Do Nuclear Weapons guarantee Peace?

 

1. Do Nuclear Weapons guarantee Peace .....?
   
   No they don't......
   
   Within a couple of years of their use on Japan Nuclear Weapons did not deter the Soviet Union from their blockade of Berlin. Neither did they prevent North Korea - with Soviet and Chinese Support - from invading the South. They did nothing to stop the Warsaw Pact clampdown on the Protests in Poland and Hungary in 1956 and did not dissuade North Vietnam from pursuing their Aims - again, with Soviet and Chinese Support - in Indochina against Saigon, the French and Americans. The same applied in Czechoslovakia in 1968, the various Cold War Crises of the 1970's and the Soviets War in Afghanistan.
   
   Indeed, it could be argued that they nearly caused World War several times during all this ....
   
   General MacArthur wanted to use the Bomb on North Korea and China but, thankfully, was prevented from doing so by President Truman.
   
   The Cuban Missile Crisis pushed the World to the Brink by mutually provoking both America and the Soviet Union. Khrushchev wanted Missiles in Cuba because America had them in Turkey, both of which would have rendered any early warning Systems useless by their Proximity, and there were People in X-Com who were prepared to launch a full scale pre-emptive Attack on Cuba in response to the Weapons that were there.
   
   Nixon wanted to use them on North Vietnam but cooler Heads prevailed.
   
   More recently, the UK might have had the Bomb but it did not prevent the Argentine invasion of the Falkland Islands, even though Polaris could very easily have been launched from a Submarine off the Coast of Buenos Aries.
   
   It was the prospect of a Nuclear Strike by the West created during the Exercise "Able Archer" in 1983 which nearly prompted a full Soviet Response.
   
   Both India and Pakistan have Nuclear Weapons, but their continuing and occasionally violent Spat about the disputed Kashmir Region has never ended.
   
   Both China and the US have the Bomb but neither have prevented the other in the continuing Jostle over Taiwan. Nukes did nothing to prevent the provocatively unthinkable recently when the Speaker of the US Congress Nancy Pelosi crossed the diplomatic Line and recognised Taiwan as an independent country. The proverbial Third Rail in Sino-US Relations.
   
   Israel now has Nuclear Weapons, but this has never prevented any incursions against them since, or the huge Iranian Response to their Assault last year (2025).
   
   So it could be argued that the very existence of Nuclear Weapons might actually cause War and even the Doomsday Scenario. They induce a sense of Complacency which neglects other Solutions.
   
   The Cold War started when Truman wanted to scare the Soviets by using a new Atomic Weapon in 1945, which merely hardened Attitudes and guaranteed that Moscow would begin work on their own Bomb rather than a Spirit of Conciliation between the former WW2 Allies.
   
   It wasn't until the Missile Crisis of 1962 when the potential use of Nuclear Weapons became horribly apparent that work started to be rid of them with the first in a succession of Treaties governing them.
   
   

2. Have Nuclear Weapons even escalated Conflict?
   
   Yes they have and Events from the end of the 1950's to 1962 and again in 1983 prove that.
   
   There had been a 15 year stand off between the West and Soviet Spheres since the end of WW2. There were even hostilities during times when one was very close to the other.
   
   Khrushchev once described West Berlin as "a Bone stuck in his Throat" while there might have been the Blockade and then the Berlin Wall in response to all this.
   
   America had a similar Attitude about Cuba after the Revolution and it became apparent they were Communists allied to the Soviets. There was the disastrous Bay of Pigs Fiasco, economic Warfare and even novel Ideas to depose Castro.
   
   But neither led to whole Fleets facing each other off in the Atlantic like they did during the 1962 Crisis - which was caused by the very presence of Nuclear Weapons close to each others Territory.
   
   "Able Archer" in 1983 might otherwise have been seen by the Soviets as just another NATO War Exercise were it not for what was thought to be a first Strike Nuclear Attack until further Scrutiny showed it wasn't. Were it not for the better Judgement shown by a Soviet Lieutenant that Day civilisation would have ended 43 years ago.
   
   This wasn't the only time the Soviets saved the World from the Abyss.
   
   During the 1962 Missile Crisis a Soviet Submarine was being pummeled by American Depth Charges and the Captain was on the brink of using a tactical Nuclear Weapon. The Crews Political Officer talked him down and prevented Nuclear War.
   
   Many have suggested that Truman was wrong to use the Bomb against Japan.
   
   It could also be argued that the Soviets would have forced Emperor Hirohito to sue for unconditional Surrender after they smashed the Japanese Armies in Manchuria and Mongolia. Japan had been hoping for a conditional Surrender via Moscow in the months before and had never faced the Soviet Army in Battle.
   
   They very rapidly lost all the Territory they had on the north eastern Asian Mainland and it was obvious the Soviets weren't going to act as intermediaries.
   
   So the use of the Bomb might have been unnecessary - even though the first Attack was before the Soviet Declaration of War on Tokyo. This is because their Invasion of Manchuko took months to prepare and Stalin had pledged a War on Japan as long ago as Yalta in February 1945, long before he knew about American Nuclear Weapons.
   
   So Truman might have begun a 45 year Spiral that could very quickly have gone into apocalyptic free fall.

From "Axis of Evil" to being "On the Brink"

As the Title suggests this examines the Quote from a 2002 Speech by an American President to one from a British Foreign Secretary a couple of days ago.

More recently, things have escalated even further as a US Carrier Group makes it's way towards the Gulf. This is how several Scenarios lead to WW3.

From "Axis of Evil" to being "on the Brink".

So how did we get here?

The recent Protests and State response in Iran which has caused the current Crisis where Diplomatic Missions in the middle East are evacuated and the West readies for War with Iran did not happen in a vacuum and started years ago with GWB.

Even the AI on Google agrees in response to the Question: "Did "Axis of Evil" cause the conservative backlash in Iran?" here was the response......

"Yes, George W. Bush’s foreign policy, most notably his 2002 "Axis of Evil" speech, is widely credited with fueling a conservative backlash in Iran that crippled the domestic reformist movement.

