Thursday, November 20, 2008

Depressing News

With all of the talk regarding the bailout, the newly elected president, and other economic issues, it’s easy to ignore the long term global destabilization that is likely to bring about increased terrorism and even increase the chance of nuclear weapons being used. I think the fact that Europe and Asia followed in the US economy’s downturn, reinforces how interconnected the world has become. The “smaller” world we inhabit really increases the scariness of existential threats brought about by rouge states with high tech weapons. US intelligence sources revealed today, that nuclear warfare is becoming increasingly likely in the future. The world seems headed down a path that will include more nuclear weapons by rogue states, population increases in the poorest parts of the world, climate shifts brought about by global warming, and terrible food shortages. (Just the highlights from a long list of depressing future possibilities.) Maybe, the nightly news isn’t so depressing after all.


Nuclear weapons use more likely in future: US intelligence

WASHINGTON (AFP) – The use of nuclear weapons will grow increasingly likely by 2025, US intelligence predicted Thursday in a report on global trends that forecasts a tense, unstable world shadowed by war.
"The world of the near future will be subject to an increased likelihood of conflict over scarce resources, including food and water, and will be haunted by the persistence of rogue states and terrorist groups with greater access to nuclear weapons," said the report.
"Widening gaps in birth rates and wealth-to-poverty ratios, and the uneven impact of climate change, could further exacerbate tensions," it concludes.
Called "Global Trends 2025 - a Transformed World," the 121-page report was produced by the National Intelligence Council, a body of analysts from across the US intelligence community.
It has good news for some countries. Among its conclusions:
-- A technology to replace oil may be underway or in place by 2025;
-- Multiple financial centers will serve as "shock absorbers" of the world financial system;
-- Global power will be multipolar with the rise of India and China, and the Korean peninsula will be unified in some form.
But the report also says some African and South Asian states may wither away altogether, organized crime could take over at least one state in central Europe; and the spread of nuclear weapons will heighten the risk they will be used.
"The likelihood that nuclear weapons will be used will increase with expanded access to technology and a widening range of options for limited strikes," it said.
The report highlighted the risk of a nuclear arms race in the Middle East where a number of countries are thinking about developing or acquiring technologies that would be useful to make nuclear weapons.
"Over the next 15-20 years, reactions to the decisions Iran makes about its nuclear program could cause a number of regional states to intensify these efforts and consider actively pursuing nuclear weapons," the report said.
"This will add a new and more dangerous dimension to what is likely to be increasing competition for influence within the region," it said.
The report said it was not certain that the kind of deterrent relationships that existed for most of the Cold War would emerge in a nuclear armed Middle East.
Instead, the possession of nuclear weapons may be perceived as "making it safe" to engage in low intensity conflicts, terrorism or even larger conventional attacks, the report said.
"Each such incident between nuclear-armed states, however, would hold the potential for nuclear escalation," it said.
The spread of nuclear capabilities will raise questions about the ability of weak states to safeguard them, it said.
"If the number of nuclear-capable states increases, so will the number of countries potentially willing to provide nuclear assistance to other countries or to terrorists," it said.
"The potential for theft or diversion of nuclear weapons, materials, and technology -- and the potential for unauthorized nuclear use -- also would rise," it said.
The report said terrorism would likely be a factor in 2025 but suggested that Al-Qaeda's "terrorist wave" might be breaking up.
"Al-Qaeda's weaknesses -- unachievable strategic objectives, inability to attract broad-based support, and self-destructive actions -- might cause it to decay sooner than many people think," it said.
"Because history suggests that the global Islamic terrorist movement will outlast Al-Qaeda as a group, strategic counterterrorism efforts will need to focus on how and why a successor terrorist group might evolve during the remaining years of the 'Islamic terrorist wave.'"
The report was vague about the outcome of current conflicts in Iraq, Afghanistan and nuclear armed Pakistan.
In 2025, the government in Baghdad could still be "an object of competition" among various factions seeking foreign aid or pride of place.
Afghanistan "may still evince significant patterns of tribal competition and conflict."
"The future of Pakistan is a wildcard in considering the trajectory of neighboring Afghanistan," it said.
(http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20081120/pl_afp/usintelligenceforecastnuclear;_ylt=AmK2SdXCiSatOVZt9f0wrp6s0NUE)

1 comment:

Jason Bade said...

The logic of zero nuclear weapons must be embraced by every country in the world.

Currently, 95% of the world's nuclear weapons are in the hands of Russia and the United States. But the vast majority of these is totally unnecessary. Countries possess nuclear weapons to deter others from attacking them. Only the foolhardy would launch a preemptive nuclear attack.

The problem with the some 25,000 nuclear weapons being spread around the world is that the security of one of them will inevitably be compromised, and a terrorist will suddenly be the proud owner of a warhead. That terrorist could care less if the country he attacks has nukes; he likely has no goals of self-preservation.

If the nuclear states consider the most dire threats facing themselves, that of terrorism will almost certainly trump that of nuclear attack by a rouge state. It is thus in all of our best interest to pursue a course that will lead us to zero nuclear weapons worldwide.

This will not only grant us better bargaining power with the non-NPT-signatory-nuclear states (those we fear going rouge in the first place) by eliminating the double standard to which we hold them, but it will inspire others to let down their excessive guard, as well.

With nuclear weapons existing period, it is not a question of if one will get used but when.