The United States is about to enter an interesting era in nuclear decisions. Critical points of US relations with Russia, Iran, and North Korea are about to rear its head. U.S. and Russia appear to be on the edge toward extension of  their preexisting Nuclear Treaty that is about to expire. Iran has continued to amass nuclear fuel and Biden will have to decide whether he will be the one to step in and stop it. And in North Korea, Kim Jung-un rolled down the street last week their biggest atomic arsenal to date. Israel and Saudi Arabia, which shared President Trump’s deep antipathy toward Iran, may not be particularly thrilled with a Biden presidency. 

Joe Biden’s extensive experience as head of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and as vice president in the Obama administration may give all these nuclear nations a different feel during negotiations. Diplomacy and decency seem to have escaped the White House over the past 4 years, and I think it will be welcomed back on the international stage. It’s difficult to use the word “decency” when talking about weapons of mass destruction with the power to kill billions and potentially annihilate the entire planet, but it is reassuring that the leader of the free world, who has the power to press the button, has proven time and time again to choose decency over destruction. 

While I may feel that way, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran’s supreme leader, has said, “the United States is untrustworthy regardless who is in the White House.”  While Iran may still be interested in entering a deal that relaxes their sanctions, their tumultuous relationship with Trump will not be easily forgotten. 

While Trump has sported a friendly relationship with North Korean like no US President before, critics say, “Mr. Trump’s approach not only failed to persuade Mr. Kim to relinquish his arsenal of nuclear weapons and missiles, it bought Mr. Kim time to strengthen them.” We saw just last month North Korea unveiling its largest ever intercontinental ballistic missile. “On Trump’s watch, the North’s nuclear weapons program has grown apace, its missile capabilities have expanded, and Pyongyang can now target the United States with an ICBM,” said Evans J.R. Revere, a former State Department official and expert on North Korea. How President Biden decides to take action to halt this unwanted growth may be one of the most important decisions during his presidency. 

With the COVID pandemic clearly the number one priority of the new administration taking office January 20, 2021, resetting their relationships on the world stage has to be a close number two.

Gladstone, R. (2020, November 07). Biden to Face Long List of Foreign Challenges, With China No. 1. Retrieved November 09, 2020, from https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/07/world/americas/Biden-foreign-policy.html

 

In her article “How strong is the nuclear taboo today?”, the author Nina Tannewald discusses the “taboo” that currently surrounds nuclear weapons and their usage, particularly their usage against states without nuclear weapons. In her article, Tannenwald articulates her belief that this taboo has helped humanity thus far avoid an apocalyptic nuclear war. She discusses how the characteristically reckless Trump administration has softened the effect of this taboo through the use of aggressive rhetoric threatening the usage of nuclear weapons. The author specifically points to his verbal duel with North Korean dictator Kim Jong-un.

In case you were unaware, Joe Biden has defeated Trump in the 2020 presidential elections. In my opinion this is great news for people who do not want to see humanity destroyed in nuclear fire because I believe that a Biden administration would work to undo a lot of the damage Trump has done to international norms including the nuclear taboo.

Aside from the obvious allure that nuclear weapons possess to dictators such as Saddam Hussein and the Kim dynasty in North Korea, they can serve as a mandate and a bargaining chip. In the case of Saddam Hussein in Iraq, even the slightest notion that a re-start of the Iraqi nuclear weapons program played into the strongman image that he cultivated throughout his time in power. It was so important that he continued to leave the question unanswered as the United States and its allies threatened invasion in the leadup to the Iraq War for non-compliance with international observers. By refusing to provide the proof that would save Iraq from invasion, he continued to act as if he had something to hide and feed into his strongman persona.

Similarly, it is not entirely the possession of nuclear weapons outright that drives the Kim dynasty to continue to foster a nuclear program. Having nuclear weapons gives North Korea a better negotiating position with the international community. Claiming to scale back (but not completely dismantle) its nuclear program can be exchanged for sorely-needed sanctions relief.