Key impacts of the Bush administration's approach include:

Empowerment of Hardliners: Bush's rhetoric provided Iranian radical Islamists with a powerful political weapon to use against their modernist rivals. By framing the U.S. as a persistent existential threat, conservatives revived militant revolutionary language and sidelined reformists like President Mohammad Khatami.

Stalling Reform: The "Axis of Evil" label was viewed by Iranian political elites as a "betrayal" of the cooperation Iran had provided during the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan. This shift eroded the ability of reformists to argue for transparency or moderation in foreign and domestic policies.

The "Axis of Evil" Impact: The speech sparked immediate outrage across Iran's political spectrum, uniting both reformists and conservatives in condemnation. Analysts note that while public support for reform remained high, the conservative "Old Guard" successfully used the perceived American hostility to seize the political initiative.

Long-term Shift: This backlash contributed to the eventual rise of hardliner Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in 2005, marking a significant departure from the more cooperative era sought by reformists earlier in the decade."

So the Situation in Iran that threatens to draw the whole World into WW3 began 24 years ago with a Speech by the US President of the time.

Something many of us have been very critical of in the years since.

What I'm saying here is a reformed Iran was exactly what the Iranians were working towards 25 years ago - without the risk of a regional, or even a global, War - until their task was made next to impossible by a misguided and ignorant Speech by an American President in 2002.

A Speech that ignored recent History the Presidents own Father was involved in.

To lump Iran in with Iraq was extremely erroneous given how they had fought a brutal War with each other in the 1980's - during which America and others supported Saddam. Iran remained neutral during the 1990/1 Gulf War and did not support Saddam at all.

To compare them to North Korea was even more erroneous as it ignored the Fact that traditionalist Muslims don't like Communists. This was exactly why America supported the Mujahedin in Afghanistan as they fought the "Communist Infidels" of the Soviet Union and their own Government. Or why the Soviets supported the Marxist Government in Kabul and were fearful of the Islamic States in their own backyard.

Both Foreign Policies happened when GWB's Father was the American Vice President.

24 years later you have an Iraq where many Shia Muslims are as loyal to Tehran as they might be Baghdad, an Iran who now probably does have dealings with a Nuclear North Korea, and a Geopolitical Alliance with both Russia and China.

Instead of a reformed Iran that could have happened without Bloodshed.

And one that doesn't now face the Risk of Civil War like the one that raged in Syria for nearly 15 years. Except this one would happen in a Country that could sever the Persian Gulf from the rest of the World, flatten pro-Western Arab States, severely damage Israel, and is far bigger and geopolitically far more significant to their Allies.

The Chinese angle .......

A lot of gung ho Idiots might think that putting pressure on Iran acts as a choke point to China but Chinese Oil imports from the Gulf Region amounted to half it's total Oil imports in 2024.

Any destabilisation in Iran threatens to render the Straits of Hormuz completely unnavigable which would include Shipping to China from all the Gulf States. Would Beijing tolerate such a huge disruption to its Supply?

The gung ho Lunatics might think it's a good thing if that happened, but here's why it wouldn't be.......

China supplies America with 50% of the USA's medical needs including essentials like Gauze, protective supplies and basics like Ibuprofen.

The EU is even more dependent - relying on China for up to 95% of its ingredients for Drugs like Anti Biotics.

There are many other Areas of Industry where China has become a huge supplier of Goods - from electrical and consumer Goods to EV's, Telecoms and heavy engineering - and while importers are trying to become less dependant on Chinese Products it won't happen overnight, Factories, Foundries and retooling can take years to develop, while the resulting economic conflict would merely add to the Tension.

And this doesn't include the growing standoff involving Taiwan, the world's biggest supplier of microprocessors.

All of this at a time when supply chains are under more strain than they have ever been since WW2.

If People think Price increases have been steep in the last 4 years what might they be if the Situation in Iran escalated?

None of this helped by what is happening in Venezuela and elsewhere.

In both "Threads" and "Countdown to Looking Glass" - Films that deal with the Preamble to Nuclear War the Scenarios start in Iran, but the Threat now is more real than even the most realistic of Films.

America was always worried about the Soviet Union taking control of Iran's Oil - which is why they deposed Iran's leader Mohammed Mossadegh and installed the Shah. They continued to supply Iran with Weapons until the Islamic Revolution toppled the Shah'ist Regime in 1979, after which they were concerned that the Soviets would move on Tehran to establish Geopolitical and economic Links.

Russia now has very firm links with Iran - being the main provider of Nuclear Technology - while Iran has supplied Moscow with Weapons used in the War in Ukraine. A lot of this in response to western Foreign Policy with both Countries. In better times Russia acted as guarantor to Iranian compliance with the JCPOA Treaty. As the Situation deteriorated that no longer applies.

WW2 started with Conflicts in various Parts of the World gradually merging with each other, from the Far East to North Africa, Spain then the rest of Europe - and finally America.

We are seeing the same thing happening gradually now and Tensions don't seem to be easing. Conflicts in Eastern Europe, North Africa, the Arctic Circle, the Far and Middle East and Latin America.

Unfortunately any World War resulting from these won't end with Victory Street Parties in Trafalgar and Times Square, or Red and Tiananmen Square depending in which side you are on.

They will end with nothing - because no one will win and everyone loses everything.

And also ........ How about the Iranian People themselves?

Given what happened in Iraq after Saddam and the brutal Pogroms against Alawite Muslims and Christians in Syria after the collapse of the Assad Government has anyone considered what could happen in Iran if the same thing is done there?

Alawites - including Women and Children - were slaughtered in Syria by Agents of the HTS Government even though they had nothing to do with the Assad Regime. Christians were murdered despite Jolani's assurances of religious Pluralism. So how about Iran after 46 years in it's current form and anyone who is accused of being involved with the Government? Given the Slaughter in Syria would the new Regime bother to establish Guilt or Innocence?

