have any leverage to force China on arms control. They already have nuke submarines capable of striking China from first island chain. Nukes in Japan and SK won't make any difference

They could have put nukes in SK the day NK tested nukes decades ago but they didn't. That tells you a lot

Click to expand...