Nuclear technology and proliferation

[Agent327]

Iran isn't being pushed around (except by its leadership), and even with nuclear strike capability North Korea is a third rate 'power' - if any.

This is just a theoretical argument - that a wealthy, technologically advanced state could very easily and quickly transition into a nuclear power should it feel threatened.

For the the record, Switzerland did briefly look into the development of atomic weapons back in the 1960s, but soon backed out. Japan began an atom bomb program during WW II but also gave it up.

As for the "What on earths" (the why?), rationale for military procurement can either be long term or change overnight. Japan is currently in a downwards spiral with China over war guilt, territory and economics. Hopefully it will all settle down soon. But what if it doesn't? Switzerland seems safe now, but what might Europe look like in ten years? What if the Euro collapses? It isn't any stretch of the imagination to see conflict in Europe in our lifetime - it's historically overdue.

I suppose when Professor Einstein wrote his famous letter to the President, there probably were plenty of "What on earths" going around then, too.

Strange comparison. My critique stands: Switzerland (or Japan) has no interest in acquiring nuclear strike capability. Japan isn't in á downward spiral', the euro won't collapse, and conflict in Europe isn't 'historically overdue' (there's no such thing) - if anything current European peacefulness is a tribute to the European Community's effectiveness. (The Balkan excluded, as usual, historically speaking). And I'm wondering why you ignore my counterexamples.

 

[Winner]

Iran isn't being pushed around (except by its leadership), and even with nuclear strike capability North Korea is a third rate 'power' - if any.

Have you been living on a different planet the last couple of years? Iran absolutely feels it is being pushed around. It doesn't matter that the reason that's happened is that it is ruled by a theocratic semi-totalitarian regime; the regime's perception is that Iran is being under siege by the West and its allies and nuclear weapons are thus a good "insurance policy" for the future. The same goes for North Korea.

I suspect Switzerland considered nukes for the same reason Israel had actually developed them - an option of last resort to deter others from destroying them. Switzerland then realized that if the Soviets had somehow shot their way through much of Western Europe to reach puny Switzerland, a couple more nukes wouldn't have impressed them very much, so they gave up.

You need to learn to distinguish between the reality and the ways different countries/regimes perceive it.

 

[Cutlass]

Iran is extremely being pushed around by foreign players, and has been during all of the years of the current political control there. They are constrained, severely, from doing as they please. Now you could argue the merits of those constraints, but you can't really claim they aren't there.

 

[Goodfella]

Japan is competing with China for the alpha dog position in Asia, and the US won't be around forever to shield it.

Japan's decline is inevitable. As a result of a demographic crisis, the nation will lose a third of its population within the next few decades. Currently its the oldest nation in the world and has an ever shrinking birth rate (1.2 births per woman) It is also highly ethnically homogenous as a result of its strict immigration policies (98.5% are Japanese). The country's economic power has been slowly disappearing since it reached stagnation in the 1990s.
The point is: I doubt Japan will ever try to build a nuclear weapon.

If the theory works, anyone who can copy it will. So the genie is already out of the bottle just in announcing it.

The news articles do not provide any information on how to actually enrich the uranium with a laser so I doubt it'll be that simple.

 

[Cutlass]

The news articles do not provide any information on how to actually enrich the uranium with a laser so I doubt it'll be that simple.

You think any nuclear physicist couldn't reconstruct what the theory is just in knowing that it's considered possible?

 

[Glassfan]

You think any nuclear physicist couldn't reconstruct what the theory is just in knowing that it's considered possible?

Strongly agree, especially keeping in mind the espionage and reverse-engineering successes of the old Soviet Union during the Cold War. "Knowing is half the battle".

My critique stands: Switzerland (or Japan) has no interest in acquiring nuclear strike capability. ...And I'm wondering why you ignore my counterexamples.

Perhaps we have a misunderstanding here. I'm not saying that these countries have the bomb or want it*. I'm just pointing out that; a) They are technologically and economically at a stage where, should a serious threat arise, they could achieve a credible nuclear deterence virtually immediately, and that; b) Historically, strategic threats do indeed occur.

Your critique stands: these countries have no interest in acquiring nuclear strike capabilities - until such time as they do.

*

Spoiler :

As a footnote to the above comment, I would speculate, IMHO, that the difference between a "safe" country (Israel?) and a "dangerous" one (North Korea?) is a matter of wanting nuclear weapons. A dangerous country wants the bomb as a matter of prestige and for purposes of Sabre-Rattling. A safe country doesn't really want the bomb at all - understands it's dangers and limitations - but feels it is forced to develope the capability due to perceptions of existential threats to it's existance...

 

[Agent327]

Have you been living on a different planet the last couple of years? Iran absolutely feels it is being pushed around. It doesn't matter that the reason that's happened is that it is ruled by a theocratic semi-totalitarian regime; the regime's perception is that Iran is being under siege by the West and its allies and nuclear weapons are thus a good "insurance policy" for the future. The same goes for North Korea.

