Ben Zala
@drbeezee.bsky.social
190 followers 210 following 21 posts
Senior Lecturer at Monash University, Australia. Work focusses on great power relations and reducing nuclear dangers.
Posts Media Videos Starter Packs
drbeezee.bsky.social
80 years into the nuclear age and "arms control has all but collapsed while reliable and trusted channels of communication between major nuclear adversaries are virtually non-existent." We're going to need more than luck to survive another 80 years.
theconversation.com/fear-built-t...
Fear built the nuclear bomb – only trust can ensure it is never used again
If the nuclear bomb was born out of fear, then ensuring it is never used again requires replacing fear with trust.
theconversation.com
drbeezee.bsky.social
After being repeatedly asked about this for the better part of a fortnight, I figured I'd just write it up in one spot. It's not an endorsement of nuclear deterrence, nor a nuclear-armed Iran. But could we live with that outcome? