Nuclear War Could Mean Annihilation, But Babylon the Great Is Messing Around

Nuclear missiles against fiery sky
The Biden administration hasn’t just remained mum about current nuclear war dangers — it’s actively exacerbating them.

Nuclear War Could Mean Annihilation, But Biden and Congress Are Messing Around

Norman Solomon 

Norman Solomon is co-founder and national director of RootsAction. He was a Bernie Sanders delegate from California to the 2016 and 2020 Democratic National Conventions. Solomon is the author of a dozen books, including War Made Easy: How Presidents and Pundits Keep Spinning Us to Death. His book Made Love, Got War: Close Encounters with America’s Warfare State was republished this year in a new edition as a free e-book. He founded the Institute for Public Accuracy, where he is executive director.

President Joe Biden and top subordinates have refused to publicly acknowledge the danger of nuclear war — even though it is now higher than at any other time in at least 60 years. Their silence is insidious and powerful, and their policy of denial makes grassroots activism all the more vital for human survival.

In the aftermath of the 1962 Cuban missile crisis, President John F. Kennedy was more candid. Speaking at American University, he said: “A single nuclear weapon contains almost 10 times the explosive force delivered by all the allied air forces in the Second World War.” Kennedy also noted, “The deadly poisons produced by a nuclear exchange would be carried by wind and water and soil and seed to the far corners of the globe and to generations yet unborn.” Finally, he added, “All we have built, all we have worked for, would be destroyed in the first 24 hours.”

Kennedy was no dove. He affirmed willingness to use nuclear weapons. But his speech offered some essential honesty about nuclear war — and the need to seriously negotiate with the Kremlin in the interests of averting planetary incineration — an approach sorely lacking from the United States government today.

At the time of Kennedy’s presidency, nuclear war would have been indescribably catastrophic. Now — with large arsenals of hydrogen bombs and what scientists know about “nuclear winter” — experts have concluded that a nuclear war would virtually end agriculture and amount to omnicide (the destruction of human life on earth).

In an interview after publication of his book The Doomsday Machine, Pentagon Papers whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg summed up what he learned as an insider during the Kennedy administration:

What I discovered — to my horror, I have to say — is that the Joint Chiefs of Staff contemplated causing with our own first strike 600 million deaths, including 100 million in our own allies. Now, that was an underestimate even then because they weren’t including fire, which they found was too incalculable in its effects. And of course, fire is the greatest casualty-producing effect of thermonuclear weapons. So the real effect would’ve been over a billion — not 600 million — about a third of the Earth’s population then at that time.

Ellsberg added:

What turned out to be the case 20 years later in 1983 and confirmed in the last 10 years very thoroughly by climate scientists and environmental scientists is that that high ceiling of a billion or so was wrong. Firing weapons over the cities, even if you call them military targets, would cause firestorms in those cities like the one in Tokyo in March of 1945, which would loft into the stratosphere many millions of tons of soot and black smoke from the burning cities. It wouldn’t be rained out in the stratosphere. It would go around the globe very quickly and reduce sunlight by as much as 70 percent, causing temperatures like that of the Little Ice Age, killing harvests worldwide and starving to death nearly everyone on Earth. It probably wouldn’t cause extinction. We’re so adaptable. Maybe 1 percent of our current population of 7.4 billion could survive, but 98 or 99 percent would not.

Even before the Russian invasion of Ukraine four months ago, the risks of global nuclear annihilation were at a peak. In January, the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists set its Doomsday Clock at a mere 100 seconds from apocalyptic Midnight, compared to six minutes a decade ago. As Russia’s horrific war on Ukraine has persisted and the U.S. government has bypassed diplomacy in favor of massive arms shipments, the hazards of a nuclear war between the world’s two nuclear superpowers have increased.

But the Biden administration has not only remained mum about current nuclear war dangers; it’s actively exacerbating them. Those at the helm of U.S. foreign policy now are ignoring the profound lessons that President Kennedy drew from the October 1962 confrontation with Russia over its nuclear missiles in Cuba. “Above all, while defending our own vital interests, nuclear powers must avert those confrontations which bring an adversary to a choice of either a humiliating retreat or a nuclear war,” Kennedy said. “To adopt that kind of course in the nuclear age would be evidence only of the bankruptcy of our policy — or of a collective death-wish for the world.”