North Korea recently unveiled a massive nuclear capable missile with a Transporter Erector Launcher. This 90 ft tall, 10 ft diameter intercontinental ballistic missile – the Hwasong-16 – is believed to be capable of hitting U.S. cities such as D.C. and New York.  The new developments in the ICBM that are nuclear-capable show that there may be other developments going on in North Korea.

Due to the lack of sanctions relief, Kim has decided to conduct the ongoing nuclear and missile technology tests. However, there hasn’t been the traditionally aggressive rhetoric against the United States and thus it remains to be seen what the North Korean foreign policy approach towards the United States and the rest of the world may look like.

 

North Korea unveils massive nuclear-capable missile with US reach

The use of chemical weapons particularly in the Syrian’s civil war  has been creating so much concern to the international community. According to the reading, “The Future of Chemical Weapons” raises questions about the civil war norm and mot importantly analyzes the Syrian case and its role in further proliferating the use of chemical weapons. The reading discusses three crucial points, first is that chemical weapons have demonstrated limited military utility in Syria. Second, the costs of use have been repeatedly demonstrated by the international reaction to their use. Lastly, the use of sarin—a nerve agent—has attracted a stronger international response than the use of chlorine.

Recently, according to the Middle East monitor article “Syria’s representative to UN: Damascus did not use chemical weapons and does not possess them anymore”, Bashar Jaafari confirms that Syria does not have chemical weapons anymore and did not use them. Also, Syria today is taking a different path through  fully cooperating with the inspection organization in place. According to the latest news, “Syria is currently hosting a delegation of experts and inspectors who arrived two days ago and will stay until 24 November.”

 

This claim and the danger of an (again) Third World War is not a horror film scriptwriter´s mind spring. It can be attributed to the Israeli Settlement Minister Tzachi Hanegbi. The TV interview of the Likud politician from the Party of Prime Minister Netanyahu saying that

If Biden stays with that policy, there will, in the end, be a violent confrontation between Israel and Iran

was quoted by several media worldwide, among them The Jerusalem Post[1].

Whether or not the pithy statements of the Likud politician are true; if one asks the Israelis or many Arabic states, there is an increased state of mind to be observed. Not without any reason. The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) deal which was, diplomatically said, rejected by the Trump administration, is now to be dusted again, according to Mr. Bidens’ earlier statements. But is it still America after 4 years of Mr. Trump that determines something on the international stage or does it all depend more on the unity of its allies? We know, a chain is only as strong as its weakest link, or according to Wallerstein[2], and more related to security policy

In the future, the United States is likely to fight in coalitions whose CP-defense readiness will be limited to some degree by the capabilities of its least prepared member.

Another question is whether we are dealing here with states or with some dictators and, as Sagan puts it

Such dictators often weaken their state institutions by prizing loyalty over professionalism in military and scientific organizations, thus impeding their nuclear ambitions[3]

And how will a Catholic democrat like Biden prepare for a dialogue with dictators (a “personalist regime”)? It seems Egypt, Syria, and Turkey are all in the pool and Saudi Arabia is well positioned too. How smart again from the Israeli to sign with them that deal…[4]

On the 45^th Birthday of the “Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention” (BTWC), the first international treaty to eliminate a complete category of weapons of mass destruction we should commemorate these ancient weapons as well. It’s only a little reassuring that the nuclear danger is just one of many other dangers that, alongside COVID-19, threaten our civilization.  The use of bacteria, viruses, and other active organic compounds, such as poisons or various drugs, during wars was a common practice already thousands of years ago. Infecting drinking wells with corpses, or even using human and animal feces on cold weapons.

So, we may look optimistically into the future and hope that even after the 45^th President of the USA leaves the White House in an undefined time, no other tough man will find the red button in his office. We can destroy our world also without nukes so efficiently, can´t we?

