It never ceases to surprise me that when it comes to security issues, Democrats are far more moralistic and self-righteous than Republicans, who have time and again proved to be pragmatists.
Take President Obama's nuclear posture review for instance. It assumes that by renouncing the right to use nuclear arms against countries that attack America as long as they are in compliance with the provisions of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, the U.S. can dissuade poten- tial proliferators from weaponizing their capability. Such a rationale stems from a deep moral abhor- rence of nuclear weapons, out- weighing their strategic utility even in the face of a chemical or biologi- cal attack.
No doubt it is a bold redemptive posture, in stark con- trast to that of the Democratic and unabashedly Christian President Truman, who used nuclear weapons against a beaten enemy and justified it on moral and military grounds. Clearly, morali- ty is a double-edged sword.
The world, there- fore, would be better off with the established doctrine that nations acquire nuclear weapons not because of a nuclear threat, but because of fear of a con- ventional military attack or inter- vention. Hence, a real antiprolifera- tion posture would be to renounce war in totality. Nothing less.
No comments:
Post a Comment