In sync with the overwhelmingly hawkish U.S. media, members of Congress and “national security” establishment, Biden has moved into new Cold War overdrive. The priority aim is to make shrewd moves on the geopolitical chessboard — not to engage in diplomacy that could end the slaughter in Ukraine and prevent the war from causing widespread starvation in many countries.

As scholar Alfred McCoy just wrote, “With the specter of mass starvation looming for some 270 million people and, as the [United Nations] recently warned, political instability growing in those volatile regions, the West will, sooner or later, have to reach some understanding with Russia.” Only diplomacy can halt the carnage in Ukraine and save the lives of millions now at risk of starvation. And the dangers of nuclear war can be reduced by rejecting the fantasy of a military solution to the Ukraine conflict.

In recent months, the Russian government has made thinly veiled threats to use nuclear weapons. Meanwhile, the U.S. has been shipping huge quantities of weapons to Ukraine, while Washington has participated in escalating the dangerous rhetoric. President Biden doubled down on conveying that he seeks regime change in Moscow, and Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin has declared that the U.S. wants the Russian military “weakened” — an approach that is opposite from Kennedy’s warning against “confrontations which bring an adversary to a choice of either a humiliating retreat or a nuclear war.”

We’d be gravely mistaken to wait for Washington’s officialdom to level with us about nuclear war dangers, much less take steps to mitigate them. The power corridors along Pennsylvania Avenue won’t initiate the needed changes. The initiatives and the necessary political pressure must come from grassroots organizing.

A new “Defuse Nuclear War” coalition of about 90 national and regional organizations (which I’m helping to coordinate) launched in mid-June with a livestream video featuring an array of activists and other eloquent speakers, drawn together by the imperative of preventing nuclear war. (They included antiwar activists, organizers, scholars and writers Daniel Ellsberg, Mandy Carter, David Swanson, Medea Benjamin, Leslie Cagan, Pastor Michael McBride, Katrina vanden Heuvel, Hanieh Jodat Barnes, Judith Ehrlich, Khury Petersen-Smith, India Walton, Emma Claire Foley, retired Army Col. Ann Wright and former California Gov. Jerry Brown.)

The U.S. government’s willingness to boost the odds of nuclear war is essentially a political problem. It pits the interests of the people of the world — in desperate need of devoting adequate resources to human needs and protection of the environment — against the rapacious greed of military contractors intertwined with the unhinged priorities of top elected officials.

The Biden administration and the bipartisan leadership in Congress have made clear that their basic approach to the surging danger of nuclear war is to pretend that it doesn’t exist — and to encourage us to do the same. Such avoidance might seem like a good coping strategy for individuals. But for a government facing off against the world’s other nuclear superpower, the denial heightens the risk of exterminating almost all human life. There’s got to be a better way.Copyright © Truthout. May not be reprinted without permission.

The China Horn’s new nuclear weapons: Daniel 7

China’s new weapons

The People’s Republic of China, also known as China to the rest of the world, is a communist nation in East Asia. According to the Center for Strategic & International Studies in 2020, it had a population of more than 1.4 billion people and has become one of the world’s largest economies and tenth largest exporter. China was able to develop many weapons useful for warfare, and some of them are the hypersonic glide vehicle, the anti-satellite missiles and nuclear weapons.

Hypersonic glide vehicles are vehicles like airplanes, spacecraft and missiles that can travel four times faster than the speed of sound. From the Arms Control Association, tests of the hypersonic glide vehicles were conducted last summer and raised concerns from the U.S. about China’s advancements in military weapons. According to Financial Times, the Chinese military launched a rocket that was used to propel a hypersonic glide vehicle around the globe.

Anti-Satellite missiles are space weapons that involve missiles capable of destroying satellites for strategic motives. Based on the Secure World Foundation, China launched a missile on January 11, 2007, at Xichang Space Launch Center. This missile collided with a Chinese weather satellite, destroying the satellite.

The aftermath of this incident left an abundance of debris, which, as reported by BBC, led to the U.S. being the first country to ban such missile tests. Explosive devices that need nuclear energy are known as nuclear weapons. China has an estimate of 350 nuclear warheads, according to the Arms Control Association.

In addition, China wants to increase the number of missiles that are capable of delivering conventional and nuclear warheads, expanding their ability to engage in nuclear warfare.

China’s military inventory is gradually increasing in size as time passes. The newly developed hypersonic glide vehicle, the anti-satellite missiles, and other explosive devices for nuclear warheads can obviously be used for a wider range of warfare strategies. 