(...)

You need to learn to distinguish between the reality and the ways different countries/regimes perceive it.

I'm not sure who needs to learn what here... Countries do not feel. Apart from that Iran is pretty assertive about anyone trying to 'push it around'. And ofcourse North Korea 'feels', as you say, it's being pushed around; it's practically a third world nation - if any.

Iran is extremely being pushed around by foreign players, and has been during all of the years of the current political control there. They are constrained, severely, from doing as they please. Now you could argue the merits of those constraints, but you can't really claim they aren't there.

Again: what foreign or domestic policies of Iran are being decisively influenced from outside Iran?

 

[Cutlass]

Again: what foreign or domestic policies of Iran are being decisively influenced from outside Iran?

The fact that they want to export their revolution, for one.

 

[uppi]

The news articles do not provide any information on how to actually enrich the uranium with a laser so I doubt it'll be that simple.

Look at the figure at the top of the page I linked in the OP. The working principle is described right there.

You think any nuclear physicist couldn't reconstruct what the theory is just in knowing that it's considered possible?

You'd need an atomic physicist instead of a nuclear physicist, but the theory is actually quite simple and it is an established technique in atomic physics. The only challenge is to design a large scale setup that can enrich macroscopic amounts of uranium at reasonable cost.

 

[Agent327]

The fact that they want to export their revolution, for one.

Any foreign policy of any nation has to take into account other nation's interests; it doesn't follow from that that Iran is 'being pushed around.' (I wouldn't know to which countries Iran would be able to 'export their revolution' as you say. There aren't that many regimes around that are susceptible to a Shiite revolution Iran-style. (And the reason Iran might want to develop an Islamic Bomb, is precisely the fact that it is such an isolated regime, even in the Islamic world - although the invasion of Iraq actually has increased Irani influence in the region, besides eliminating a vehement opponent of Iran.)

 

[Winner]

Iran is extremely being pushed around by foreign players, and has been during all of the years of the current political control there. They are constrained, severely, from doing as they please. Now you could argue the merits of those constraints, but you can't really claim they aren't there.

Precisely.

Iran wants a bigger clout in the Middle East, but unless it can keep the West from intervening against it, it's limited to covert means. With nukes to scare the West from a direct intervention, its hand would be much more free.

Japan's decline is inevitable. As a result of a demographic crisis, the nation will lose a third of its population within the next few decades. Currently its the oldest nation in the world and has an ever shrinking birth rate (1.2 births per woman) It is also highly ethnically homogenous as a result of its strict immigration policies (98.5% are Japanese). The country's economic power has been slowly disappearing since it reached stagnation in the 1990s.

Ah, the same old "aging population will doom us all" argument. I don't buy it. Demographic predictions are notoriously unreliable, and many things might change. Not to mention that China, Korea, Taiwan, and perhaps other Asian countries face or soon will face the exact same demographic problems.

And BTW, Japan might react to its relative decline precisely by becoming more hardline against its neighbours (especially if it feels cornered).

I'm not sure who needs to learn what here... Countries do not feel. Apart from that Iran is pretty assertive about anyone trying to 'push it around'. And ofcourse North Korea 'feels', as you say, it's being pushed around; it's practically a third world nation - if any.

Are you familiar with the concept of "figure of speech"? Countries "feel" in so far as their ruling elites "feel", i.e. share a particular opinion of what the country is, what danger it faces, what it should do, etc., and act according to these convictions.

Iran is being economically, politically, militarily, and diplomatically isolated by a coalition of Sunni Arab countries and the West. Just now its currency is in free-fall due to Western sanctions, and you're asking how we're "pushing it around"? Are you serious?

 

[Agent327]

And BTW, Japan might react to its relative decline precisely by becoming more hardline against its neighbours (especially if it feels cornered).

What relative decline? And how would that 'decline' result in Japan developing a nuclear strike force? (See also below.)

Are you familiar with the concept of "figure of speech"? Countries "feel" in so far as their ruling elites "feel", i.e. share a particular opinion of what the country is, what danger it faces, what it should do, etc., and act according to these convictions.

Iran is being economically, politically, militarily, and diplomatically isolated by a coalition of Sunni Arab countries and the West. Just now its currency is in free-fall due to Western sanctions, and you're asking how we're "pushing it around"? Are you serious?

Quite serious. What you just mentioned is the result of Iran's own stance, i.e. to a very large extent Iran has isolated itself by its own policies. How this results in your view of Iran 'being pushed around' I don't quite follow.

And countries nor their elites 'feel' anything. There are opinions, governing opinions, opposing opninions, yes. And all those opinions are no doubt to a smaller or larger extent influenced by the feelings of the people who hold them. Your figure of speech is the same way in which a certain dictator claimed that his country needed 'living space'. So I consider it a bad choice of words at best. A country is not a living organism; it's an abstraction. (A very vivid abstraction to those that believe in it, but an abstraction nonetheless.)