Arctic Daily

Nuclear war risk high

Norman et al, 1-13, 25, By Laurence NormanFollow , Daniel KissFollow , Ming LiFollow  and Peter SaidelFollow, Wall Street Journal, The Bomb Is Back as the Risk of Nuclear War Enters a New Age

Fears of nuclear conflict are growing again as arsenals expand, alliances shift and treaties dissolve At the end of the Cold War, global powers reached the consensus that the world would be better off with fewer nuclear weapons. That era is now over. Treaties are collapsing, some nuclear powers are strengthening their arsenals, the risk is growing that nuclear weapons will spread more widely and the use of tactical nuclear weapons to gain battlefield advantage is no longer unimaginable. The path to resurgent fears of nuclear war began in 1945, with the first nuclear test blast at the Trinity test site in New Mexico. When nations first acquired nuclear weapons 1945 N. Korea U.S. 2000 ’50 Soviet Union Pakistan U.K. ’90 ’60 ’80 Dissolution of Soviet Union‡ ’70 France China Israel* India South Africa† *Israel has never openly admitted to having nuclear weapons. †South Africa gave up its nuclear weapons in 1989. ‡Ukraine, Kazakhstan and Belarus turned over their nuclear weapons to Russia in the 1990s. Note: These dates correspond to a first test or, where there was no test, their first nuclear bomb. Source: Federation of American Scientists In 1963, during the throes of America’s Cold War rivalry with the Soviet Union, President John F. Kennedy described his fear of a nuclear age without guardrails, in which dozens of nations possess weapons of mass destruction—what he called the “greatest possible danger and hazard.” For decades, arms-control agreements, technological challenges and fears of mutually assured destruction kept such a doomsday on the distant horizon. As years passed, U.S. and Russian stockpiles of nuclear warheads grew, then shrank—while China, in recent years, began its ascent. Total number of warheads, 1966 The U.S. detonated its first atomic bomb in 1945. The Soviet Union followed in 1949, and the Cold War arms race was under way. Total number of warheads, 1986 Since the start of the Cold War, at least 16 countries have worked seriously on the development of a nuclear-weapons program. By the 1980s, tens of thousands of nuclear warheads had been built. Total number of warheads, 2023 Ten of these countries have joined the ranks of nuclear powers; only South Africa has left the group. Note: Data as of 2023 Source: Our World in Data The global stockpile reached a peak in the mid-1980s, and has since been significantly reduced. In the first Start treaty, signed in 1991, the U.S. and Soviet Union agreed to cap the number of their warheads. But one of the two critical nuclear-arms-control pacts between Russia and the U.S., the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, has collapsed. The New Start treaty, which placed even tighter limits on the number of deployed warheads on each side and the missiles and bombers that carry them, expires early next year. Estimated nuclear-warhead stockpiles U.S. Soviet Union/Russia 1968 1987 ​ ​ Intermediate–Range Nuclear Forces Treaty 1991 1972 1979 Non–proliferation Treaty ​ ​ ​ START I SALT I ​ SALT II ​ 45 thousand 40 1993 2002 2010 35 START II ​ SORT ​ New START 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 1950 ’55 ’60 ’65 ’70 ’75 ’80 ’85 ’90 ’95 2000 ’05 ’10 ’15 ’20 ’24 Source: Federation of American Scientists Senior officials in Washington now say the U.S. needs to be prepared to expand its nuclear force to deter growing threats from Russia and China—raising the potential of a new arms race. China’s growing stockpile of nuclear weapons is expected to triple by 2035, according to some estimates. U.S. estimates for Chinese nuclear-weapons stockpiles 1,600 1,400 DOD estimates 1,200 1,000 800 600 400 DIA* 200 FAS estimates 0 1990 ’95 2000 ’05 ’30 ’35 ’10 ’15 ’20 ’25 *Defense Intelligence Agency Sources: Federation of American Scientists; U.S. Department of Defense (DOD estimates for 2030 and 2035) The latest estimates indicate that China has about 600 intercontinental ballistic missiles in its arsenal, all of which can reach the U.S. mainland, according to a Pentagon assessment of China’s military released in December. Beijing has rejected past proposals that it meet with the U.S. and Russia to negotiate formal limits on nuclear forces. Advertisement Estimated Chinese nuclear forces by ballistic-missile type Warheads Launchers Land-based SEA-BASED Air-based 2020 2030 2020 2030 2020 2030 456 344 264 204 144 96 48 30 20 48 20 20 Note: Estimates as of 2020. Source: Federation of American Scientists The leading nuclear powers have intercontinental nuclear weapons. The U.S., Russia and China are all triad nuclear powers—meaning they can deliver nuclear weapons from land, sea and air, allowing them to launch an attack on any of their potential foes. The images below cover only currently deployed, land-based weapons. The Earth’s circumference is roughly 24,900 miles. The world within range: land-based missiles The U.S.’s longest-range nuclear weapon, Minuteman III, can travel around 8,050 miles. The range of Russia’s SS-18 missile is believed to be around 6,835 miles. The longest-range Chinese nuclear weapon, the DF-5, reaches around 8,077 miles. North Korea’s Hwasong-14 missile can deliver nuclear weapons that reach 6,213 miles, far enough to hit the U.S. Sources: Center for Strategic and International Studies, William Alberque of the International Institute for Strategic Studies. While the U.S. and Russia whittled down their stockpiles, concerns have risen about the use of tactical nuclear weapons. These are weapons with shorter ranges and smaller yields, which could make a big difference on the battlefield in an otherwise conventional war without sparking a wider nuclear conflict. Moscow has hinted that it might use nuclear weapons in Ukraine and introduced a doctrine in November that made the grounds for potentially using them broader and more explicit. Western powers feared Russia might decide to use tactical weapons in the conflict if it found itself on the defensive. Estimated tactical or nonstrategic warheads arsenal Russia 1,558 U.S. 230 Sources: Federation of American Scientists (Russia); Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation (U.S.) Advertisement Efforts to contain nuclear threats have centered on the 1970 Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, or NPT, which now has 191 signatories that have pledged never to acquire nuclear weapons or, for those that have them, pursue disarmament. But three nuclear-weapon states never accepted the NPT, and North Korea officially withdrew from the treaty in 2003. Iran, while a party to the treaty, could be months away from building a nuclear weapon; Saudi Arabia has said it would follow suit if that happens. The NPT gives the United Nations atomic agency only limited powers to prevent that. Iran is on the cusp of developing weapons if it chooses to, according to some officials and experts. They say it would be capable of producing a crude nuclear device in a matter of months. If Iran goes nuclear, Saudi Arabia has said it would follow. Turkey has said it could develop nuclear weapons in what some fear could become an arms race across the Middle East. The U.S. has accused Moscow, which has a growing military partnership with North Korea, of flouting United Nations sanctions imposed on Pyongyang over its nuclear and missile programs. Some officials in South Korea have argued that the country should obtain nuclear weapons in response to threats from across the border. Source: Atomic Archive President Kennedy’s warning of the perils of a global arms race was an argument for a continued effort to limit arsenals through treaties. While those treaties, especially the NPT, have bound many nations into staying away from nuclear weapons, those commitments could be tested in a world of serious global tensions and the weakening of traditional alliances.