With more knowledge of their military weapons, other countries can understand and develop weapons that can counter Chinese weapons if they become more militarily aggressive.

Babylon the Great’s test of new hypersonic missile fails

 US Air Force conducts latest hypersonic weapon flight test (photo credit: REUTERS)

US test of new hypersonic missile fails amid China, Russia pressure

With Russia, China and North Korea developing their own hypersonic missile capabilities, with some being able to carry nuclear warheads, the Pentagon is feeling the pressure.

A flight test of a new US hypersonic missile system in Hawaii, named “Conventional Prompt Strike,” failed, most likely due to a problem that took place after ignition, the US Department of Defense said in a statement.

“An anomaly occurred following ignition of the test asset,” Pentagon spokesman Navy Lieutenant Commander Tim Gorman said. “the Department remains confident that it is on track to field offensive and defensive hypersonic capabilities on target dates beginning in the early 2020s.”

“Program officials have initiated a review to determine the cause to inform future tests,” he said. “While the Department was unable to collect data on the entirety of the planned flight profile, the information gathered from this event will provide vital insights.”

“While the Department was unable to collect data on the entirety of the planned flight profile, the information gathered from this event will provide vital insights.”Pentagon spokesman Navy Lieutenant Commander Tim Gorman

The recent failure marks the second unsuccessful test flight of the prototype weapon, in October 2021, a booster malfunction, which prevented the missile from leaving the launch pad, rendered the weapon system’s first test flight a failure as well.

The Conventional Prompt Strike weapon system is expected to be installed on Zumwalt destroyers and Virginia-class submarines.

With Russia, China and North Korea developing their own hypersonic missile capabilities, with some being able to carry nuclear warheads, the Pentagon is feeling pressure to deploy the newly developed weapon system as soon as possible.

China

The Chinese military believes hypersonic weapons will change the nature of the battle and is investing heavily to advance their capabilities.

“China tested a nuclear-capable hypersonic missile in August that circled the globe before speeding towards its target, demonstrating an advanced space capability that caught US intelligence by surprise,” according to the Financial Times.

China has been working on these missiles for decades, according to the US Defense Intelligence Agency’s 2019 China Military Power Report, the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) “is developing a range of technologies to counter US and other countries’ ballistic missile defense systems, including maneuverable reentry vehicles (MARVs), MIRVs [multiple independently targetable reentry vehicles], decoys, chaff, jamming, thermal shielding, and hypersonic glide vehicles.”

On 1 October 2019, the 70th anniversary of the establishment of the People’s Republic of China, in a parade that reviewed the PLA’s troops and weapon systems, the PLA revealed a new hypersonic missile, the Dong Feng (DF) 17.

A PRC blog devoted to military affairs described the DF-17 as a “combat-ready hypersonic weapon.”

China is investing heavily in heat-seeking hypersonic weapons, claiming that they “will be able to hit a moving car at five times the speed of sound,” with a new system that is set to deploy by 2025, according to scientists involved in the project.

The research team, led by Yang Xiaogang from the PLA Rocket Force University of Engineering in Xian, said “important progress” had been made towards solving the main problem of how to pinpoint a moving target at extreme speeds.

Yang and his colleagues from the university’s College of Missile Engineering have been given a deadline of 2025 to come up with solutions to the seemingly intractable challenges of hypersonic technology.

Over distance, the infrared signature of a small moving target “constitutes just a few pixels without detailed information such as shape, texture and structure,” making identification and tracking “extremely difficult”, they explained in a paper published in the Chinese peer-reviewed journal Infrared and Laser Engineering.

The hypersonic heat-seeker would also be able to go after a target in the air, according to a separate paper in the series by Qin Hanlin from the school of optoelectronic engineering at Xidian University.

Qin and his team demonstrated a technology that would allow a hypersonic ground-to-air missile to hit a target as small as a commercial drone. The missile could identify the drone hanging low over buildings or trees with nearly 90 percent accuracy, they said.

The PLA’s hypersonic program employs about 3,000 scientists, 50 percent more than those working on traditional weapons, according to a study published in January by the Chinese peer-reviewed journal Tactical Missile Technology.

Russia

In March 2022, the Russian navy conducted a test of a prospective hypersonic missile, the ‘Zircon,’ in a demonstration of the military’s long-range strike capability amid the fighting in Ukraine.