Then there was what happened in Iraq after Saddam, where Maliki's Government imposed discriminatory Laws against Sunni Muslims regardless of any or no involvement in the Ba'ath Party.

They endured everything from suspected Complicity to accusations of Terrorism and lost many Rights including those to their own Property.

The potential for a terrible Pogrom in Iran should the Government fall is quite real and could kill, maim and displace 100's of 1000's.

2012 ....... Or the Day after Tomorrow?

 2012 ........ or the Day after tomorrow?

A Geologist could study the Fault Lines and Tectonic Plates of the geopolitical World as much as they could the geological ones.

A Patchwork or Network of Allegiances and Enmities that met at certain points mostly remaining dormant apart from an occasional Rumble as they jostle against each other then settle down.

But what if they don't and begin to erupt or cause an Earthquake like those at San Andreas?

Berlin was one for a very long time, with several tremors caused by the Berlin Airlift, and the Building of the Wall. Korea saw the huge Plates of the Soviet Union and China collide with a predominantly American one. Cuba in 1962 or Hungary and Poland in 1956 and Czechoslovakia in 1968, then there was Vietnam. 

Not to mention the various Conflicts of "Proxies" in the Israeli-Arab World.

The Balkans in the 1990's was another as the Serbs were tacitly supported by Russia and others by the West and finally NATO.

The Ukraine is an example of how this has happened after it remained dormant after WW2. It might have seethed occasionally during the Cold War with Operation Nightingale and maybe even a few stand offs in the Air and on the Sea with NATO in the Black Sea but these were isolated Incidents.

But what we have seen in recent years is different and the Incidents not only aren't isolated they are also causing other Fault Lines in the region and beyond to rupture. From the Baltic to the Balkans old Wounds that were gradually healing have reopened. This has also happened in Scandinavia which has even seen new ones form between Russia and Sweden.

The Balts have revisited their Acrimony with Moscow and Poland seals it's Border with Belarus while watching the Suwalki Corridor.

In an ominous resonance of History the Balkans have begun to creak. The Serbian Government try to straddle their Loyalties with both Russia and the EU they are now surrounded by. They are also now surrounded by NATO - who launched their Assault on Serbia in the 1990's. This might have begun to heal in an uneasy Peace were it not for the War in Ukraine which has caused the Serbs to look to their traditional Russian Allies as they wonder what intrigue could be done to them.

The Bosnian Serbs in Pale have begun to jostle for Secession from the Bosnian Federation which puts a huge strain on the Region and causes raised Eyebrows in both Brussels and Belgrade.

While not in NATO Bosnia - or at least its Bosniaks - enjoy preferred Status, but while things remain in flux it allows the Bosnian Serbs a very small Land bridge to the Dalmatian Coast and the outside World.

The increasing Pressure caused by the War in Ukraine and the growing Tectonic Plates that confront each other in it could cause any allegiances in the former Yugoslavia to solidify and become fixed.

A Trip to Sarajevo anyone?

Further East, the Fault Line of Transnistria - which erupted in War between pro-West Moldovans and ethnic Russians - had remained dormant for 30 years until the Ukraine Conflict caused a Conflict Line between Russia and the eastern Balkans.

Then, there was "Axis of Evil" and how that proved very counterproductive.

This created the impression that Iran, Iraq and North Korea somehow had regular meetings to decide how they would destroy the civilised world. It ignored how they were either Enemies (Iran/Iraq) or indifferent to each other (Iran/North Korea), and each worked in isolation of each other. After the "Axis of Evil" Speech they gradually found common Cause, while the Shia Moslems of Iraq gravitated to Tehran. Suddenly they begin to coalesce.

This was shown during the 12 Day War with Israel and Iran, and then America, in 2025 where the years before had seen Iran align itself with bigger players to its north and north east.

The Ukraine War reinforced this and extended it to Russia and China. Suddenly there's a vast Tectonic Plates across the length and breath of Eastern Europe, Siberia, Asia and the far and Middle East. A very dangerous Fault Line appeared in the Persian Gulf, while the Israelis onslaught on Gaza caused another which threatened the Suez Canal.

In the far East and Oceania North Korea reinforced it's Links with Russia and China causing another Fault Line with one of the Worlds biggest Economies Japan and increasing nervousness with the Anzacs. The Indonesian Islands could become a Choke Point between the Indian and Pacific Oceans, while India gradually moves towards their Continental Neighbours.

So how does all this connect with the Films "2012" and "The Day after Tomorrow"?

The former shows what happens when an Earthquake isn't just something that famously struck San Francisco or Turkey and Syria. That it involves the whole Surface of the World which is engulfed in vast Seismic Traumas and Tsunami 1000's of feet high.

That the geopolitical Tremors and Traumas which threaten us now could very quickly spread and engulf the whole World.

The latter shows what happens when a Storm does the same thing and isn't another isolated Hurricane on Americas eastern Seaboard or Carribbean.

So, while a Geologist could use their Craft to interpret Geopolitics so could a Climatologist use Meteorological Charts to do the same thing.

What is particularly ominous is how Jack's Computer generated Model shows huge Storms over where Nuclear War could happen - North America, Europe and Russia. It doubles down when it leads to an Ice Age that could be analogous to a Nuclear Winter.

The OSCE ........ or NATO?

 The OSCE ...... or NATO?

Many of the Problems we have now are due to the gradual neglect of the OSCE or Organisation of Security and Cooperation in Europe.

This was an initiative that was meant to establish a working relationship of Security from Portugal to Vladivostok and a way forward in the post-Cold War World Order.

Originally conceived between European Countries, America and the Soviet Union, as Sergei Lavrov says it could very easily have continued with post-Soviet Russia.

Indeed, in conjunction with the CFE or Conventional Forces in Europe Treaty - signed by western European, former Warsaw Pact and Soviet Countries - it would have acted as a Guarantee against where we are now. Because everyone is in it - including Ukraine and Georgia - Russia would feel no Threat to it's Security.

Thus, there would be no War in Ukraine, while the Dynamic affecting the Ukraine-EU Association Agreement would have been very different.

