Apr 14, 2014 03:00 am | Harvey M. Sapolsky, Christine M. Leah
America’s
policy of opposing the proliferation of nuclear weapons needs to be
more nuanced. What works for the United States in the Middle East may
not in Asia. We do not want Iran or Saudi Arabia to get the bomb, but
why not Australia, Japan, and South Korea? We are opposed to nuclear
weapons because they are the great military equalizer, because some
countries may let them slip into the hands of terrorists, and because we
have significant advantage in precision conventional weapons. But our
opposition to nuclear weapons in Asia means we are committed to a costly and risky conventional arms race with China over our ability to protect allies and partners lying nearer to China than to us and spread over a vast maritime theater.None of our allies in Asia possess nuclear weapons. Instead, they are protected by what is called extended deterrence, our vaguely stated promise to use nuclear weapons in their defense if they are threatened by regional nuclear powers, China, North Korea and Russia. We promise, in essence, to trade Los Angeles for Tokyo, Washington for Canberra, and Seattle for Seoul, as preposterous as that might seem.
read morehttp://server1.nationalinterest.org/commentary/let-asia-go-nuclear-10238
No comments:
Post a Comment