The Admiral Gorshkov frigate of the Northern Fleet in the White Sea launched the Zircon cruise missile in the Barents Sea, successfully hitting a practice target in the White Sea about 1,000 kilometers away, according to Russia’s Defense Ministry.

The launch was the latest in a series of tests of Zircon, which is set to enter service later this year, according to Russian sources.

Zircon is intended to arm Russian cruisers, frigates and submarines and could be used against both enemy ships and ground targets. It is one of several hypersonic missiles under development in Russia.

Russian officials have boasted about Zircon’s capability, claiming that it’s impossible to intercept with existing anti-missile systems.

Earlier, in 2018, a demonstration of the ‘Avangard’ hypersonic missile proved successful, according to the Russian Defence Ministry.

After separating from its carrier in the stratosphere, the HGV maneuvered 6000 kilometers across Siberia at a searing Mach 27, according to Russian officials, then hit a target on the Kamchatka Peninsula.

Russian President Vladimir Putin called Avangard “the perfect New Year’s gift for the country.” Russia’s Defence Ministry claimed that it has put the nuclear-armed HGV into combat duty in 2020, allowing Putin to claimthat Russia was the first country armed with functional hypersonic weapons.

All the Nations Will Be Destroyed: Revelation 16

Vladimir Putin

Putin’s ‘brandishing of nuclear sword’ to backfire as ‘Russia will also be destroyed’

VLADIMIR Putin will not launch a nuclear missile as if it does Russia itself would risk being wiped off the map, a military expert has said.

Russia’s ‘brandishing of nuclear sword’ discussed by expert

Mark Voyger, Senior Fellow of the Centre of European Analysis, has dismissed Vladimir Putin’s nuclear threats as “unthinkable” as Russia would also disappear from the map if it were to execute its threat. Putin has reportedly told Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko the Kremlin will hand over nuclear-capable missile systems to Belarus in the coming months. Putin’s latest announcement follows a series of veiled nuclear threats against the West and Ukrainein its more than 100-day war against its neighbour.

Mr Voyger argues Russia is again bluffing and attempting to intimidate.

When asked about the potential for Russian response to the Kaliningrad blockade, Mr Voyger said: “For as long as the Russian army, especially the majority of the ground forces, are bogged down in Ukraine with no easy end, with no easy victory, they won’t. They won’t be able to.

“I don’t think Russia can take any offensive action at least in terms of land warfare. You know, they keep talking about brandishing the nuclear sword. But you know, global nuclear war is not the purpose of this regime, what they want. They will also be destroyed like anybody else. So, that’s out of the question.”

On the type of response he would expect, he said: “I would expect some hybrid actions, maybe pressure of course along the borders, maybe subversive moves, cyber pressure, potentially the threat of tactical nukes.

“That’s the most probable in terms of military action Russia would use. But they’re not in a position to fight NATO, especially with an additional 300,000 troops on the eastern flank. That’s unthinkable.”

According to a Kremlin readout, Putin told Lukashensko the short-range ballistic missiles systems with a range of up to 310 miles “can use both ballistic and cruise missiles, both in conventional and nuclear versions.”

Some military analysts fear the humiliation for Putin will lead Russia to deploy chemical or nuclear weapons. As a result, several world leaders have suggested offering him a way out such as giving up parts of Ukraine’s territory.

However, CIA Director William Burns told the US Congress that has not seen any “practical evidence” suggesting Putin is preparing nuclear weapons for immediate use.

Vladimir Putin

In early June, Putin announced Russia will deploy the nuclear-capable missile RS-28, also known as Satan II, by the end of this year in case of a “threat” to Russia’s “sovereignty.”

Former chief Treasury Secretary David Mellor branded Putin as a “madman”, linking his deteriorating sanity to repeated nuclear threats.

“If he really is dying of various diseases that have lined up to get him, would he like to take the rest of us with him?” he asked.

Vladimir Putin
Macron in embarrassing slip-up as secret conversation with Biden caught on mic
Putin taunts West with chilling threat as it publishes coordinates of the Pentagon

In a Kremlin meeting on Tuesday, President Putin said: “Successful test of the Sarmat heavy intercontinental ballistic missile has been carried out. It is planned that the first such complex will be on combat duty by the end of the year,” according to Russian state-owned publication RIA Novosti.

