An Armed and Dangerous Place

I have to admit that I'm pretty worried about the militarization of the international society. Particularly one should be worried about the spread of weapons of mass destruction (henceforth WMD). Of course, at a first glance it may seem ridiculous that just a few countries should agree upon who has the right to develop nuclear weapons, but come to think of it I'd be more than happy to live in world with as few atomic bombs as possible threatening the very existence of humanity. So I'm not enthused that the nuclear club now has been expanded to eight members with Israel, Pakistan and India having developed and tested A-bombs during the last two decades or so. Furthermore, rouge state North Korea alledges that it is the ninth country to have entered the club, an event that unravelled a clandestine network of spreading nuclear knowledge and technology within an extended axis of evil. Libya admitted to having been working on a bomb, but abandoned their project. Talking of nuclear ambitions, Iran denies vehemently that it is constructing a bomb (even though the smoking gun evidence could appear anytime), while Brazil vows its ambitions on developing its own bomb. And one shouldn't rule out Japan, nor South Korea, nor South Africa, nor...

Adding to pessimism so far, consider the spread of other WMDs, the frail support for the anti-personell mine convention, and that there is no convention regulating the spread of hand weapons. Resorting to weapons and violence has always been the compelling argument of the strong, but also the voice of the oppressed. Two most interesting blogs, The Armchair Generalist and Arms and Influence, discuss in depth military affairs and the political use of violence, respectively. Both should be recommended reading for people interested in realpolitik and the current state of our world.