回到核悬崖

Mar 20, 2019 Javier Solana

马德里—十年前，在成为美国总统后的第一次欧洲之行期间，奥巴马在布拉格做了一次历史性演讲。令听众十分高兴的是，奥巴马说，无核的世界令人渴望，也可以实现。此前从未有过美国总统发出这样的宣言，它也成为当年晚些时候他赢得诺贝尔和平奖的原因之一。

奥巴马还在布拉格向捷克——以及整个欧洲——保证美国永远不会背弃他们；这是北大西洋公约第5条所承诺的集体防务原则，它是永久性的、无条件的。这些话现在听上去像是史前遗迹。

奥巴马的继任者特朗普质疑这一北约的重要支柱，违背了近70年来的外交传统。更糟糕的是，他最近还宣布准备让美国退出与俄罗斯签订的中程核力量（INF）条约，即1987年以来保证欧洲安全的根本条件。尽管奥巴马政府后来逐渐将核裁军列为次要日程，但特朗普似乎准备走向另一个极端：重整核军备。

To continue reading, register now.

As a registered user, you can enjoy more PS content every month – for free.

Subscribe now for unlimited access to everything PS has to offer.

Already have an account? Log in

Subscribe to Project Syndicate

Enjoy unlimited access to the ideas and opinions of the world’s leading thinkers, including long reads, book reviews, topical collections, short-form analysis and predictions, and exclusive interviews; every new issue of the PS Quarterly magazine (print and digital); the complete PS archive; and more. Subscribe now to PS Premium.

A New Era of Nuclear Uncertainty Politics
ATTA KENARE/AFP/Getty Images

A New Era of Nuclear Uncertainty

Javier Solana expects chaos to follow from US President Donald Trump's decision to scrap the Iran nuclear agreement.

3
Picking Up the Pieces After Hanoi Politics
Chung Sung-Jun/Getty Images

Picking Up the Pieces After Hanoi

Richard Haass outlines the options – none of them good – in the wake of last month's failed US-North Korea summit.

5
The Real Border Crisis The Big Picture
NARINDER NANU/AFP/Getty Images
Subscriber Exclusive

The Real Border Crisis

A recent military clash between India and Pakistan has brought the two nuclear powers’ long-simmering acrimony back to a boil. And whether further escalation is avoidable may depend on who is really calling the shots.

1

new comment has been posted. new comments have been posted.

0 Comments on this paragraph, 6 Comments on this article

Ban banzandone@gmail.com Apr 12, 2019

Mr. Solana has never understood a thing about Iran; neither about the character and the mandate of the Khomeiniist regime, nor the socio-historical nature of the people of Iran. As someone whose job description was interacting with people from other cultures, he has not figured out the important subtleties of the various nations and cultures. As someone who has actually met Mr. Solana, all I can say is, that as an Iranian, I found Mr. Solana to be the average European cultural imperialist who cannot suspend his own mentality long enough to understand another. Presentable yet intellectually ossified career politicians are a dime a dozen. From where I and MANY other Iranians who've watched his interaction with the terrorist regime officials, stand, Solana, is just that.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Ban banzandone@gmail.com Apr 12, 2019

Mr. Solana has never understood a thing about Iran. He has not learned anything about the character and the mandate of the Khomeiniist regime and has not understood the socio-historical nature of Iranians. Basically, as someone who has actually met Mr. Solana, all I can say that as an Iranian, I found Mr. Solana to be nothing more than the average European cultural imperialist who cannot suspend his own mentality long enough to understand another. Presentable yet out-of-touch (ans possibly somewhat corrupt) career politicians are a dime a dozen. Solana, fits the bill from where I and MANY other Iranians who've watched his interaction with the terrorist regime officials, stand.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
j. von Hettlingen Mar 27, 2019