Upon announcing its deployment, Putin added: “This truly unique weapon will strengthen the combat potential of our armed forces, reliably ensure Russia’s security from external threats and provide food for thought for those who, in the heat of frenzied aggressive rhetoric, try to threaten our country.”

The world is preparing for the Bowls of Wrath: Revelation 16

The world is spending more and more on nuclear weapons

Helen Hernandez2 weeks ago

(Washington) Spending by nuclear powers to modernize their atomic arsenals rose nearly 9% in 2021 to $82.4 billion, according to a report by the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN). 

Posted at 7:45 a.m.

The United States alone spent $44.2 billion on its nuclear program last year, 12.7% more than the previous year, and China spent $11.7 billion (+10 .4%), according to this report published on Tuesday. 

The budgets devoted by Russia (8.6 billion), France (5.9 billion) and the United Kingdom (6.8 billion) to nuclear weapons have increased slightly, adds the ICAN, which won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2017 for having worked tirelessly for the treaty banning nuclear weapons, which was ratified by 59 countries but none of the nuclear powers.

Pakistan spent 1.1 billion dollars on its nuclear armament, against 1 billion the previous year, while India reduced its expenditure in this sector to 2.3 billion (against 2.5 in 2020), according to The report. 

Israel, which has never officially acknowledged having the nuclear bomb, has allocated 1.2 billion to it, as the previous year, according to the ICAN which estimates the budget that North Korea has allocated in 2021 at 642 million dollars. to its nuclear program compared to 700 million in 2020. 

Taxpayer money allowed new contracts to be awarded to private companies (30.2 billion in total) to modernize the nuclear arsenals of the great powers, and these private companies in turn bought the services of centers of reflection and pressure groups to defend the usefulness of nuclear weapons, adds the NGO, which denounces a pronuclear vicious circle. 

“This report shows that nuclear weapons are useless,” commented Alicia Sanders-Zakre, research coordinator at ICAN. “Nuclear-armed countries spent $6.5 billion more in 2021 and they weren’t able to stop a nuclear power from starting a war in Europe,” she said. reference to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. 

“This is why we need multilateral nuclear disarmament more than ever,” she added. 

Source link

Russia Horn’s latest nuclear threats ‘irresponsible’

Pentagon: Russia’s latest nuclear threats ‘irresponsible’

Russian President Vladimir Putin’s weekend pledge to transfer nuclear-capable missile systems to Belarus is being viewed by U.S. officials as “cavalier” and “irresponsible” language, a senior U.S. defense official said Monday. 

“Certainly, any time anybody uses the word nuclear you have concerns. Quite honestly it seems pretty irresponsible of a national leader to talk about the employment of nuclear weapons and to do so in a generally cavalier fashion,” the defense official told reporters in an on-background briefing.  

Putin on Saturday told Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko that the Kremlin will transfer Russian-made Iskander-M missile systems to Belarus “in the next few months.” 

The mobile, short-range ballistic missile systems with a range of up to 310 miles “can use both ballistic and cruise missiles, both in conventional and nuclear versions,” the Russian leader told Lukashenko at a meeting in St. Petersburg, according to a readout from Moscow.

The U.S. defense official said Washington takes such threatening language seriously and has “from the very beginning” of Russia’s attack on Ukraine on Feb. 24.  

“The way that statement read from Putin was, ‘Hey we’re going to give them Iskanders, and oh, by the way, they can hold nuclear weapons.’ And everybody takes that very seriously when you use that language,” the official said.  

“Our strategic forces are always monitoring things in that regard,” they added. 

Putin has frequently made veiled nuclear threats against Ukraine and the West in its more than four-month war against its neighbor.   

At the very start of the Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, Putin ordered his country’s deterrence forces, including nuclear weapons, be put on higher alert, citing so-called threats from the West. 

He has also flouted Moscow’s nuclear might, warning that other countries which seem to interfere with Russian actions will face “consequences you have never seen.”

