The End of MAD: America's Nuclear Supremacy, Part 1

I read an article by an ex-Rand Corporation analyst Benjamin Schwarz in the January issue of The Atlantic. It basically argued that with the erosion of Russia's nuclear arsenal and continuous improvements to the US arsenal, the Cold War foundation of strategic stability through the prospect of Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) was now at an end.

For those of our readers who are a little rusty on their Nuclear weapons strategy, basically how MAD works is that neither side dares to launch a first strike against the other. This is because there are enough nuclear warheads in the opponent's arsenal to survive any first strike which of course means a devastating second strike can be launched in retaliation against the aggressor. For years this strategic condition underpinned stability within the superpower rivalry between the US and the USSR.

What has changed since the end of the Cold War and the bi-polar order which disciplined great power conflict and rivalry, has been the preponderance of American power in what some have called a unipolar system with the United States as hegemon. This all pretty old news I admit, however Schwarz's article is the first that I've seen to suggest that the logic or order of MAD is now in jeopardy.

The reasons for the erosion of MAD are to be found in the respective decline and improvement in Russia's and the United State's nuclear and technological capabilities. Russia's arsenal is a fraction of it's size in 1990 (appx 3,800 warheads and forecast to decline to 500), and more importantly has not been maintained or upgraded. The Russian strategic forces lack the funds and resources to maintain readiness and technological capacity, such that the traditional strengths of the old USSR such as the nuclear ballistic missle submarine fleet have deteriorated markedly. Much of the sub fleet is permanently in port thereby eroding their crews' skills while also being highly vulnerable to attack.

Meanwhile the US arsenal while also smaller (5,200 warheads appx) than its Cold War levels is however more effective due to improvements in technology. The technological improvements to US forces since 1990 have given it a tremendous edge over any major power. New missile technology has increased accuracy thereby requiring a smaller of number of warheads to ensure successful strikes while new satellites and sensors increase the ability to find targets. Advanced technology as seen in the B2-Stealth Bomber, Sea Wolf class nuclear submarines, and GPS satellite guided munitions have given the US a capability edge over all rivals not seen since the peak of relative American power in 1945. Military and strategic analysts conducting simulated wargames conclude that the US could prevail in a conflict against any nuclear rivals by wiping out their entire arsenals in a first strike.

What of China one might ask? Despite the emergence of China as the next superpower rival to the US, at present and for the forseeable future, its military and strategic nuclear capabilities will remain far behind that of the US. The Chinese nuclear arsenal is even smaller than that of Russia's at appx 2,000 warheads, with only 18 warheads capable of striking the continental USA.

Of Toothpicks & Turkeys

A week or so ago I purchased some toothpicks and had occasion to take them out recently. I must say that I was somewhat disappointed in their design. I suppose it is curious to say that one could be disappointed in toothpick design as there doesn't seem to be so much to it at first glance. Most of our readers are probably familiar with standard toothpick design i.e. basically a double pointed toothpick, so perhaps they can appreciate my suprise when I discovered that my toothpicks were only single pointed. Yes it's incredible, single pointed toothpicks? What a stupid design. As the reader appreciates this is one of those instances where no thought whatsoever has been undertaken into the interests of efficiency. You get one point therefore 50% of the usage potential. Talk about a waste of that precious natural resource, wood!

Now, lest the reader think that it was mere economy or laziness on the part of the manufacturer of the said toothpicks, I found evidence to the contrary. On the opposite end where the second point would usually be there was instead a flat end but also a number of uniform sized u-shaped grooves made as a form of styling. Talk about a waste of time and effort not to mention the ultimate example of form over function!

Yesterday morning after doing some tidying downstairs I returned to this room around midday to see out of the corner my eye outside a rather novel apparition. It was a turkey. Yes one of those big black birds with the red head. It landed on the right fence of the backyard/courtyard. Suprisingly, despite its considerable size it was able to balance on the thin wooden fence. I looked at it for a few seconds and then reached for my camera on the desk, however it flew away before I could take a shot.

This turkey sighting has in a way resolved a mystery for me. Late at night I have occasionally heard the sounds of an unseen creature. I had suspected that either somebody was keeping a pet pig or else it was a scrub turkey.

I Take It All Back ...

