Whilst some of President Donald Trump’s actions in recent times have drawn justifiable criticism (such as his approach towards Russia and Ukraine), in my opinion, his decision to degrade Iran’s nuclear capability seems wise and should be supported. What’s more, Sir Kier Starmer’s decision to purchase warplanes capable of carrying nuclear missiles is prudent, given the brutal behaviour of Russian dictator, Vladimir Putin.
Existential threats
Russia, Iran and North Korea currently pose significant existential threats due to their aggressive actions, geopolitical ambitions, and pursuit of advanced military capabilities. Understanding the nature of these threats and the strategic responses they necessitate is crucial for international security.
The Triad of Threats: Russia, Iran, and North Korea
Russia: Under its current leadership, Russia has demonstrated a willingness to challenge the international order through military interventions in neighbouring countries, interference in democratic processes, and a resurgence of nuclear rhetoric. Its actions in Ukraine, including the invasion and annexation of territory, highlight a disregard for national sovereignty and international law. Russia’s modernisation of its nuclear arsenal and development of new strategic weapons systems, such as hypersonic missiles, further amplify concerns about its military posture and potential for escalation.
Iran: Iran’s pursuit of nuclear weapons capability represents a profound threat to regional stability and global security. If successful, Iran could become a nuclear-armed state, dramatically altering the strategic balance in the Middle East and potentially triggering a regional arms race. Beyond its nuclear ambitions, Iran’s support for proxy groups across the region fuels instability, terrorism, and conflict, directly impacting the security of its neighbours and international interests.
North Korea: North Korea’s relentless development of nuclear weapons and ballistic missile technology is a direct and persistent threat to its neighbours, particularly South Korea and Japan, as well as the wider international community. Its provocative missile tests and belligerent rhetoric underscore its destabilising intentions and its disregard for international sanctions and resolutions aimed at curbing its weapons programmes.
Strategic Responses and Prudent Deterrence
In the face of these evolving threats, leaders are compelled to consider robust and proactive measures to ensure national security and deter aggression.
The Trump Administration’s Approach to Iran’s Nuclear Programme:
The decision by the Trump administration to use bunker-busting bombs to damage Iran’s nuclear capacity was a direct response to the perceived existential threat posed by an Iranian nuclear weapon. Proponents of this action argued that it was a necessary and prudent measure to set back Iran’s nuclear programme and prevent it from acquiring the capability to build a nuclear bomb. The rationale was that conventional military strikes, while risky, could delay or destroy key nuclear facilities, thereby buying time for diplomatic solutions or preventing a far more catastrophic outcome. The argument was that allowing Iran to achieve nuclear weapons status would be a grave strategic error with far-reaching negative consequences for regional and global security.
Prime Minister Starmer’s Nuclear Modernisation and Britain’s Security:
Similarly, the British government’s decision, under Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer, to purchase new nuclear-armed aircraft, augmenting the existing submarine-based nuclear deterrent, can be viewed as a prudent adaptation to the heightened threat from Russia. Russia’s aggressive posture, its modernisation of its strategic forces, and its willingness to use coercive diplomacy necessitate a credible and modernised nuclear deterrent. By expanding its nuclear capabilities, Britain signals its commitment to maintaining a strategic advantage and deterring potential aggression. This move aims to ensure that the UK can effectively respond to any nuclear threat, thereby safeguarding its sovereignty and its allies. A diversified nuclear posture, combining submarine-launched ballistic missiles with air-launched capabilities, provides greater flexibility and survivability, thereby enhancing overall deterrence.
Multiple threats
The global security landscape is characterised by complex and interconnected threats. The actions of states like Russia, Iran, and North Korea demand constant vigilance and strategic foresight from international leaders. Decisions to employ military force or to modernise nuclear arsenals, while carrying inherent risks, are often made within the context of perceived existential threats and the imperative to maintain deterrence and stability. These actions underscore the ongoing challenge of balancing the need for defence with the pursuit of international peace and security.
Given the nature of the threats that we now face, we must heed the words of NATO Secretary, General Mark Rutte: “If you want peace, prepare for war”.
Worldwide Temple of Aurora 