It would also have had other effects far beyond the Lisbon-Vladivostok Corridor.

The enmity with Iran wouldn't exist because as an OSCE Partner Russia would use it's substantial Leverage with Tehran while Relations with China would be more inclusive than fractious. Even North Korea would see the Writing on the Wall and adjust accordingly.

So instead of green lighting NATO expansion President Bill Clinton and others like the UK Prime Minister and German and French Leaders ought to have been working to develop the OSCE.

The CFE Treaty was adapted at a Conference in Istanbul in 1999 so former Soviet States could ratify it on a national rather than soviet Basis.

The Arrangement began to unravel in 2007 when Russia cited NATO enlargement and how it increased Weapons in signatory Countries as the reason for their suspending it. They mentioned Missile Systems in Poland, Bases in Romania and other things which rendered the Treaty meaningless.

NATO responded by criticising Russian Troop presences in both Moldova and Georgia.

This was before the Georgian War of 2008, which gave Russia some justification for being there as Peacekeepers when Georgian Artillery began firing at South Ossetian Villages and the enclaves Capital Tskhinvali. Even the EU found in a subsequent enquiry against the Georgians for deliberately targeting Civilians and dubbed the episode a War Crime.

The Moldovan Story goes back to the Transnistria War where ethnic Russians - backed by Ukraine - fought for independence against the Romanian Moldovans, and it could be argued that Russian Soldiers were there to act as guarantors, particularly as the Chisinau Government were veering towards Europe and maybe even NATO.

As the War in Ukraine began after the Russian Military Operation of 2022 there were fears in Moldova that they might become the "next Ukraine", and even Sergei Lavrov once mentioned this. It was because of Moldova's proximity to Odessa.

Except, shouldn't this have been added to the Reasons why Zelenskiy ought to have ratified the Istanbul Communique in April 2022?

The Treaty guaranteed Ukraine's possession of the famous Black Sea port, and thus, a sizable buffer between Moldova and the Russian held Oblasts of the Donbas and Crimea.

Any Russian Troops in Transnistria would have been bound by the Treaty, while Fears surrounding their Presence and Moldovans position in European-NATO Geopolitics ought to have been the subject of further negotiations and a Treaty.

The OSCE and CFE Treaties - along with the Intermediate Nuclear Forces Treaty - were the things that prevented Missiles from crashing into every European Capital and City. These were the Frameworks for how the post-Cold War World Order would look, while the START Treaty covered strategic Arms that meant the rest of the World.

As these formed Lines that should never be crossed the World becomes increasingly dangerous as each one becomes fainter by the Month, or erased completely.

NATO expansion effectively cancelled the CFE Treaty as Member States increased their Military beyond it. An Irony probably not lost on Russians who see it as akin to Germany violating the Versailles Treaty when it expanded it's Armed Forces in the 1930's.

One Problem President Trump has with anyone who has been paying attention is how he was the one who walked out of the INF Treaty - and then did the same with the JCPOA Deal with Iran. The latter was a Deal with Tehran that they should curtail their Nuclear Program in return for Sanctions relief. Because he did this, not only were Sanctions reapplied, we are now in the very ambiguous position of having to guess what Iran's Nuclear program might be doing. The latter is proving very dangerous, with Trump deploying Aircraft Carriers to the Region and rattling a very large Sabre.

None of this would be happening if he hadn't left the JCPOA.

Not helped by the growing Iranian enmity with an Israel that does have the Bomb.

Meanwhile, Russian fears of western Militarism shouldn't be underestimated.

It took heaps of reassurance from a plethora of western and NATO Leaders to convince Gorbachev to support German reunification. Everyone, from James Baker to Margaret Thatcher, Manfred Woerner to Helmut Kohl, and French Leaders, all told him "not one Inch eastward"!

Despite nearly 45 years of liberal democracy in the Bundesrepublik or West Germany, Gorbachev was still wary of how a unified Germany would bring NATO further east and nearer to his Border, such was the impact of Operation Barbarossa on the Soviet/Russian Psyche.

Subsequently how could People be shocked when "Gorby" came down firmly in support of Putin over Ukraine, rather than condemn him? But then, he was the one who must have felt most betrayed when NATO did expand, being the Leader in the Kremlin when those pledges were made.

The OSCE - along with the supporting Treaties - was supposed to be how the World would be once the NATO-Warsaw Pact Stand-off ended. Even Vaclav Havel alluded to this when he suggested a similar Arrangement in 1990, saying; the Soviet Union should join NATO, or the Organisation be dismantled as it's Warsaw Pact Opponent no longer existed.

Moscow didn't join, but this was finally deemed unnecessary as the OSCE and Treaties of Paris and Helsinki would facilitate the alternative.

What we are seeing now is the consequences of all this being neglected.

..........

WHY ARE TREATIES IMPORTANT?

Treaty's are crucial to maintain some semblance of international Law.

History shows us what happens when they are violated, the most significant being that of Versailles and Munich. The former restricting Germanies Military expansion, the latter meant to prevent it's geographical equivalent, violation of both resulting in WW2. Reparations being the formers Weakness and warned against by several People, including the Architect of the League of Nations Robert Gascoyne Cecil.

The subsequent War cancelled the Treaty's of St Germaine as Countries disappeared into the Reich.

In recent years the Oslo Accords died with the Zionist Bullet in 1995 and Nablus now has empty would-be Government Buildings, Gaza is reduced to Rubble, West Bank increasingly annexed and Palestinians decimated.

The CFE Treaty effectively cancelled by NATO expansion while the OSCE, with its origins in Helsinki and Paris, sidelined by it. The INF Treaty was rendered meaningless by further NATO deployment and development of dual purpose Weapons that could be turned into Nuclear Missiles. That finally died when Trump #1 abandoned it.

The JCPOA was meant to ensure Iranian cooperation in not developing Nuclear Weapons and Trump #1 abandoned that one too.