India Pressures the Pakistani Nuclear Horn:Daniel 7

An advanced sea-to-sea variant of the BrahMos Supersonic Cruise missile is test-fired from the Visakhapatnam, an Indian navy ship, Jan. 11, 2022. [Photo courtesy Defense Research and Development Organization @DRDO_India via Twitter]

Indian Nuclear Missile Proliferation: Effect On South Asian Strategic Stability – OpEd

June 27, 2022

An advanced sea-to-sea variant of the BrahMos Supersonic Cruise missile is test-fired from the Visakhapatnam, an Indian navy ship, Jan. 11, 2022. [Photo courtesy Defense Research and Development Organization @DRDO_India via Twitter]

An advanced sea-to-sea variant of the BrahMos Supersonic Cruise missile is test-fired from the Visakhapatnam, an Indian navy ship, Jan. 11, 2022. [Photo courtesy Defense Research and Development Organization @DRDO_India via Twitter]

The nuclear capability of Pakistan is purely security based and depends upon the changing technological developments in the region. Pakistan maintains a posture of credible minimum deterrence and ensures strategic stability in the region. However, India continually pushes Pakistan towards arms race, by the development and induction of new aggressive technology, and incorporation of offensive doctrines. 

The proliferation of supersonic and hypersonic weapons, which is echoing in South Asia, could be disastrous for the regional peace and stability. Ever since the mass nuclear power has been invented, the deterrence stability in the region is maintained by keeping the mutual vulnerability intact, which India tries its best to sabotage. The introduction of supersonic and hypersonic weapons could be devastating as it travels with immensely high speed, and the enemy can’t be certain whether it is carrying conventional or non-conventional weapon, hence the chances and risks of nuclear war manifolds. 

Recently, Atul Rane, CEO and MD, BrahMos Aerospace said that in five to six years, India will be able to have the first hypersonic missile. Moreover, India has also tested the Supersonic missile assisted torpedo (SMART), which indicates the continuous modernization of its technology. Owing to the volatile situation in south Asia, with the absence of any conflict resolution treaties and agreements, the innovation in technology in South Asia leads to the change in the nuclear doctrines a swell. Pakistan maintains a policy of minimum credible deterrence, but that minimum is directly proportional to the advancements made by the adversary in offensive technology and ultimately in the nuclear doctrine. 

The Indian posture of NFU is also questionable, as the statements from the defence minister of India comes otherwise. The recent development indicates India’s move towards a counterforce targeting, which is a highly destabilizing factor for south Asia. The Indian military modernization is far exceeding the ‘minimum’ in minimum credible deterrence, and there is no reasonable justification of credible and minimum in the recent developments. Such doctrines only exist when a country prepares for the offensive first strike targeting and pre-emption strikes, hence leading to a full scale war. 

The recent BrahMos Misfire incident into the Pakistan territory indicates the weak command and control structure of India. This is signaling as it indicates India’s poor handling of such sensitive technology. This irresponsible behavior of India needs to be changed as it could result in disastrous consequences. Pakistan has always made efforts for restoring regional peace and stability, which India has always tried to destabilize due to its immature ruling authority. The political elite has always used the aggressive war-prone card against Pakistan in front of public for their political gains, without realizing the repercussions, which shows the ill-mindset of India’s ruling power. Moreover, the world has seen numerous instances of Uranium theft in India, which indicates weak safety and security protocols and weak Command and Control structure in India to handle such precarious technology. 

The Indian obsession of acquisition of newer technology could result in the accidental or inadvertent war in South Asia, provided its unproven capability to manage it and war-prone behavior. This shows India being an irresponsible nuclear weapon state and the international community should look into this child state that is incompetent to take-up with nuclear and nuclear-related technology and delivery vehicles, and is thus a threat to the regional and global peace and security.

India doesn’t have any security concern for which it is going for the acquisition of hypersonic weapons or change in doctrine. It doesn’t have any potent threat from the neighboring countries to go for such ventures; hence, the drive is totally out of the prestige factor, as India wants to come at par with US, Russia and China in leading world technologies, without realizing the effect of such technologies on the regional stability. India needs to withdraw its hegemonic ambitions if the stability and regional peace is required or if the arms race needs to be withheld. As a responsible nuclear weapon state, Pakistan always maintains a modest nuclear posture, and any military development is the part of strategic chain in the south Asia, and or because of its allies.

Russia Threatens the European Horns

Putin Lukashenko
Russian President Vladimir Putin attends a meeting with his Belarusian counterpart Alexander Lukashenko in St Petersburg on Saturday [Maxim Blinov/Kremlin via Reuters]

Russia to send Belarus nuclear-capable missiles within months

Putin has several times referred to nuclear weapons since his country invaded Ukraine on February 24 in what the West has seen as a warning not to intervene.

Russia will supply Belarus with missiles capable of carrying nuclear warheads after the president complained about nuclear-armed NATO flights coming close to the Belarusian border.