[1] https://www.jpost.com/us-elections/israeli-minister-warns-of-war-if-biden-returns-to-iran-deal-648097

[2] Mitchel B. Wallerstein, “The Origins and Evolution of the Defense Counterproliferation Initiative,” in: Countering the Proliferation and Use of Weapons of Mass Destruction, Peter L. Hayes, Vincent J. Jodoin, and Alan R. Van Tassel, eds., New York: McGraw-Hill Co, 1998, Chp. 2 (pp. 21-36)

[3] Scott D. Sagan, “Armed and Dangerous: When Dictators Get the Bomb,” Foreign Affairs, (Vol. 97, No. 6) November/December 2018, pp. 35-43

[4] ibid.

Yesterday, just before noon Eastern Time, U.S. media called the election for President-elect Joe Biden. Cities across the country and around the world reacted in celebration to the news. Church bells rang in Paris and people across the U.K. set off fireworks to mark the occasion. I haven’t yet been able to find another election that received this kind of reaction from America’s allies. Though President Trump has yet to concede, and is in fact continuing to insist he actually won the election, world leaders began to congratulate President-elect Joe Biden and Vice President-elect Kamala Harris.

The sentiment of our allies can be summed up in a tweet from Paris Mayor Anne Hidalgo: “Welcome back America!” Other leaders were slightly more diplomatic in their statements, but all expressed their excitement to work with the incoming Biden-Harris administration on a multilateral basis. A few organizations were especially relieved by the election results. The Director General of the WHO extended his congratulations and eagerness to work with the new administration. President-elect Biden has promised to reverse President Trump’s decision to withdraw from the WHO. The Secretary General of NATO specifically called out the President-elect’s dedication to the alliance in his statement. The feeling is mutual here in the U.S. A Reuters photographer yesterday captured a photo of a man celebrating Biden’s win at Black Lives Matter Plaza in D.C. with a NATO flag draped around his shoulders. A close ally of Trump’s Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi was quick to celebrate the election of Kamala Harris. Vice President-elect Harris’ mother immigrated from India at the age of 19, and her village is celebrating Harris’ election, calling her the pride of the village.

Other leaders who were closer to President Trump have held off on commenting. Prime Minister Netanyahu of Israel waited much longer than other leaders and in his message did not refer to Biden as the President-elect, as he did in his statement on the Trump victory in 2016. He immediately followed his message to Biden with a message of gratitude to President Trump for his support of Israel and pro-Israel policies, including the recognition of Jerusalem and the Golan Heights. Palestinian leaders have a different view, with official Nabil Shaath telling Turkish media: “There was nothing worse than the Trump era. Good riddance.” Russia, China, Turkey, Brazil and others have not offered their congratulations to the new administration, though Putin was very quick to do so in 2016.

Another interesting note is that some world leaders appear to be pushing back on President Trump’s baseless claims of election fraud in their statements. French President Emmanuel Macron said “America has chosen its new president,” and German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas welcomed “clear figures” that decided the election. Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny congratulated Americans on “defining the new leadership in a free and fair election.” He went on to say, “this is a privilege which is not available to all countries.”

One notable exception is Slovenian Prime Minister Janez Jansa, who falsely claimed Donald Trump won re-election after his 3AM speech on election night and has since doubled down. The Prime Minister has tweeted or retweeted hundreds of times in favor of Trump’s election, bashing President-elect Biden and amplifying Trump’s and other Republicans baseless claims of voter fraud and election fraud along with conspiracy theories. He has also echoed U.S. Republican complaints about social media “censorship” of these claims. This could make Slovenian-U.S. relations awkward come January 20, 2021.

Overall, it is clear America’s allies and adversaries recognize President-elect Biden’s win means a return to the foreign policy positions that have been more or less consistent since 1945: an emphasis on multilateralism and strong ties with our allies, a strong NATO to counter Russian aggression, and a warning for authoritarian regimes.