By her own admission former German Chancellor Angela Merkel said how the West used the Minsk Accords as a way to buy time to further arm and militarise a Ukraine that was being brought closer to NATO Membership.

And the very reason NATO expanded was because, while both Gorbachev and Yeltsin were given assurances it wouldn't there was no Treaty to ensure it.

There are others which have now become nominal as the Situation is anathema to their aspirations.

So, as these disappear or are made impotent by belligerence or contempt we could descend into a neo-dark Age like the time when arbitrary Powers could War with each other on a Whim.

What we are seeing is the gradual erosion of the Peace of Westphalia.

This was a series of Treaties signed in Osnabruck and Munster in 1648 to end both the 30 year and 80 year Wars.

It was felt that if these continued there would be nothing left of Europe as all combatants would have fought each other to death and that had to end.

It established several principles ....

Ending religious Wars between Catholics and Protestants.

The rise and sovereignty of nation states.

Foundation of international Law.

All of this being the premise upon which other Treaty's are built.

So, Treaty's are important to maintain a World Order that means Countries and their People can develop and live in Peace. Europe after WW2 enjoyed 40 years of it until the Balkans descended into Wars of the 1990's with the break up of Yugoslavia and the Transnistria War.

Compared to the Ukraine though these were very regional Conflicts that didn't draw the whole World into them. The Ukraine Conflict has caused Europe to move even further away from the Treaties that bound it, including it's very existence, meant to prevent War in Europe.

A LAME EXCUSE......

It has been said that the OSCE could never replace NATO because it doesn't have anything like the same resources.

The Answer to that is a simple one, give them the resources ......

The OSCE - with its origins in Summits in Helsinki and Paris - was meant to be a Framework for how Security and Cooperation would happen in Europe after the confrontational Situation caused by the Warsaw Pact and NATO ended.

In other words, the end of the Cold War which saw the end of the Pact but not that of NATO.

Like the end of any major Conflict a huge amount of restructuring should happen after it, which means developing the OSCE with former Warsaw Pact Countries and the Soviet Union/then former Soviet Republics integrated with what would soon become former NATO Countries.

The end of the Cold War was the thing that defined the Era, like the end of both World Wars.

1918 saw the birth of the League of Nations, and the end of World War 2 the UN and the framework that would become the European Economic Community and then EU.

So the same Resolve should have happened at the end of a Cold War that had affected global alignments for 40 years. The Resources that had been used to supply it's stand off on both sides being channeled into the new Framework.

Thus, former NATO and Warsaw Pact Staff share the same Offices and Work Space.

And why would this have been impossible when you see how easily former Warsaw Pact and even Soviet Countries joined the EU and NATO from what they were before?

And they were staunchly anti western.

It wasn't just Soviet Forces who went into Hungary in 1956 and Czechoslovakia in 1968. The former saw Hungarian Communist Forces support the Soviets while the latter was a coalition of Warsaw Pact Countries that included the Soviet Union, Poland, Bulgaria and Hungary.

And how about before that when former Axis Countries joined NATO - starting with Italy in 1949 and West Germany in 1955? Only a few years before both were in a very hot War with their new NATO Partners.

More recently, almost all the Weapons and Equipment like the MIG29's and Artillery Pieces former Warsaw Pact Countries like Poland were giving Ukraine in 2022 were from the Cold War when they got them from the Soviet Union.

Any of those in my Age Group who were in their mid to late 20's at the end of the Cold War might have served in NATO or Warsaw Pact Militaries for the last 10 years of that Cold War. We were old enough to remember it but young enough to to be part of what would make things right as the division of Europe came to and end. The end of a European Civil War that started in 1914.

At least that's what some of us hoped for.

But that didn't happen and it became apparent that NATO expansion would usurp the OSCE and come to dominate the post Cold War Geopolitics.

And that expansion with the exclusion of Russia told Moscow who it was being set off against.

So the question I'm asking here is why, at the end of WW1 which saw the end of 3 Empires (German, Austro-Hungarian and Russian), the start of the Soviet Union, the creation of several new Countries in Europe and the League of Nations.

Or how the end of WW2 and 6 years of disruption to World Trade, a War that ravaged most of Europe, where some Countries still endured Rationing up to the 1950's, that saw a Continent divided, and millions of Refugees, plus the end of several more Empires and the expansion of 2 they could still find the Resolve and Resources to provide Marshall Aid, create the UN, and what would become NATO and the European Union, but they couldn't find similar for the OSCE at the end of a Cold War that had none of the above?

But had significantly shaped and defined the World for every year since the second would War.

If the same Resolve and Resources had been channelled into the OSCE they'd have secured Peace and we'd have avoided the Situation we are in now where the World is becoming more dangerous than it ever was even during any of the above Conflicts.

The War everyone hoped wouldn't happen.

In recent Days a full blown, direct shooting War started with Israel and Iran with the former beginning an illegal AND EXTREMELY RECKLESS preemptive Attack on the latter. I began writing Commentary on it and given the severe Gravitas of the situation I felt it necessary to turn those Comments into a Post on the subject........   

Pearl Harbour 2......

There are so many parallels with the Israeli Attack on Iran in the early Hours of June 13th and the Japanese Attack on Pearl Harbour in December 1942.

The Japanese were in Negotiations with the Americans right up to their Attack - using the Talks as a Feint while they prepared for it - rather like it looks like the supposed 'Negotiations' President Trump's Team were doing with Tehran were happening while Americas Ally Israel were preparing for their Attack.

Trump now looks to the Iranians and their Allies like Yamamoto or General Tojo, and is probably regarded in the same way.

This must have raised Eyebrows in Moscow as they have been 'negotiating' with America in the last Month while they had the recent Attacks on the Airfields and Railways to contend with.

But then, didn't they have 'negotiations' in Minsk which were - as Angela Merkel confessed - just a Feint while the West armed and militarised Ukraine?

Intriguing how a German Chancellor would say this after another in the Reichstag used Munich 1938 to buy time to further equip before his invasion of Poland the year after.

