On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 7:18 PM, Eugen Leitl <eu...@leitl.org> wrote: > Speaking about a wipeout, how probable would you see a nuclear > conflict arising between failing states? I see huge problems > in the Pakistan/India/China corner. The climate shift will > probably hit Pakistan much harder than it already is.
Sure, we have to keep our eyes on the nukes, but I don't think they will be used by state actors. It's another matter if non-state actors get their hands on them. Big wars involving nukes are not possible anymore for many reasons - fraying patriotism; growing loyalty to regional causes; and disruption of propaganda by new media. Some may yet wish to start one in the hope of distracting the populace, but anyone can see it won't have the same success as in the past. So I am not worried about nukes, but I am worried about the unrest being caused by three things, often interconnected. First is climate change, the second, weak political representation and control, and third, the cold war between US & China happening in the subcontinent. Here is the start of a rather lengthy list: - Bangladeshi migration into India & Nepal; - riparian conflicts between all states; - civil wars with naxalites, baloch rebels, Islamists and disgruntled local actors; - failing local governments - J&K, Karachi, Balochistan, NWFP, Maoist belts - power and water riots in India, PK, Bangladesh - The Chinese string of Pearls - Gwadar, oil pipelines in Burma, etc. It's clear Pakistan is becoming another Afghanistan, but the nukes aren't going to save it. p.s. I'm not entirely sure though that only states have nukes. States like Georgia have been selling nukes for more than ten years, I'd be surprised if some billionaires in the region or elsewhere haven't considered picking one up as insurance.
