Russia has been violating the Intermediate Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty, but the United States won’t say exactly what the violation is. The INF Treaty prohibits intermediate-range missiles with nuclear warheads. Back in the 1980s, both the US and Russia had such missiles aimed at each other in Europe. The problem with missiles like this is that there is no warning time whatsoever, and thus a heavy motive to strike the other party first. James Action suggests a strategy for getting the treaty back on track. Top photo from here: Soviet inspectors and their American escorts standing among dismantled Pershing II missiles in Colorado as other missile components are destroyed nearby under the INF Treaty, January 1989. Read More
There is a lot going on in the world beyond the United States. The problems that Donald Trump is inflicting on the country are severe, but we need to continue to be aware of the rest of the world. Read More
If Assad has been hiding chemical weapons, we need to know. By the chief inspector for the 2014 removal of chemical weapons from Syria. Unfortunately, Russia is protecting Assad and is unlikely to agree. And yes, it’s likely Assad has been hiding nerve agents. Photo from that link. What can forensics tell us about the attacks? Read More
On the Donald Trump presidency and its effect on America: Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie says we need to speak clearly about the dangers. Similarly, Vann R. Newkirk II says we must confront racism.
Evan McMullin ran for president as an independent. Now, on Twitter and in the New York Times, he is warning about Trump’s autocratic tendencies.
The president alone can order a nuclear strike. Alex Wellerstein summarizes the procedure.
The Heritage Foundation recommends that Donald Trump withdraw from all nuclear treaties as president. Steven Pifer tells us why that’s a bad idea.
Meanwhile, in Russia. Putin and pseudoscience.
Fascinating long read on an Estonian dialect spoken in Latvia and the people who have researched it.
Issues in South Asia for the next president. (photo from here)
More links to what I consider good commentary on the election.
Mourning Trump and the America we could have been. I would say we still can be, but it will take a lot more work than I anticipated.
What now? What may happen and suggestions for our responses.
What Europe needs to hear from Trump. I have this schizophrenic feeling, between two worlds, when I read something like this that assumes (because it must in order to make its own kind of sense) that Trump is a normal candidate, will be a normal president. He has nothing prepared that can respond to these very reasonable and normal expectations.
What Vladimir Putin wants to hear from Trump. Charles Pierce says that we should be hearing about Trump’s Russian connections, but of course we know we won’t. Crazy idea: If something truly disqualifying about them were found before the Electoral College meets on December 19, they could vote Trump out. I tweeted links to what I collected on those connections this morning. Haven’t seen much new since I collected most of it in July.
A view from India: The end of America’s soft power?
An open letter to my former colleagues in the US government’s civil, foreign, intelligence, and military services. By Richard Nephew, one of the negotiators of the Iran nuclear deal.
Attention Donald Trump: Strategic reasons for publicizing military offensives.
Estonia trains citizens for insurgency operations in case Russia decides to invade. The tactics recall those of the Forest Brothers who resisted both the Nazis and the Soviets. Photo from this article; I love seeing Estonia’s forests and countryside, hate seeing the idea of war there. Read More
Benjamin Wittes: “But this election is a different kettle of fish, one that pits a normal candidate—that is, a woman with flaws, virtues and policy ideas—against a man who menaces American democracy.” This is the sense I’ve had every time someone wants to talk about policy in the election. I love a good policy discussion as much as anyone, but that’s not the point in this election. Read More
Pakistan and India are glaring and occasionally shooting at each other again. Since both have nuclear weapons and no warning time at all to decide what it is the other has in that missile, this is a particularly dangerous situation. Here’s a good idea: Russia and China, which have good relations with the two, should press for a peaceful accommodation and better ways for India and Pakistan to relate to each other. Vladimir Putin seems to want to be seen as a peacemaker. He’s blown that in Syria. India and Pakistan present a real opportunity. Read More
India was denied membership in the Nuclear Suppliers’ Group, but made it into a similar group on missile technology. Here’s one Indian reaction with suggestions that, if taken up, are likely to be counterproductive. Increasing plutonium production is hardly a sign of serious commitment to nonproliferation. Read More