Nuclear signalling, the need for new guard rails

Source: The Hindu

For Prelims: NATO, Warsaw pact, 1962 Cuban missile crisis, Thomas Schelling, Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky, Patriot missile defense batteries, long-range Himars, Storm Shadow and Scalp long-range missiles, Javelin and Stinger missiles. 

For Mains: Nuclear Escalation Management.

Highlights Of the Article:

• The conflict in Ukraine has raised concerns about nuclear escalation between major powers.
• Nuclear deterrence during the Cold War no longer seems effective for the U.S. and Russia.
• Attempts at deterrence failed as both Russia and the U.S. engaged in escalatory rhetoric.
• Lessons from the Cold War on nuclear deterrence are no longer applicable in the current political environment.
• Both Russia and the U.S. are probing each other's red lines in the absence of clear boundaries.
• The concept of nuclear deterrence is based on the assumption of rationality, but the situation is more complex now.
• Russia's nuclear doctrine allows for the use of nuclear weapons in specific situations.
• New guard rails are needed to prevent unintended nuclear escalation and preserve the nuclear taboo.

Context:

The article discusses the current geopolitical context, specifically focusing on the conflict in Ukraine and the nuclear rhetoric exchanged between major nuclear powers, the United States and Russia.

UPSC EXAM NOTES ANALYSIS:

The article talks about the ongoing conflict in Ukraine and the use of nuclear threats between major nuclear powers, the United States and Russia. It points out that the old ways of dealing with nuclear issues from the Cold War no longer work.

1.Deterrence Failures and Strong Words

• The article shows that attempts to prevent conflict failed, and both Russia and the U.S. used aggressive language during the Ukraine crisis. This situation is different from the past, like the Cuban missile crisis in 1962, where tensions were managed differently.
• It's now harder to predict how Russia and the U.S. will act, as the world has changed since the days of NATO and the Warsaw Pact. This makes it tough to handle potential nuclear escalation.
• Both sides made scary threats about using nuclear weapons, which made the situation even more uncertain. In the past, nuclear weapons were seen as a tool to prevent war, but now they seem to be used differently.

2.New Problems and Important Research

• The article talks about the challenges of dealing with unclear boundaries and red lines. Russia and the U.S. find it difficult to understand each other's intentions, making the situation more complicated.
• It mentions studies by Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky about decision-making when things are uncertain. The current nuclear situation is unpredictable, which makes it harder to find the right approach.
• The article highlights the changes in the world, with NATO expanding and the Warsaw Pact gone. These shifts influenced how Russia and the U.S. reacted to the crisis.
• NATO got involved in supporting Ukraine by providing military help, like missiles and defense systems, to respond to Russia's actions.

3.Conclusion

We need new ways to handle nuclear tensions and prevent dangerous situations. The old strategies from the Cold War don't work anymore, and we must find better approaches to deal with potential nuclear conflict between major powers like Russia and the U.S. The fear of unintended escalation is very real, so it's essential to create new rules to handle these challenges in today's complex world.