Investment in Greenland boxes out Russia and China, secures REMS and other natural resources

Ashley Fields, 1/12, 25, https://thehill.com/policy/international/5081040-stavridis-says-trumps-plan-for-greenland-not-a-crazy-idea/, The Hill, Stavridis says Trump’s plan for Greenland ‘not a crazy idea’

James Stavridis, former NATO supreme allied commander, said he doesn’t think President-elect Trump’s comments about Greenland are “crazy.” “It’s not a crazy idea. … We could do an awful lot in terms of business, investment, box out the Russians, box out the Chinese, and work very closely with Greenland,” he told radio host John Catsimatidis in a Sunday interview on “The Cats Roundtable” on WABC 770 AM.   Stavridis said he thinks Greenland is a “strategic goldmine for the United States,” expressing support for Trump’s idea. “It sits at the very top of the North Atlantic. It protects approaches to our own country. … It’s geographically very important. It’s full of strategic minerals, rare earth, probably a lot of gold. It’s got a lot of natural resources,” he said earlier in the interview. “It doesn’t have to become the 51st state, but it can certainly be an economic objective for us,” he added. “I think that’s how it plays out. … The prime minister of Greenland said, ‘We are not for sale. But we are open for business.’ I think we ought to take him at his word.” The Hill’s Headlines – January 12, 2025 Trump last week expressed his ambitions for the U.S. to acquire Greenland, the world’s largest island. Greenlandic Prime Minister Múte Egede said Friday that “Greenland is for the Greenlandic people. We do not want to be Danish, we do not want to be American. We want to be Greenlandic.” Egede also said that he is “ready” to talk with Trump.