It appears that I have been mistaken. The stove fan actually works. After getting a bit frustrated with it, I started poking & prodding around and discovered that it only powers up after you extend it. Yes it did seem curious to me that it only covered half the depth of the stove (it was in a retracted position) which would make it pretty ineffective at fanning the steam & smoke. So I take everything back I said about Italian kitchen appliances. Yes sometimes even Dr. K gets it wrong.

Does The Truth Matter?

Ok we're on a bit of a roll here aided by the good doctor's insomnia. I realise that the above question seems all too obvious. Of course the truth matters. Sure, we are taught from a young age that being truthful and not telling lies is the way to go in terms of ethical and moral conduct. However I don't mean to ask the question from a normative perspective. Specifically I'm interested in truth and or the search for truth and whether they have any relevance as driving forces for what occurs in the world today. Has truth become a victim of expediency (if it wasn't already throughout history)? I would suggest that as an independent motive or object for guiding behaviour and conduct it has become secondary (probably always has been) to set preferences and agendas. I will aim to illustrate this through a number of examples taken from different spheres of human activity.

Let's take the Anglican church in Africa for example. Now the 9th Commandment in the Bible is "Thou Shalt Not Lie" which seems to suggest that the truth and being truthful is of value in itself. It doesn't say that you can lie in certain circumstances to forward what you believe to be a good cause (though I'm sure we could all quite imagine certain circumstances where it might be necessary). But the general essence of it is, the truth matters. So it suprised me a number of years ago watching a documentary about how an Anglican bishop in Africa (can't remember the country or diocese) was urging his parishoners and fellow Africans not to use condoms, not only because he prefered abstinence, but because in his educated view, condoms were too unreliable and dangerous. He said something along the lines of "they are full of holes so AIDs can spread through them". I'm no expert on the physical properties of condoms and the relative chances of transmission but I do feel very much that the good Bishop was exaggerating the danger if not OUTRIGHT LYING to further his agenda - more sexual abstinence, less promiscuity.

Now if the Lords spiritual do not value truth what about the secular leadership i.e. politicians, policymakers, and Statesmen (well yeah they are mostly men)? Let's look at the Iraq campaign. Oh yes I can hear the collective groan from the audience. I'll be brief. The whole Iraq campaign was a done deal, even before the charade of going to the United Nations. So the truth of whether there was WMD did not matter one bit at all. Nor did it seem the truth of the prospects of success for the Western alliance. There were many voices of great learning and experience, analysts, academics, diplomats, military commanders even (like General Eric Shinseki - the then US Chief of Staff, General Anthony Zinni - immediate predecessor to the Central Command Chief Tommy Franks) who warned that the whole endeavour would likely f**ck up. Now they were much closer to the truth but were ignored. Why? Because the people with power and authority couldn't give a crap about truth, they were furthering an agenda.

Now let me pick a another example or examples of where truth does not matter. In many realms like advertising, or even general relations between people in certain social settings, appearances & presentation far outweigh the matter of truth. It matters not whether one has the best product or not or whether people even need it, what matters is that people believe that it is the best, and that they believe that they need it. So for example you have a powerful pharmaceutical industry in the United States hawking 5 zillion drugs for many illnesses which don't even exist like "Social Anxiety Syndrome" (I think we used to call it shyness), or doping children with dextroamphetamines (a.k.a. "kiddie speed") because their parents couldn't discipline them. Then you've got people who enter reality TV contests because they believe that if they win the grand prize of a nose job it will solve their problems with self esteem and relationships.

Harking back to one of my earlier posts about occupational status we see that the appearance of the person as seen through this prism also distorts or devalues the truth. The measure of a person is not in "the content of their character" as the late Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King would have liked, but in the outward trappings of their job, car, suburb, social set, breeding, or looks - or at least that is the measure as the world sees it.

So what does one do in this morass of powerful agendas, and endless superficiality which so routinely discard the truth that it almost seems natural? What does it profit a person to value the truth or even trouble him or herself to find out about it if the truth ultimately cannot prevail ? Is it better to avert one's gaze, avoid asking the difficult questions, when ultimately it seems that when push comes to shove, power, delusion and expediency trump all? Do we seek the enlightened life or the comfortable one and might it be too much to hope for both?

