Commentary
-
Our commentary partners will help you reach your own conclusions on complex topics.
Hey everybody, Peter Zeihan here coming to you from the shores of Lake how we it’s the famed Dingle burn arm behind me, this is my favorite lake in New Zealand for the obvious reasons. And today we’re talking about Russia and nukes. So for those of you who have not been under a rock, the Russians have been threatened in nuclear this and that and everything since the Ukraine war started. But if you’ve looked back and look at the statements, you’ll know that sometime in mid March of last year, Putin stopped making threats. And it was only in the last couple of weeks that the Russians have said they’re moving nukes up to permanent station in Belarus, which is the first expansion of the Russian military footprint in terms of nuclear arms. Since the end of the Cold War, a lot of people are worried about that. But I think it’s best to look back before we look forward. So if you remember back to February and early March, Putin was making nuclear threats against anyone who was willing to support the Ukrainians in any way. And then he just stopped. And the way it was explained to me the last time I was in Washington, when something like this, that the ambassador was dispatched to talk to Putin, and to lay out a little bit of logic. And the idea was that if you look back to February and March, especially in January, when the Russians would have a super secret meeting with the National Security Council in a locked room, and then within hours, the transcript of those conversations would be published in Western media, the way the ambassador explained it to Putin was that the Americans had been listening to everything, every phone call every conversation, reading every email, and in doing so have a full picture of everything that Putin was personally considering and within his inner circle. And the idea was that, you know, a minor detail of this sort of espionage was that the United States knew at any given time, physically where Putin was. So if he thought he could fling a nuke into the Western Hemisphere in the first couple wouldn’t just come back and come right down his throat, he was kind of out of his mind. So he stopped making the threats, and he left it to his henchmen to do it. This new development is kind of in the same vein, putting nukes in a place doesn’t in of itself, change your military posture. And we know from some of the nuclear threats that the Russians made back in last March and April and May, is that they didn’t actually change their readiness, they were just shouting. This is kind of like that. Because if you put a nuke in another country, you need a hardened facility, you need a command and control system, you need an IT system that is absolutely hack proof. And putting that in Belarus, Belarus barely has electricity on a good day. It’s a horrible place for nuclear base. So if the Russians did transfer nukes there, they’d basically been sitting in crates surrounded by soldiers unable to be launched. So at this point, and this specific issue, the nuclear threat coming out of Russia has not actually increased. The potential risk we have here is proliferation because we know that the Russians don’t have security. And we know that the military has become really corrupt, especially when it comes to hardware and funding. So taking secure nuclear materials and transferring them to a country that’s a kleptocracy like Belarus actually raises the chance that these things might get sold on the open market. It’s not that that’s a non risk, but it’s a very, very different risk from the idea of the Russians actually physically expanding their nuclear deployment footprint. But in terms of operational readiness, there’s really no change because the Russians already have a nuclear footprint in their little enclave of Kaliningrad on the Baltic Sea, which is west of Belarus. So nothing has really changed here. The Russians are just looking for a little way to beat their chests and kind of feed the domestic nationalism machine that is keeping the government in power. This is about internal Russian politics, not international security issues, at least for now. All right, that’s it for me. Talk to you guys later.
-
Global warming won’t impact Russian-Chinese shipping
The seas above Russia’s northern coastline are too frozen for shipping, but some have wondered whether global warming might change that in the decades to come. If those seas were to become navigable for commercial shipping, new direct routes between Russia and China could theoretically open up. Straight Arrow News contributor Peter Zeihan throws more…
-
Can other nations replicate success of US shale revolution?
The “shale revolution” has provided the United States with a bountiful domestic supply of oil. But extracting oil from shale is a highly technical process, and it is also dependent on specific geological formations. Straight Arrow News contributor Peter Zeihan tackles the question of whether or not other nations might be able to replicate the…
-
Peace between Israel and Iran, at least for now
A series of recent airstrikes between Israel and Iran inflamed fears of a wider regional war erupting in the Middle East. That concern now seems to have paid off, after third-party countries around the world successfully intervened and talked down military hardliners in both Israel and Iran in order to avoid such an outcome. Israel’s…
-
Global internet in a precarious state, but that could be a positive
Over 500 underwater cables span over 870,000 miles worldwide, serving as the foundation of the modern global internet. Despite their critical role in facilitating communication, these cables often go unnoticed, even as the amount of data transmitted through them has surged. So what happens if the cables fail? Straight Arrow News contributor Peter Zeihan contends…
-
Water wars are an unlikely future
Foreign policy writers have long warned of the possibility that clean drinking water might become “the next oil” — that is, that major wars might be fought around the globe over access to potable water. With expanding populations and finite water supplies, these critics argue that humans will inevitably fight each other to secure drinking…
Latest Stories
-
Conservative media liken Biden protest comment to Trump’s ‘fine people’ dustup
-
Survey: More US workers now fear losing jobs, lower wages due to AI
-
Hamas video shows American hostage, arm amputated from Oct. 7 attack
-
Arizona House votes to repeal Civil War-era abortion ban
-
Arizona grand jury indicts 18 in alleged 2020 fake elector scheme tied to Trump
Popular Opinions
-
In addition to the facts, we believe it’s vital to hear perspectives from all sides of the political spectrum.
Latest Opinions
In addition to the facts, we believe it’s vital to hear perspectives from all sides of the political spectrum. We hope these different voices will help you reach your own conclusions.
The opinions published in this section are solely those of the contributors and do not reflect the views of Straight Arrow News.
Latest Commentary
We know it is important to hear from a diverse range of observers on the complex topics we face and believe our commentary partners will help you reach your own conclusions.
The commentaries published in this section are solely those of the contributors and do not reflect the views of Straight Arrow News.
Peter Zeihan
Geopolitical StrategistCan other nations replicate success of US shale revolution?
Peace between Israel and Iran, at least for now
Global internet in a precarious state, but that could be a positive
Dr. Frank Luntz
Pollster and Political Analyst‘Take the job seriously’: Why Americans are fed up with Congress
‘If we can shrink it, it will stop growing’: Americans talk debt, deficit
‘I don’t think they care’: Undecided voters explain their reasons
Pete Ricketts
U.S. Senator for Nebraska