Missing The Third Nuclear Horn (Daniel 8:8)

The Most Dangerous Nuclear Threat No One Is Talking About

The National Interest
December 19, 2014

While Iran and North Korea’s nuclear programs are all the rage these days, the most dangerous nuclear threat facing the world continues to go largely unnoticed.

Namely, China and India are both on the cusp of deploying multiple independently targetable reentry (MIRV) vehicles on their ballistic missiles, a development that is likely to have profound, far-reaching consequences for the region and beyond.

MIRVed missiles carry payloads of several nuclear warheads each capable of being directed at a different set of targets. They are considered extremely destabilizing to the strategic balance primarily because they place a premium on striking first and create a “use em or lose em” nuclear mentality.

Along with being less vulnerable to anti-ballistic missile systems, this is true for two primary reasons. First, and most obviously, a single MIRVed missile can be used to eliminate numerous enemy nuclear sites simultaneously. Thus, theoretically at least, only a small portion of an adversary’s missile force would be necessary to completely eliminate one’s strategic deterrent. Secondly, MIRVed missiles enable countries to use cross-targeting techniques of employing two or more missiles against a single target, which increases the kill probability.

In other words, MIRVs are extremely destabilizing because they make adversary’s nuclear arsenals vulnerable to being wiped out in a surprise first strike. To compensate for this fact, states must come up with innovative ways to secure their deterrent from an enemy first strike. This usually entails increasing the size of one’s arsenal, and further dispersing to make it more difficult for an enemy to conduct a successful first strike. For example, when the U.S. first deployed MIRVed missiles in 1968, the Soviet Union had less than 10,000 nuclear warheads. A decade later, however, it had over 25,000 (of course, the Soviet Union deploying its own MIRVed missiles incentivized expanding the size of its arsenal since more warheads were needed per missile).

With regards to China and India, then, the introduction of MIRVed missiles could have profound consequences of both of their nuclear postures. One of the most remarkable aspects of every nuclear state not named Russia or the United States is they have relied on an extremely small nuclear arsenal to meet their deterrent needs. This is especially true of India and China who have generally maintained minimum deterrence and no-first use doctrines. With the introduction of countervailing MIRVed missiles, however, there will be strong incentives on both sides to vastly increase the size of their arsenals if any to guard against the threat of a first strike by the other side.

Of course, the consequences of China and India acquiring MIRVed missiles would not be limited to those states alone. Most obviously, India’s acquisition of MIRVed missiles would immediately threaten the survivability of Pakistan’s nuclear forces. In the short-term, this will probably result in Islamabad further dispersing its nuclear arsenal, which in general will leave it more vulnerable to Islamist terrorist groups in the country. Over the long-term, Pakistan will feel pressure to expand the size of its arsenal as well as acquire MIRVed capabilities of its own.

The same pressures will be felt in Moscow. Since the disintegration of the Soviet Union, Russia has relied on its vast nuclear arsenal to compensate for its relative conventional weakness. In the eyes of Russian leaders, this will only grow more necessary as China continues to modernize its conventional military forces. Currently, Russia holds vastly more nuclear warheads than China, which is a source of relief for Moscow. As China MIRVs its missiles, however, as well as likely builds up the size of its arsenal, Moscow will see its nuclear superiority over Beijing rapidly erode. It can be counted on to respond by abrogating its arms control treaties with the United States, and expanding its own arsenal as well. In such a situation, a U.S. president would come under enormous domestic pressure to meet Russia’s buildup warhead for warhead.

Thus, while the prospect of North Korea and Iran acquiring operationalized nuclear arsenals may be concerning, China and India’s MIRVed missiles present far greater threats to the world.

Zachary Keck is the managing editor of The National Interest. You can find him on Twitter: @ZacharyKeck.

India Should Worry About The Neighboring Nuclear Horns

India Expresses Concern Over Pakistan-China Nuke Deal

Pak-China
Published: Dec 19, 2014 at 1:29 pm
InSerbia News
 
At the same time, she said that India is “fully prepared” to safeguard national interests. “India is well prepared to deal with threats. We are fully alert. We will not allow any harm to (happen to) India,” she also said while speaking at the Lok Sabha – the Lower House of the Indian Parliament recently.
Swaraj once again assured the members of the House that the Narendra Modi government would take all the necessary steps to protect national interests. “The government remains concerned about the impact of the deal on global non-proliferation norms. It believes that countries should abide by the commitments that they have undertaken in the field of nuclear non-proliferation,” stressed the minister.
 
According to Swaraj, India is well aware of the agreement signed by Islamabad and Beijing on the basis of which China will supply two additional nuclear power reactors – Chashma-3 and Chashma-4 – to Pakistan. Although Chashma-3 and Chashma-4 reactors are under construction, Chashma-1 and 2 reactors are currently in operation.
 
