Saturday, March 06, 2010

On the Nuclear Front: The Threat of a Rogue America

In today's statement commemorating the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, President Obama discounted the threat of nuclear war:
Today, the threat of global nuclear war has passed, but the danger of nuclear proliferation endures, making the basic bargain of the NPT more important than ever: nations with nuclear weapons will move toward disarmament, nations without
nuclear weapons will forsake them, and all nations have an "inalienable right" to peaceful nuclear energy.
Sure, there isn't much danger of the U. S., Russia, and China will exchange nuclear attacks. So, Obama's right. The main threat on the nuclear front has changed.

But the danger doesn't lie in nuclear proliferation either.

What's really dangerous is the possibility of a rogue government gaining control in a country that already has nuclear arms and then using its nuclear weapons to threaten or attack its enemies.

And what government is most at risk of such a takeover--Pakistan, India, France?

No! It has to be the United States.

Pakistan may be unstable because "elements" of the Pakistani military and intelligence services are sympathetic to al-Qaeda.

However, the situation is worse in the United States because neo-conservatives have enormous disdain for the United Nations, international law, and anything else that might inhibit its ability to wage total war. Neo-conservatives also speculate openly about nuclear attacks on Iran and the speculation should be taken seriously because neo-cons seem to be aching to break the taboo on nuclear weapons just as they were aching to break the taboo on torture.

Conservative America--the world's most dangerous and unstable political force.

1 comment:

Todd Mayo said...

The most disturbing aspect of this is the single-mindedness of the far right as opposed to the constant fracturing and re-fracturing of the broad left regarding aims, strategy, tactics, programmatic demands, etc. It is happening right now.
One trend stakes out a left position on every issue, resists compromise, believes that the Democratic Party has no reform potential, pays no attention to right-wing extremism, and reduces President Obama to nothing but a puppet of Wall Street.
The other trend, so it appears anyway, argues that the 2008 elections reset the political terrain to the advantage of working people and their allies. I fall into that category.
But the real problem…check that, danger here would be crushing midterm losses because as long as the broad left is divided, the very united far-right will define the issues and continue to hijack the process.
This would lead to another situation where radical nationalists on the far right would influence policy…foreign policy. So, once again, a radical nationalist pseudo-populist, gang of thugs would have access to the United States’ massive nuclear arsenal. That’s a great big bowl of bad!
In 2008, a broad people's movement was instrumental in electing Barack Obama and a Democratic majority in Congress. Failure to reassemble this coalition would have disastrous results at home and abroad. Life is always more complicated than broad generalizations but for now, for our safety, for our survival as a democracy, a very broad left coalition is crucial.