Opinion: Whatever happened to Mutually Assured Destruction?
CNNEditor’s Note: David A. Andelman, a contributor to CNN, twice winner of the Deadline Club Award, is a chevalier of the French Legion of Honor, author of “A Red Line in the Sand: Diplomacy, Strategy, and the History of Wars That Might Still Happen” and blogs at Andelman Unleashed. In a joint news conference in Brussels with NATO secretary general Jens Stoltenberg last month, Estonia’s prime minister Kaja Kallas called Belarus “unpredictable and dangerous.” In turn, with a preview of the NATO summit, Stoltenberg added, “We must keep our defenses strong to send a clear message to Moscow and Minsk that NATO protects every inch of allied territory.” Especially with nukes now deployed right next door. The question today is whether the growing pace of threats from Russia of the possible use of devastating nuclear weapons against Ukraine could mean the end of such a concept’s viability. David A. Andelman With the transfer of the weapons to Belarus, the UN’s disarmament chief, Izumi Nakamitsu, warned the Security Council that the risk of nuclear weapons use was “higher than at any time since the Cold War.” So whatever happened to MAD? “In the early ’60s American officials worried that the Soviet Union would launch a less-than-all-out attack, reasoning that the US would not respond in a way that might trigger Armageddon,” he said.