Given how dangerous this can be isn't all this utterly detestable that western Leaders should deliberately forfeit any Trust their Negotiating Partners are meant to have to give the Process any substance?

History repeating.....or ignored?

During the 1962 Missile Crisis Kennedy was very reluctant to attack Cuba for this very reason. That he did not want to be seen treating Havana like Pearl Harbour while there was scope for negotiation with Khrushchev. He was being pressured by his General Staff to do so, but he held firm.

Given the potential Consequences it's just as well he did.

Other similarities ....

Maybe he had learnt his lesson from the Bay of Pigs fiasco the year before when the same People talked him into launching the Invasion, and how it would prompt an insurrection against the Cuban Government.

Both failed.

The Bay of Pigs also failed because Kennedy wasn't going to get drawn into a direct War with Cuba - which is what those attempting to manipulate him wanted him to do.

So, about whether America and Israel are hoping attacks on Tehran will invoke the same and Iranians will rise up against their Government?

Didn't they learn anything from "Axis of Evil" when GWB lumped Iran in with it despite Tehran's reformist Government of the time?

Did the Iranians panic and scurry off to vote for an even more pro-western Candidate in the Election after Bush's Gaffe? No they didn't, and they voted instead for a former Revolutionary Guard.

Yet more History repeating ......

Is this "WMD's" 2, a rerun of the 2003 War in Iraq?

The thing here is, given that Iran doesn't actually have any Nuclear Weapons, any "smoking Guns turning into Mushroom Clouds" could very well be Israeli. That Israel could resort to their proven to exist Nuclear Weapons should things become so parlous that a Population who have never had a War like this on their own Soil demand it.

Or that Netanyahu could blackmail other Countries to support him by using this Threat.....

"If things get too bad I might have to use the Bomb unless you help" that sort of thing.

It's a Fait Accompli because if others do get drawn into it Iran's Allies who also have the Bomb will feel obliged to support Tehran. Pakistan has even offered to Nuke Israel should Netanyahu use his.

Iran's response to the Israeli Assault shows they weren't dealt the crippling blow Propaganda would have us believe while Israeli Authorities are doing everything they can to conceal the Damage it has done.

What might Iran do to any Gulf States that look complicit, and what would that mean for the global Economy if it's main Fuel supply is blocked or even destroyed? And might Israel/America do the same to any that side with Iran?

Like the Economy hadn't been battered enough in recent years by the Pandemic, Sanctions resulting from the War in Ukraine, and the Sino-US Trade and Tariff War.

This whole thing is a complete travesty and Israel should be condemned in the strongest terms for an unprovoked Attack on a sovereign Nation who were negotiating in good faith to end an increasingly tense Crisis.

And what did Netanyahu do when the proverbial hit the Fan?

Fly away to Greece apparently on the "Wings of Zion!"

So, about these Negotiations ........

A few months ago now I began asking if Trump was sincere in wanting to end some of the Wars America had started.

Or was all the Shuttle Diplomacy and publicised Statements that began with Russia nothing more than Bluster to hide the Fact that the War was going to continue?

Was the Confrontation with Zelenskiy in the Whitehouse that time nothing more than Show? That maybe the Ukrainian President doesn't have the Monopoly on being an Actor?

Trump could have ended American support for a pointless War as soon as he took office, but he didn't. He could also have done the same with Israel in Gaza.

That his distancing himself from Britain and Europe, trapped in a Policy of his predecessors making, could be meant to prompt them to increase their own Military spending?

And who might they buy a lot of Weapons from?

There are questions about whether Trump knew in advance of the Israeli Attack and even those about American complicity.

The problem Trump faces is either/or

Either he knew and the Negotiations with Tehran were just a Feint to lull Iran into a false sense of Security.

Or, he didn't know, which compromises his Credibility as a reliable negotiating Partner because why bother hoping for a Result with someone who is either oblivious to the situation or ineffectual?

So, how are any of these People supposed to trust any western Leader about anything when it looks like such a Culture of Duplicity exists?

What makes it even more dangerous are rumours that North Korea aren't getting drawn into the same Game and Kim Jong Un isn't playing, which tells you that the whole Process might be being seen for what it is.

America should not be gambling with World War 3, but that is exactly what they are doing.

One thing I can't fathom is how any of this was allowed to fester for so long anyway.

Couldn't Trumps predecessor Joe Biden have commissioned his former Boss Barack Obama as a special Envoy to Iran and re-establish the JCPOA he negotiated when he was President?

The terrifying thing is Americas War with Japan started with Pearl Harbour, but it ended with Nuclear Weapons.

Update ......

From "Axis of Evil" to being "on the Brink".

The recent Protests and State response in Iran which has caused the current Crisis where Diplomatic Missions in the middle East are evacuated and the West readies for War with Iran did not happen in a vacuum and started years ago with GWB.

Even the AI on Google agrees in response to the Question: "Did "Axis of Evil" cause the conservative backlash in Iran here was the response......

"Yes, George W. Bush’s foreign policy, most notably his 2002 "Axis of Evil" speech, is widely credited with fueling a conservative backlash in Iran that crippled the domestic reformist movement.

Key impacts of the Bush administration's approach include:

Empowerment of Hardliners: Bush's rhetoric provided Iranian radical Islamists with a powerful political weapon to use against their modernist rivals. By framing the U.S. as a persistent existential threat, conservatives revived militant revolutionary language and sidelined reformists like President Mohammad Khatami.

Stalling Reform: The "Axis of Evil" label was viewed by Iranian political elites as a "betrayal" of the cooperation Iran had provided during the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan. This shift eroded the ability of reformists to argue for transparency or moderation in foreign and domestic policies.

The "Axis of Evil" Impact: The speech sparked immediate outrage across Iran's political spectrum, uniting both reformists and conservatives in condemnation. Analysts note that while public support for reform remained high, the conservative "Old Guard" successfully used the perceived American hostility to seize the political initiative.

Long-term Shift: This backlash contributed to the eventual rise of hardliner Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in 2005, marking a significant departure from the more cooperative era sought by reformists earlier in the decade."