President Vladimir Putin made the announcement on Saturday as he received Belarusian leader Alexander Lukashenko in Moscow.

“In the coming months, we will transfer to Belarus Iskander-M tactical missile systems, which can use ballistic or cruise missiles, in their conventional and nuclear versions,” Putin said in a broadcast on Russian television at the start of his meeting with Lukashenko in St Petersburg.

At the meeting, Lukashenko expressed concern about the “aggressive”, “confrontational”, and “repulsive” policies of Belarus’s neighbours Lithuania and Poland.

He asked Putin to help his country mount a “symmetrical response” to what he said were nuclear-armed flights by the US-led NATO alliance near Belarus’s borders.

Putin offered to upgrade Belarusian warplanes to make them capable of carrying nuclear weapons amid soaring tensions with the West over Ukraine.

Last month, Lukashenko said his country had bought Iskander nuclear-capable missiles and S-400 anti-aircraft anti-missile systems from Russia.

“Many Su-25 [aircraft] are in service with the Belarusian military. They could be upgraded in an appropriate way,” Putin said.

“This modernisation should be carried out in aircraft factories in Russia and the training of personnel should start in accordance with this. We will agree on how to accomplish this.”

South Korea Must Nuke Up: Daniel

A missile is fired.
A missile is fired.

South Korea Stares Into the Nuclear Abyss

June 23, 2022, 4:00 PM

Welcome back to Foreign Policy’s SitRep! Your two jetlagged hosts, Robbie and Jack, are here. Robbie is toasting cups of soju with South Korean journalists tonight (their time) while Jack is trying to turn back the clock to Eastern time after traveling around the world with U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin—and looking for basketball player Klay Thompson’s lost Golden State Warriors NBA championship hat at the bottom of the San Francisco Bay.

Alright, here’s what’s on tap for the day: South Korea is sitting in limbo for North Korea’s expected nuclear test, NATO is set to beef up its defense forces amid Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and U.S. President Joe Biden picks a half-dozen new ambassadors.

P.S. Check out Flash Points, a curated selection of our very best long reads, in your inbox every Wednesday and Sunday.

The Russian Nuclear Horn Threatens the UK: Daniel

Putin ‘getting madder by the moment’ as Russia threatens to destroy UK in missile strike

VLADIMIR Putin has been described as a “madman” by former chief Treasury Secretary David Mellor as the Kremlin leader has made increased threats of nuclear attack against Europe.

By Leia Paxton

 06:58, Thu, Jun 23, 2022 | UPDATED: 06:59, Thu, Jun 23, 2022

Putin is getting ‘madder by the moment’ says David Mellor

The Russian President was branded a “madman” by former Conservative MP David Mellor. Mr Mellor, who served as chief secretary to the Treasury under former Prime Minister John Major, suggested Vladimir Putinhad been corrupted by his own desire for “absolute power.” His analysis comes as the Kremlin has renewed threats of nuclear strikesagainst international allies of Ukraine, including the UK among other European nations. Increased anxiety has been felt among military analysts as President Putin’s war in Ukraine rages on and Moscow’s threats of aggression against global nations continue to grow more severe.

“I think he really is a mad man and getting madder by the moment. 

“Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

“If you ever want a good example of that, step forward Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin.”

Putin
David Mellor

The former politician suggested President Putin’s sanity had rapidly deteriorated as the Kremlin leader has aimed to expand his power by capturing Ukraine.

Mr Mellor also claimed that the Russian President’s renewed focus on nuclear threats could be linked to reports that Putin’s physical health is in serious decline.

He said: “If he really is dying of various diseases that have lined up to get him, would he like to take the rest of us with him?”

As explained by Mr Mellor, the only real defence against a nuclear attack from Russia is the promise of mutually assured destruction, meaning the UK would launch a nuclear counterattack on Moscow.

Putin
Russia

In the event of a nuclear launch, the defence of mutually assured destruction would effectively eradicate civilisation as we know it, creating a devastating loss on a global scale.

Mr Mellor suggested President Putin’s bold discussion of nuclear weapons is a signal of the Russian leader’s ill-health as he is acting with little consideration for his own wellbeing.

Analysts have suggested that Vladimir Putin could be suffering from some form of terminal health condition, evidenced by several symptoms observed during his recent public appearances.

President Putin has appeared pale and unbalanced, even shown to be walking with a limp during some official events, fuelling rumours that his physical health is not as strong as the Kremlin suggests it to be.