A couple of months ago, the Chinese officials had informed New Delhi that its nuclear supplies to Pakistan were in accordance with its international obligations and for peaceful purposes. Swaraj added that China, as a member of the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG), should not forget its responsibility to ensure that necessary safeguards are in place before exporting nuclear technology to any countries.
 
Meanwhile, she admitted that India would not raise the issue in the UN because the China-Pakistan nuclear deal was yet to reach that level. Recently, Pakistan and China have described bilateral defence co-operation as an important component of strategic co-operation between them. For long, Beijing has been providing Pakistan with military assistance and equipment. Chinese officials visit Pakistan on a regular basis to conduct acceptance tests on the military equipment supplied by them and train Pakistani soldiers on the same. The two Asian neighbours also hold joint exercises between their Armies, Navies and Air Forces regularly.

Nuclear War Is Coming (Matthew 24)

December 17, 2014  •  From theTrumpet.com
Representatives from more than 150 countries, international organizations and civil-society groups convened in Vienna on December 8 for the third Humanitarian Impact of Nuclear Weapons Conference. “As long as the nuclear weapons exist, the risk of their use on purpose or accidentally exists too,” Austrian Foreign Minister Sebastian Kurz stated in his opening remarks.

Kurtz wants to see world leaders eradicate all nuclear weapons. With over 16,000 nuclear warheads scattered around the globe, the risks of human error and cybercrime detonating a nuclear device are astronomical.

“After the Cold War, most people stopped worrying about nuclear weapons. But this is fundamentally wrong,” said Kurz.

Kurz is right: We still do need to worry about the likelihood of nuclear war.

“After the Cold War, most people stopped worrying about nuclear weapons. But this is fundamentally wrong.”
— Austrian Foreign Minister Sebastian Kurz
In the lead-up to the conference, more than 120 senior political, military and diplomatic figures urged world leaders to minimize the risk of nuclear war by taking immediate action. They expressed that a potential nuclear conflict is “underestimated or insufficiently understood” by world leaders. “Tensions between nuclear-armed states and alliances in the Euro-Atlantic area and in both South and East Asia remain ripe with the potential for military miscalculation and escalation,” they noted in a letter to the Austrian foreign minister.

The dignitaries also stated, “Stockpiles of the world’s nuclear weapons and materials to produce them are insufficiently secure, making them possible targets for terrorism.” Similar to the Austrian foreign minister, these dignitaries called for the world to eliminate its nuclear weapons. They see this as the only solution to preventing a nuclear war.

Yet some nuclear nations around the world are doing the opposite.

These nations believe building up their nuclear arsenals is necessary to prevent a future war. Some national leaders believe mutually assured destruction will prevent any nation from contemplating nuclear war. And there are some nations that likely have more aggressive ambitions with such devastating weapons.

South Asian nations are the “most at risk of a breakdown in strategic stability due to an explosive mixture of unresolved territorial disputes, cross-border terrorism, and growing nuclear arsenals,” according to Gregory Koblentz, an arms control and non-proliferation expert. Pakistan has the fastest growing nuclear arsenal in the world. By 2020, Pakistan could produce 200 nuclear weapons, roughly equal to the United Kingdom’s arsenal. Pakistan’s nuclear stockpiles are far from secure.

North Korea is another volatile nation stockpiling nuclear weapons. “North Korea is presumed to have the capability of producing some four nuclear bombs per year, and it appears that the North will possess some 20 nuclear bombs by 2016,” said Siegfried Hecker, a Stanford University research professor who visited North Korea’s Yongbyon nuclear facility in 2010.

What are the ramifications of a terrorist obtaining a nuclear weapon?Iran is another nation that aspires to become a nuclear power. The Trumpet recently reported about Iran’s continued progress toward the production of a nuclear bomb despite sanctions.

Then there is China.

What would happen if a terrorist got his hands on such a weapon? There are already claims that the Islamic State has a dirty bomb in Europe.

The reality is that one day a nuclear bomb will go off. And a whole bunch will follow. It is just a matter of when—not because a bunch of experts warn that it is a possibility, but because Bible prophecy clearly indicates it will happen.

Shortly after the end of World War ii, Herbert W. Armstrong warned about the reality of a coming nuclear war.

We might as well face the stark, ugly, horrifying truth, my friends—the world leaders know within themselves that there is no hope, so far as human effort and international agreement or organization is concerned, of preventing another war—and all know now that even this greatest of all wars (World War ii) will have been but child’s play by comparison. We have engines of destruction now which can annihilate humanity from this Earth—stamp out all human life!

Shortly after the end of World War II, Herbert W. Armstrong warned about the reality of a coming nuclear war. Today, it is just as Christ said it would be: “For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be. And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved [alive—Moffatt translation]: but for the elect’s sake those days shall be shortened” (Matthew 24:21-22).

But Christ will intervene to save mankind from himself and bring an end to man’s misrule over man. Christ will usher in a time of peace—a time world leaders can only dream about. Soon, nuclear weapons will be extinct—but not before this world has learned some very painful lessons. Nuclear war is coming.