So the Situation in Iran that threatens to draw the whole World into WW3 began 24 years ago with a Speech by the US President of the time.

Something many of us have been very critical of in the years since.

           

1912 and back again.

 

James Cameron's Film might at first just look like a Love Story set against the most famous maritime Disaster in History, but there's a lot more to it than that.

Not only is it as Film about that famous Disaster, it also spans other things - from a Island off the eastern Coast of Canada to a Press Conference held in August 1990, and seems to have been prompted by an Image from 1993 and the Story that surrounds it.

It was 1990 and a Rock Music Album was compiled and released dealing with the Lebanese Hostage Crisis that had gone on through the second half of the 1980's. Anyone who was aware of things at the time would know Names like John McCarthy, Terry Waite, Brian Keenan etc and a few People in Bristol decided to do an Album Project to campaign for their release.

I was asked to write a Press Pack for it that would be sent to recording Artistes in the hope they would donate a Song for it. They did, and as Songs from the likes of Tina Turner to Dire Straits, Simple Minds to Peter Gabriel began arriving it started gaining a Momentum that would culminate in the Press Conference to launch it.

What was impressive was that it was held at the iconic Waldorf Hotel in London, which they donated the use of for free. Years later I began doing family Research and began wondering how, and did any of that have something to do with that Conference?

The Waldorf was built in 1908 by William Waldorf Astor - Cousin to the wealthiest Man on the stricken Ship - John Jacob "Jakie" Astor. The Astor's were close Friends of the Cecil's of Salisbury and Arthur Balfour who was related to them. So was Lord Harlech - David Ormsby Gore - whose Mother was one of the Gascoyne-Cecils. It turned out Harlech was also a Friend of my own Family who I was reunited with in 1996. It seems I had a connection with that Conference Venue that went beyond a 1990 Music Album launch.

The Hotel itself was actually used in the "SOS Titanic" Movie because it was contemporaneous with the Ship and had certain aesthetic similarities. There was also the Astor connection.

As for the Album Project .....

Dealing with Hostages the Balfour connection resonates with the most beloved Novel of Scotland - Robert Louis Stephenson's "Kidnapped". Balfour featured elsewhere in it all as the Project was invited to Prague in the newly democratised Czechoslovakia, a Country he helped create at the Treaty of St Germaine after the Austro Hungarian Empire was broken up in 1918.

I was supposed to go to Prague that time - but for reasons I didn't Questions should be asked of those responsible.

The Hand and the Rose ........

It was February 14th 1993 and someone opened an Envelope with a Card in it which had drawn Image of a Hand coming from a Lake holding a Rose. A Tor was shown in the Background and it was all evocative of the famous Arthurian Scene when Merlin receives Excalibur or when Sir Bedywr throws it into the Lake after Arthur is killed at the Battle of Camlann.

At the end of the "Titanic" Movie we see Rose throw a Diamond Necklace into the Sea - reminiscent of the latter and what would once have been called a Votive. This has it's modern equivalent with the Wishing Well, when you throw a Coin into it making a Wish.

The Necklace had a huge Jewel mounted into it and the Astor family Heirloom was the Sansi Diamond.

Could she have been returning it to its rightful owner - given that JJ Astor died on that Ship? In that context might he and Jack Dawson have been one and the same?

Or was it a metaphor for the Press Conference and how it might have happened - and how it seems to have launched rather a lot more than a Hostage Album Project? She goes on to become an Actress while a lot of creative Economics - from Fleet Street to independent Television - is attributable to those associated with it. More of some of that in a moment.

An earlier Voyage ......

We go back to 1621 when Welsh Sea Captain Edward Wynn, commissioned by George Calvert - aka Lord Baltimore - sailed to and established a Colony on Newfoundland called Avalon. It was named by Calvert after the Town in Somerset which he saw as the fount of Christianity in Britain. Obviously an adherent to the Story of Joseph of Arimathea.

This becomes poignant given that the "Titanic" Film was made by a Canadian and the Theme Song recorded by one of Canada's most famous Artistes - Celine Dion. 

It's also reminiscent of the Hand and the Rose - with it's Avalonian Imagery.

The Name Wynn is also evocative, being connected with the ancient noble Houses of Gwynedd and Deheubarth in Wales.

Here is an article elaborating who Edward Wynn was...

https://journals.lib.unb.ca/index.php/NFLDS/article/view/12688/13593

George Calvert was sponsored by Robert Cecil of Burghley who acted as Guarantor to his rise through the Court and obtaining his Title..... becoming Lord to the Town of Baltimore, Ireland.

Calvert went on to establish the State of Maryland - Cecil helping him obtain it's Charter - and the City of Baltimore. As a tribute to his Sponsor Calvert named his Son Cecile.

This is why the City has Calvert Street as it's administrative District and I wonder how many Fans of the work of David Simon are aware of any of this?

Back to the Film and we see Jack and Fabrizio win Tickets for the Ship in a game of Poker and while they celebrate their good fortune we see People going aboard, so does everyone in Southampton, but one of those Passengers is a young Woman called Rose. "To everyone else it was the Ship of Dreams - to me it was a Slave Ship!" she says. Those on the Quayside just see the Glamour - they don't see what Rose is feeling.

The Name Wynne appears again - this time in the form of John Arthur Wynne who was involved in the process that would lead to the abolition of Slavery.

https://metrowynn.blogspot.com/2016/08/john-arthur-wynne-unsung-philanthropist.html?m=1

There are other things that allude to this ......

As the mighty Ship finally sinks the last thing we see is "Titanic - Liverpool" painted on the Stern. Mid 90's Britain was in the throes of a huge Beatles Revival, while the NME's Album of the year was their "Revolver" LP. Strange given it wasn't from 1996 at all, and was from 1966 - 30 years earlier, although it was that year I last saw my Family before the Reunion in 1996.

