• More Blogs
• Observations »
• Bering in Mind »
• Cross-check »
• Extinction Countdown »
• Solar at Home »
• Expeditions »
• Guest Blog »
• Anecdotes from the Archive »

If you thought the Cold War was over—that long nuclear standoff that shaped the last five decades of the 20th century—think again. Following his American counterpart, and perhaps prompted by new tensions over the war in Georgia and the agreement between the U.S. and Poland to deploy a missile defense system there, Russian president Dmitry Medvedev has announced plans to upgrade that country's "nuclear deterrent" by 2020.

It's part of a full upgrade for the Russian armed forces: more nuclear-powered subs, better bombs as well as their own "air and space defense network". "Star wars" has at last come to a galaxy not so far away.

The move prompted U.S. Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice to boast that the U.S. possesses an "extremely capable, robust, broad and indeed varied nuclear deterrent," according to an interview with Reuters. That no doubt includes not only the hit-or-miss missile defense effort but also plans to build new nuclear weapons and the industrial complex that develops and fabricates them.

At the same time, the U.S. has given its tacit approval to India's uninvited entry into the ever less exclusive nuclear weapons club; the Congress* approved a deal that would give India access to U.S. nuclear know-how for the first time since the Asian democracy exploded an atomic bomb in 1974.

The deal would neuter international treaties on nuclear testing and nonproliferation, according to critics, or simply make a special exception for India, according to proponents.

The deal is aimed only at bolstering India's nuclear power industry, a technology which other developing countries such as Egypt, Vietnam and even the oil-rich Persian Gulf states (especially Iran) have expressed interest in pursuing (or are pursuing). In order to fend off concurrent nuclear weapon proliferation—because running civilian nuclear reactors also produces the radioactive elements required for an atomic bomb—the science academies in both the U.S. and Russia argue in a new report that similar exceptions must be made for these countries.

Instead of allowing them to develop domestic nuclear capabilities, though, the scientists from the two leading nuclear powers argue that internationally controlled facilities should produce the world's fissile fuel—and take back the radioactive waste / bomb material at the end of its useful power-generating life.

In other words, the atomic age is approaching critical mass again.

Credit: Alice McKernon/istockphoto.com

* Article was updated on 10/2/08 to reflect Senate passage of the nuclear deal with India.

2 Comments

1. 1. scohn 05:07 PM 10/3/08

   At appears that humans have difficulty learning from experience in more complex environments... Technical advances can be written down, step by step, analysed, revised and retried. In simpler social societies stories were told as a means to pass on "how to...". The stories had to make sense in context and usually were not completely divorced from the experience of the audience.
   
   Now, however, the "story" does not seem to have to make logical sense. For example the "story" that President Reagan "single handed" defeated the USSR. That HE was responsible for the down-fall of our "Arch Enemy" all alone!
   
   As long as enough people still cling to the notion of a "Super-Man" leader that can do such things and powerfull groups that find it advantageous to support such notions; the same groups best situated to say "well, that is not exactly...." and be listened to. I can't really fault people for wanting to believe in the possibility of such rescue but I can fault those that are our "leaders" who do not actually lead but try to find out which way we would like to be able to go and say Sure, we can, follow ME.

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

2. 2. PEG 04:03 AM 10/5/08

   I think controlling nuclear proliferation should be our nations number one priority. The 'no return address' nukes and the nations with extremeists governments like iran should be job number one. The war on drugs, the economy, global warming, the energy and health care crisis are all important issues which wouldnt matter much if terrorist were to obtain nuclear wepaons. Sometimes you need to put things aside and concentrate on the most pressing life threating issues first.
   A nuke in the hands of a freak like Bin Ladin would put alot more lives at risk than 9-11. An extremist government like the one in Iran obtaining nuclear technology would lead to war in the middle east with Isreal and a very real possibility of a nuclear exchange. We need to put this ahead of other issues IMO becasue once we have a nuclear detonation on Amercian soil it will be too late to blame the government for not taking more action.
   Nuclear proliferation should be the hot topic for the election so we can tell the government to do more before all we can do is point our finger at the governement for not taking action sooner.

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this