Mails in ballots that are received late are still counted in many states. In Washington state mail in ballot can be received as late of November 23, the day before the state certifies its election results. In Minnesota and Nevada ballots will be received until November 10, and In Ohio till November 13. And in North Carolina and Pennsylvania till November 6.

By December 6, is the last day to recount votes and settle any disputes it is known as the “safe harbor” date.

On December 14, which in law is the first Monday after the second Wednesday in December 14 Electoral cast their votes in states and by December 23 the certified electoral votes have nine days to get from their states to Capitol Hill.

By January 3, new members are sworn in 117^thcongress and take the oath at noon.

On January 6^thElectoral votes are counted in the house chamber by members of House and the Senate by January 20^thby noon. Inauguration day on January 20^thfor the president elect and vice-president taking the oath of office.

The European Union and many allies have announced that they are ready to intensify and cooperate relations with the next administration of the United States. President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, said on Sunday. Whether the next administration will bring hope or will be a disappointment in other ways in too early to decide now.

This seems an apt moment to consider biological weapons as the Covid-19 pandemic continues to ravage the globe and the United States faces a record number of infections. The virus is known to have originated in Wuhan, China and some have advanced the – unsubstantiated and unproven – conspiracy theory that it was actually released as a deliberate act of bioterrorism by the Chinese government.

This Forbes piece examines whether the Covid-19 virus makes a “good” bioweapon from the perspective of medical and biodefense experts. It explains that an effective bioweapon is easy to access and manufacture; it is stable in the atmosphere; it is highly contagious; it makes a high number of infected people ill, and it causes mass panic. Also, users of the bioweapon have protections against it.

While Covid-19 spreads very quickly and widely – and it has certainly generated panic – it does not hold up as a bioweapon by other key measures. For one thing, it is not very stable in the atmosphere and does not survive very well outdoors or in sunlight, allowing for activities like distanced gatherings and outdoor dining. Covid-19 also fails the test for a “good” bioweapon given that there were no known protections for users of Covid-19 as a bioweapon at the time it emerged. Though several countries say they are on the brink of approving and disseminating a vaccine – and Russia claimed to have one as of late summer – there was no known vaccine or antidote back in late 2019/early 2020, making it fairly implausible that the virus was deliberately released as a bioweapon.

The article concludes that, while Covid-19 “has some desirable properties of a bioweapon, it would probably not be good choice for military purposes.” Nonetheless, the pandemic has reminded us of our extreme vulnerability and how unpredictable the results of a public health crisis can be. The ease with which such crises can spin out of control is part of the reason the U.S. stopped its biological warfare program in 1969 and focused its efforts on prevention.  The disaster that has been the United States’ Covid-19 response is an obvious argument for greater investment in defensive capabilities against killer pathogens, no matter their origin.

As North Korea increases its nuclear weapons supply, Northeast Asia becomes more unstable due to the fact that it changes nuclear balance, meanwhile the US and its allies have struggled to set arms control and encourage disarmament regions for decades, North Korea strives to get total control over nuclear weapons in the region.

Unfortunately, during Trump’s administration, the indifference to keep military pacts such as Japan and South Korea, diminished non-proliferation measures to contain nuclear weapons. Moreover, Trump has suggested that the US should remove the nuclear umbrella from these countries allowing Japan and South Korea develop their own nuclear programs. Although Trump and Kim Jong-un leader of North Korea met several times nothing new came up from these meetings, the US has not changed the status quo in the region and the nuclear umbrella remains in place, and North Korea is still focused on working harder on its own nuclear deterrent.

On the other hand, Japan and South Korea have bristled at Trump’s extreme burden-sharing demands and relations between the United States and China have significantly worsened. Currently the US needs to move forward on a number of stalled arms control and disarmament initiatives, and maybe now under Biden’s government is a new opportunity to advance and take urgent measures to halt proliferation of nuclear weapons.