Paper Dragons

If you are an optimist considering the conflicts in Europe and in the Middle-East, yet also the clock is still static, you may decide that there is plenty before the bell of an Armageddon rings

illustration: moondeer.medium.com

This year, the doomsday clock, which is the symbolic representation of how close a human-made global catastrophe is, remains unchanged at 90 seconds to midnight. The members of a non-profit organisation which is The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists decide to set the clock forward or backward from its initial position of seven minutes to midnight. Several factors from nuclear warfare, climate change, and artificial intelligence, are taken into consideration for this decision. The last update was in 2023 and factors including an increased risk of nuclear escalation stemming from the Russian invasion of Ukraine, to continuing threats from the climate crisis and advancing technologies like Artificial Intelligence ticked the clock 10 seconds forward from its position in 2020.

If you are an optimist considering the conflicts in Europe and in the Middle-East, yet also the clock is still static, you may decide that there is plenty before the bell of an Armageddon rings. If you are a pessimist, the initial 4200 seconds is down to 90 and it is possible that we may not be even aware when the next update is done.

So what can be the risks in 2024 for getting closer to doomsday? Artificial intelligence, climate change, new conflicts like between China and Taiwan or the escalation of the current conflicts. Whichever you think is the most dangerous, the USA will be in it and who is leading the US will be deterministic. If Donald Trump will be elected there you go, climate change does not exist, an end to the Russian - Ukraine war in 24 hours, no to NATO and so on. 

Indeed, as the possibility of the re-election of Mr. Trump increases, European countries begin to reassess their vulnerability in defence more seriously. The US, under the Biden administration - in the future may be seen as well a farewell - aimed to strengthen the alliance with the addition of Sweden and Finland to NATO. Especially for the ratification of Sweden, the US had to be involved in intricate diplomatic negotiations with Turkey and use its trump card, which is the approval of the sale of F-16 fighter jets to Turkey. A series of unfortunate events had led to the removal of Turkey from the F-35 jet fighter program in July 2019. Since then Turkey was in diplomatic negotiations with the US to procure new F-16s and to modernise its existing fleet.

Moreover, The US is planning to station tactical nuclear weapons in the UK. Russia previously had declared that such an attempt would be considered an escalation, but did not refrain itself from deploying its tactical nuclear weapons to Belarus. Tactical nuclear weapons are generally intended to be used in the battlefield having shorter range and being less powerful than strategic weapons, which are designed to directly attack an adversary's homeland. Since the UK has only strategic nuclear capability, addition of tactical nuclear capability in theory will allow a stepwise escalation to the attacks, hence increasing deterrence capacity against a full scale nuclear exchange.

The US congress recently passed a legislation barring any US President from withdrawing the United States from NATO without approval from the Senate or an Act of Congress. However, even if a US President declares their intention of withdrawal, that would be considered as a sign that the US won’t respond to article 5 of NATO. The resolution of the NATO members would undoubtedly be affected by this, for example Turkey would be reluctant to be involved in the defence of the Baltic countries. If the events develop that way NATO will transform to a paper tiger in a short time. 

Nonetheless, NATO prepares for its largest exercises since the end of the cold war. The exercises aim  to improve NATO's capability to quickly deploy and reinforce in times of crisis. Undoubtedly, especially if the Baltic countries are attacked, the Suwalki corridor in Poland will be the target to cut communication between the allies, so the mobility of the troops will be important to prevent it. 

Moreover, NATO also signed a $1.2-billion contract to replenish its 155mm artillery shell stocks with 220,000 new rounds. However that sounds good, the European munition production and delivery will take almost two years. Without the US in ammunition  production Europe is inadequate for an intensive war. Even so less prepared in respect to the human force as conscription laws are only active in eight European countries.

Europe needs time to reform NATO or transform it to a European army. For that, they need Ukraine to keep Russia at bay. However, if the worst comes to the worst,  would it be so bad really, in the terms of doomsday?

If the US chooses isolation then it would not enter any war next to NATO which already diminishes a full scale nuclear warfare threat. True, Ukraine and Europe would eventually yield to autocracies, also climate change and Artificial Intelligence would continue to be threats. Moreover, nations like Crimean Tatars and Circassians would continue to be suppressed but they are resilient as they could keep their identity for centuries. Also, the worst impact of climate change is still some decades away and who knows Artificial Intelligence could benefit a president like Trump and bring a solution for the climate. The rest is what? Even the Soviet Union and the Iron Curtain lasted only about half a century.