The horror and promise of Trump's nuclear policy
However alarming you may find the short-term prospect of President Trump's withdrawal from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, there is a great opportunity here for diplomacy
A free daily email with the biggest news stories of the day – and the best features from TheWeek.com
You are now subscribed
Your newsletter sign-up was successful
President Trump announced Friday that the United States will withdraw from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, citing Russia's noncompliance with the decades-old agreement. This was, among the other things, the greatest escalation of hostilities with Russia by an American president in more than 30 years, perhaps even the most significant since the Cuban Missile Crisis.
If nothing else this decision puts paid to the lunatic fiction that Trump is in any conceivable manner serving the interests of Russia. Meanwhile we are faced with the revolting spectacle of defense executives licking their lips at the thought of profiting from the construction of weapons capable of killing a million people more or less instantaneously.
Still, it is possible to be of two minds about the administration's decision to withdraw from the agreement. The 31-year-old INF is not without its problems. For one thing, its language was outdated. For more than a decade, Putin's Russia has been able to comply with the letter but not the spirit of the treaty by building large numbers of weapons that, while perhaps not technically restricted by the text of the document, are certainly the sort of thing whose construction it had been meant to impede — forever. This is to say nothing of the fact that China, a much greater threat to American security than Russia will ever hope to be again, is not a party to the agreement, limiting its effectiveness.
The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.
Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
This means that, however alarming we may find the short-term prospect of the collapse, there is a great opportunity here for diplomacy. The negotiation of a new wide-ranging arms control treaty, one that would bind not only the United States and her allies, Russia, and China, but perhaps Iran and North Korea as well, would be the greatest diplomatic triumph of our young century.
How optimistic should we be about the ability of Trump and his administration to bring together such an agreement? It is difficult to say. But I for one find it hard to imagine his secretary of state, Mike Pompeo, who has come up in the world of GOP foreign policy brinksmanship, being the man to do it, though I would be happy to be proven wrong.
Certain facts are worth facing at the outset. One is that no meaningful deal is likely to be reached that does not involve significant — perhaps even, for the United States, fatal — concessions to China's economics interests. The reign of globalized free trade is destroying us, materially and spiritually. What would a new Cold War do?
In the meantime, I cannot be the only person who feels a quiet sense of horror at the thought of the post-Cold War order collapsing as it were overnight. My mind is full of visions — skin sliding off human faces like a strip of bark, the bodies of children melting, babies turned to charcoal dust. But the truth is that we were never very far away from these possibilities. The peace of 1989 was a lie. Hundreds of millions of us could die an instant because we have created Satanic engines of destruction that cannot be employed in the service of any just cause and refused to destroy them forever.
A free daily email with the biggest news stories of the day – and the best features from TheWeek.com
This is why in the long-term total disarmament is the only solution. Nuclear war is impossible. Such a conflict could not be won. It would mean the end of civilization itself.
Now the task of saving us from this horrendous fate has fallen to a man who makes glib jokes about the size of his nuclear button. I for one will be praying.
Matthew Walther is a national correspondent at The Week. His work has also appeared in First Things, The Spectator of London, The Catholic Herald, National Review, and other publications. He is currently writing a biography of the Rev. Montague Summers. He is also a Robert Novak Journalism Fellow.
-
Buddhist monks’ US walk for peaceUnder the Radar Crowds have turned out on the roads from California to Washington and ‘millions are finding hope in their journey’
-
American universities are losing ground to their foreign counterpartsThe Explainer While Harvard is still near the top, other colleges have slipped
-
How to navigate dating apps to find ‘the one’The Week Recommends Put an end to endless swiping and make real romantic connections
-
Epstein files topple law CEO, roil UK governmentSpeed Read Peter Mandelson, Britain’s former ambassador to the US, is caught up in the scandal
-
Iran and US prepare to meet after skirmishesSpeed Read The incident comes amid heightened tensions in the Middle East
-
Israel retrieves final hostage’s body from GazaSpeed Read The 24-year-old police officer was killed during the initial Hamas attack
-
China’s Xi targets top general in growing purgeSpeed Read Zhang Youxia is being investigated over ‘grave violations’ of the law
-
Panama and Canada are negotiating over a crucial copper mineIn the Spotlight Panama is set to make a final decision on the mine this summer
-
Why Greenland’s natural resources are nearly impossible to mineThe Explainer The country’s natural landscape makes the task extremely difficult
-
Iran cuts internet as protests escalateSpeed Reada Government buildings across the country have been set on fire
-
US nabs ‘shadow’ tanker claimed by RussiaSpeed Read The ship was one of two vessels seized by the US military
