By Jonathan Power
LUND, Sweden | 29 April 2026 (IDN) — Not long ago, U.S. Strategic Command—the branch responsible for nuclear weapons—issued a stark warning: conflict conditions could “very rapidly drive an adversary to consider nuclear use as their least bad option.” That sober assessment captures a growing unease.
President Joe Biden’s decision to send advanced weapons to Ukraine marked a moment when escalation felt dangerously plausible. Although that specific crisis passed, others have followed—and more are likely as long as the war endures.
Today, the world arguably stands closer to confrontation with Russia than at any time since the Cuban Missile Crisis.
Unravelling the Architecture of Arms Control
The Cold War lesson—that “a nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought”—agreed by Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev in 1985, is steadily eroding.
Key arms control agreements have been dismantled. President George W. Bush withdrew from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, undermining mutual deterrence. Later, Donald Trump exited the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, eliminating constraints on missile deployments in Europe.
Technological developments have deepened mistrust. Systems like the Aegis missile defence platform—once described as limited—now appear capable of altering the strategic balance, potentially weakening deterrence and halting nuclear disarmament.
The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists now sets its Doomsday Clock at 100 seconds to midnight—calling it “the new abnormal.”
The Persistent Danger of Accident and Miscalculation
Beyond deliberate conflict lies another danger: accidental nuclear war. History offers chilling examples. Reports of an incoming Soviet strike once awakened Zbigniew Brzezinski, only to be later revealed as a false alarm.
Such incidents underline how fragile nuclear command systems can be. Figures like Tulsi Gabbard, George Butler, and Sam Nunn have all warned that humanity has survived largely by luck, not flawless control.
Contrary to popular belief, nuclear war is not governed by a single “button.” A complex chain of command—spanning launch officers, submarine commanders, and political leaders—creates multiple points where catastrophe could be triggered.
Even a limited exchange—say, 100 warheads—could inject massive soot into the atmosphere, blocking sunlight and disrupting global climate for decades.
Ukraine: The Most Dangerous Flashpoint
Today, the most likely flashpoint remains Ukraine. In many ways, it echoes the tensions surrounding Poland before World War II—a comparison explored by historian A. J. P. Taylor.
Analysts like Edward Lozansky warn that miscalculations involving Kyiv, Washington, and NATO could trigger a wider war. The failure to implement the Minsk agreements—endorsed by multiple parties—represents a missed opportunity to defuse the crisis.
The doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction—once intended to prevent war—now seems to be evolving into something more unstable: a state of “MADDER.”
Given the stakes, the question remains stark: how can nuclear war be considered an option at all? Yet, amid geopolitical rivalry and strategic misjudgment, it continues to hover—unthinkable, but not impossible. [IDN-InDepthNews]
Copyright: Jonathan Power