Eurotrash Kitchen Appliances

Yes it's rare that I venture on such culinary adventures as cooking a steak but tonight (well technically last night since it's am the next day now) I gave it a go. So you can imagine my shock horror to find, as the hotplate was heating up, that the stove fan, or whatever the heck you call that thing which usually has a light too, did not work. It didn't even switch on. Nada. Nothing. What a complete piece of crap! It's like the first time it has been ever used and is only 2 years old. What happened to all this crap about quality European kitchen appliances??? This thing is a fricking lemon! Ok, note to self for next time (if there ever is another occasion), Italian food & German appliances, Good, Italian Appliances & German food, Bad. Actually German food's not that bad.

Goldilocks & The Air Conditioner

It's summer and I live in a hot climate. Furthermore I have a penchant for sleeping during normal business hours. Accordingly I need reliable airconditioning during the day. Instead I've been getting hit & miss. I turn the air conditioner on and it's too cold, so I wake up shivering. I turn it down on fan option and it does nothing. I turn it off and it's too hot so I wake up in a sweat and more often than not a headache. This is a most frustrating state of affairs.

A Tennis Fairytale - Daniela & A Delayed Match Report

Yes we're running a bit behind here at FF as you've no doubt noticed. But hey that doesn't mean we can't dredge up old sports news! Your correspondent was fortunately able to attend parts of the 2006 Australian in Melbourne, whereupon he had the pleasure of viewing a number of matches featuring the 'Slovakian Swan', Daniela Hantuchova.

The first round was a rather untidy affair taking 3 sets after our favourite dropped the first carelessly to a Japanese player of little renown. In the 2nd round she faced a player from Uzbekistan, Akgul Amanmuradova, who I had never heard of. Amanmuradova is big. Yes quite big. Big as in 6'2"and broad shouldered to boot. In fact when she first came onto the court (in a men's shirt and shorts) I thought she was a man. Unfortunately for her, her size proved to be more a liability than an asset as Daniela was able to move her around the court more than she was comfortable with. Despite her opponent's big 1st serve (avg 175 km/h, max 185 km/h) Daniela was able to win quite comfortably 6-4, 6-1 with quite a few winners and not too many unforced errors which in the past has been a problem for her. I detected a greater use of topspin in her groundstrokes, particularly off the backhand and this has evidently increased her margin of safety.

Now as enjoyable as all this was, we were in for a much greater treat albeit your correspondent wasn't there in person for this gem. The Princess next faced the Darth Vader of Women's tennis, Serena Williams. Having seen quite a few of Daniela's matchs against both Serena and Venus Williams I had little hope that the result would end favourably. What has hitherto happened the last 5 or 6 times is that the Sisters Williams have basically smashed our Daniela off the court and Daniela not helping things by gifting a bunch of points away on unforced errors.

Yet for some reason on that special night things were different. Serena wasn't quite in rhythm, playing loose shots and lacking the incredible speed she possessed in prior years; while Daniela was hitting lines instead of errors. The ferocious Wiliams serve was strangely quite vulnerable with Daniela making 4 of an incredible 16 break point opportunities! The 1st set was over quick with Daniela taking it 6-1. In the second Serena launched a comeback midset and manged to break Daniela. I must confess at this moment I had my doubts. Could she overcome this setback or would she falter like so many times before?

Well, the match line read 6-1, 7-5 Hantuchova. Truly a most improbable, unexpected yet wonderful result to savour. Now the fairytale had to end at some point, and it did against the It Girl of the WTA tour, Maria Sharapova. Nonetheles, Daniela ended a good Australian Open campaign respectably, giving Sharapova a bit of a fight before going out 6-4, 6-4.

The Anniversary Party!

For those of you who haven't been reading this blog often and I count myself among you, it may be appropriate to serve notice of an important milestone. Yes, it's amazing but true. FF is one year old today! In the past year every one at FF has worked feverishly to bring you stories, insight and analysis on the widest range of possible topics without any coherent thread whatsoever. It is my hope that it may continue to be so.

Since FF has not received the updates it has deserved of late, I will endeavour to add several entries in the not to distant future.


Sincerely,


Dr. Kananga


The Mansion On The Hill, St Kitt's