Over the last few years, the sense that world events are accelerating in a way that is increasingly difficult to keep up with has become tangible. At talks I often ask my audiences the same question. ‘Have you experienced a sense of acceleration in world events in recent years? That […]
Is 2019 going to be the year of the Armageddon? The answer is a definitive ‘No’. As 2018 ended, the potential for war was looming and Russian President Vladimir Putin even refused to rule out a nuclear war. But then, the statesmen grappling with international security also know that nukes […]
The US is increasingly being squeezed out of the real Afghan peace process streamlined by the Golden Ring of multipolar Great Powers and led by the Russian-Chinese-Pakistani Trilateral, hence Khalilzad’s desperate attempt to make it seem like America still matters.
Basically, the “designer baby” industry could easily lead to “superhuman cyborgs” and a bioweapons arms race that might altogether frighteningly wipe out large amounts of the global population and fundamentally alter what it means to be human.
While the European country insincerely pretends to be a “democracy”, the East Asian one makes no such pretenses and is proud of having a different organizational model, which should be doubly disturbing for any British citizen because it means that their “democratically elected government” is actually less forthcoming about its nationwide surveillance strategy than comparatively more centralized China’s is.
It’ll remain to be seen whether the questions surrounding China’s “social credit” system are answered in the coming future, but what’s known for sure is that the world’s largest country is entering an unprecedented era of “algorithmic governance”.
The real situation in the world today shows that there are too many doctrinal and military-technical obstacles preventing the complete and irreversible elimination of all nuclear weapons. There has also been no noticeable increase in the level of trust between nuclear-armed states, which all have different views on nuclear arms control and the doctrinal basis for their actual use.
Having announced the country’s unilateral withdrawal from the INF Treaty, Donald Trump’s administration is planning to enmesh both Europe and Asia in the new intermediate-range and shorter-range nuclear missiles that Washington decided to create a long time ago. Many countries around the world understand this perfectly.
Russia’s plan to construct a robot-built moon base is more sensible of an investment than it might initially seem to those who hadn’t thought it through, though the country first has to prove that it has the technology to pull off this feat before it becomes something that the rest of the world can take seriously.
It’s unclear at this moment whether that ancillary strategy will succeed with either of them, but it nevertheless can’t be discounted that it was part of the US’ motivation in granting them waivers. By temporarily withholding the full brunt of its sanctions, the US is giving Iran a few more months to consider whether its independent foreign policy is really worth the impending costs.
Unfortunately, Heiko Maas’ plan to strengthen arms control is poorly thought out and does not take adequate account of the true state of affairs in this area. His proposal puts the diametrically opposed military and political policies of the United States and Russia on an equal footing internationally and is also unbalanced with regard to China.
The Trump administration seems to have decided to use the current international security environment to its own economic advantage and kill two birds with one stone. After all, military escalation and a new arms race both provide powerful leverage over opponents and are an effective way to attract financial flows.