Javier Solana says Trump’s withdrawal from the Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty with Russia would be a step toward a new nuclear arms race, undermining global stability. Last October, the administration cited its plan to counter a Chinese arms buildup in the Western Pacific as the reason to exit the 1987 pact, which is said to constrain the US from deploying new weapons to respond to China’s ambition. Because China was not a signatory to the treaty, it has faced no limits on developing intermediate-range nuclear missiles.
The author admits that “bilateral agreements like the INF Treaty – an artifact of the late Cold War – are no longer sufficient in today’s multipolar world.” The US and Russia have accused each other of violating the INF Treaty, rendering it obsolete. Nevertheless it would have been “far more sensible” for the US to “reaffirm its commitment to the treaty,” while putting pressure on Russia “to do the same” despite untenable violations. “By taking the high ground, the US would have been far better positioned to extend the same normative framework to China and its arsenal.”
Trump is surrounded by hawks on the nuclear issue, none more outspoken than John Bolton, for whom arms control has long been anathema. He ditched the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty in 2002 while serving as George W. Bush’s national security adviser. Today he launches attacks against the INF Treaty and the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) with Iran. His “next target” may be New START, signed by Obama and then-Russian President Dmitry Medvedev in Prague in 2010, which will expire in 2021, “barring an agreement on its extension.”
Developments in recent years warrant an urgent action – Russia’s new aggression against Europe and America; threats from a rising China; missile proliferation by India, Pakistan, North Korea and Iran, Israel – countries that have joined the nuclear club, but are not subject to the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT); other technological changes and cyber warfare. The two nuclear neighbours – India and Pakistan – have been arch enemies since their independence in 1947. Saudi Arabia, Iran’s arch rival in the Middle East, seeks to develop its own nuclear programme with US backing, adding more fuels to the sectarian fire in the region.
As “the potential use of these weapons is now discussed with such frivolity,” it makes sense to rethink whether new approaches to arms control are needed or whether the old system remains sound. While Russia had signalled its willingness to negotiate, the US and Russia should try to open talks with China and other countries armed with nuclear weapons, despite their resistance to being drawn into such a process. They prefer to wait and see at least until the United States and Russia shrink their arsenals even more.
Unlike his predecessors, from John F. Kennedy to Barack Obama, who had successfully negotiated an agreement with the Soviet Union, or the Russian federation, to reduce the threat from both countries’ vast nuclear arsenals, Trump is not a fire-fighter, but an arsonist. He suggested that Japan and South Korea should develop their own nuclear weapons as a means of self-defence. By tearing up the JCPOA with Iran, he is allowing Iranian hardliners to resume their nuclear programme, while encouraging the Saudis to buy nuclear technology from the US.
The answer to the problems that have come up is not to abandon the INF Treaty but to preserve and fix it. Such an endeavour would require political will and the kind of sustained multilateral diplomacy that the Trump administration is incapable of organising. In his landmark speech in Prague in 2009, Obama emphasized that the US “is the only country ever to have used nuclear weapons, and therefore has an historic responsibility to ensure that they are never used again.” Unfortunately a world free of nuclear arms will soon be remote, if nothing is done to prevent a conflagration from erupting.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
B Wilds Mar 25, 2019

Generally, we see little movement in the list of the "Worlds 10 Worst Problems" as counted down from least to most crucial. Growing concerns over the angst between several countries with nuclear bombs has a great deal to do with moving "Weapons of war and mass destruction" into first place.

This not only includes nuclear bombs and chemical weapons but drones and the killer robots now being developed. One big mistake or going down the wrong path in developing new weapons could change life as we know it. A major problem with these weapons is who controls them. Today many governments are become more totalitarian and Orwellian which means they may eventually be used to control populations. Killer robots are now just another part of the new arms race. The article below delves into the current list of the worlds 10 worst problems.

https://brucewilds.blogspot.com/2019/03/nuclear-war-still-atop-list-of-worlds.html
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Peter McLoughlin Mar 24, 2019

‘The Cold War gave us a glimpse of the risks we run when our single-minded pursuit of some geopolitical interests causes us to lose sight of the most important of them all: international security.’
The Cold war gave a glimpse of the dangers. The crisis we are in now is far greater and more dangerous: the Cold War was the peace, a post-world war environment; we are now in a pre-world war environment. The challenge to avoid nuclear war is immense, the chances very limited.
https://www.ghostsofhistory.wordpress.com/
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Derrick Baragwanath Mar 21, 2019

The author of this article is failing to recognise that the United States is not the instigator of the unfolding nuclear madness. The Trump administration is most likely trying to bring to a head what decades of negotiation have failed to do. China and Russia could have helped to resolve the North Korean problem years ago, but instead gained some pernicious pleasure in seeing this as an American problem. But, it is not just an American problem. China's worst nightmare is a nuclear armed Japan, something Japan could achieve in a heartbeat, but this a very real scenario if the US disengages from that area. China's proliferation of intermediate range nuclear missiles and its unwillingness to enter into open and transparent negotiations has lead to concern, both in the US and Russia, hence the breakdown in treaties covering that area. The ABM treaty is failing because Russia and China have displayed duplicity in the proliferation of nuclear weapons in both North Korea and Iran. When such countries start making veiled and not so veiled threats toward the United States what are they supposed to do? Trump's strategy is to force China and Russia to recognise this is not just an American problem.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.

https://prosyn.org/GwUthx8zh

回到核悬崖

Subscribe to Project Syndicate

A New Era of Nuclear Uncertainty

Picking Up the Pieces After Hanoi

The Real Border Crisis

New Comment

Email this piece to a friend

Contact us

Log in/Register

回到核悬崖

Subscribe to Project Syndicate

Edit Newsletter Preferences

Set up Notification