Unfortunately, Liverpool suffers from the Stigma along with Bristol, for being a Slave Traders Capital while James Penny whose Name was allegedly given to the Penny Lane the Song was about was one of its worst.

The Great Patriotic War ........

This is the eternal Flame - a Monument to the fallen at the Battle of Stalingrad, but it could be a Hand coming from a Lake holding a Sword - reminiscent of the Imagery from Arthurian Legend - or even holding a Rose like it did in 1993. In the Film we are shown Jack partially submerged in the Sea holding Rose's Hand as she floats on a Piece of Flotsam left by the Ship.

While James Horner did the Music for "Titanic" he also did it for "Enemy at the Gates", the Film about the Battle of Stalingrad and legendary Soviet Sniper Vasily Zaitsev. If you listen to the "Titanic" Soundtrack you will hear the Refrain he went on to use in the Stalingrad Movie.

Here's a Scene from the Film ......

Yours truly - 1996 - taken during the Reunion.....

A TALE OF 2 GRADS...

Anyone who speaks Russian will know that the Word Grad means City.

Somewhere in an archived Copy of Pravda or Izvestia is probably an Interview with the Man who conceived the Concept of that  Hand and the Torch in the Hall of Military Glory in the Stalingrad Memorial Complex.

As I mentioned, the Statue with the Hand coming from the Ground holding a Torch to anyone familiar with the Excalibur Legend seems reminiscent of the iconic Image of the Hand coming from the Lake holding the Sword - either about to be given to or returned by Arthur.

The two most symbolic Battles in terms of struggle of the Great Patriotic War were those of Stalingrad and Leningrad. Kursk might have been the biggest, but the Battle on the Volga and the Siege of Leningrad the most iconic.

In the Hall is the Inscription "Yes, we were mere mortals, and few of us survived (the German siege). But we all fulfilled our patriotic duty to our sacred Motherland" and the operative Word perhaps is "siege".

So it's like the Monument commemorates the Battle of Stalingrad - which was the turning point of the War in Russia and arguably that of WW2 itself, but also pays Homage to those who defended the City on the Shores of Lake Ladoga in the North. If it had fallen the Germans would have rolled up the Soviet Army and moved southwards towards Moscow.

Leningrad was supplied during this for nearly 3 years via the Lake which has a much older significance to the History of the Region and it's People.

It was from there the Rurikids established their first Citadel - Starya Ladoga - and began to consolidate and spread what would become the Rus. The City became a Hub of Commerce that would trade from the Baltic in the North to the Greek held Areas of Constantinople in the South. It became the most important in eastern europe They went on to create the powerful State of Kievan Rus.

The Route becomes a very potent metaphor for a Stream that winds its way through 1200 years of History from those early years of the 9th Century to those of Today - even in this Country, while a huge chunk of French history owes something to it, along with many other European dynasty's and histories.

Through every epoch, from it's Varangian Origins, the Rus, the Regions subjugation by the Khanates and the Golden Horde, the attempts of conquest by the Teutonic Knights, Sweden, the Polish Commonwealth, Napoleon, Tsarist rule and even during the Rule of the Bolsheviks.

Perhaps it was no coincidence that Soviet Fortunes during the Great Patriotic War improved when even dyed in the Wool Communist Stalin decided to change the Narrative; instead of fighting for Bolshevism or the glorious Revolution the Soviets were fighting as Patriots for Mother Russia, for something far more ancient and sacred than a 19th Century Ideology being applied in the 20th.

It was only recently People decided to mess with all of this and the Tragedy in Ukraine, with the ripple effects felt everywhere else, is the Result.

Artificially cultivated Ukrainian Nationalism tries to make it their own - even appropriating the Rus Symbol - the Flag of Starya Ladoga - and turning it into the horrible Wolfsangel they carry during Marches through Kiev, Lvov and other Ukrainian Cities.

Others, that Robin Day once called "here today, gone tomorrow Politicians", opportunistic Academics, Media Types and the whole Shebang act like they are no better than those Nationalists as they try and exclusivise it to their own ends too.

Maybe when there are those moments when an understanding is reached - particularly during the Cold War, and the 1962 Missile Crisis, or even when the Tsar and the Kaiser tried desperately to prevent WW1 which loomed and threatened in the Summer of 1914, there was something very archetypal happening that recognised that 1200 year History as the Thread that held it all together and should never be broken.

Something that acts like a giant Bungee - and pulls everything back from the Abyss.

A once and future Entity that establishes Unity when everything looks so irredeemably fractured.

"Titanic" the Film was an Example of when the West and Russia worked together on something as the Hollywood based Canadian Film Maker used the Services of the Russian Research Vessel RV Akademik Mstislav Keldysh for those deep Dive Scenes in a Film peopled by British and American Actors.

It turned out to be a very big Example - being the most successful Film ever made up to and even after it appeared. 

Yet more creative Economics activity .......

Wonder how many People have met here .... A Scene from the Waldorf.......

Rather like this .......

...... After the Ship has sunk this was the Scene that was described as one of the most emotive in any Film ever ..... Rose on the Piece of Wood from the above Scene ..... just before Jack dies.

Here is a Montage done by someone showing what happened after ..... Rose is rescued by 5th Officer Harold Lowe - a Gwynedd Lad - played by Ioan Gruffudd who went on to appear as William Wilberforce.......

And what of that Image of the Hand and the Rose?

Here was another Montage someone did alluding to other Films that continued the Theme .......

Yep, from Jack Dawson to Jack Sparrow - and anyone who has seen those "Pirates of the Caribbean" Films will know that "The Curse of the Black Pearl" started with the young William Turner being found floating on a piece of Driftwood wearing a Pendant made from Aztec Gold. He becomes an Artificer and fine Sword Maker.

So it seems the Hand and the Rose went on to prompt those "Pirates of the Caribbean" Movies via "Titanic".

So you can see there was a lot more to "Titanic" than a Film about a love story set on the famous maritime Disaster.

And watch this space as we will go back to the roaring Twenties and why Leonardo Di Caprio might have been chosen to play Gatsby.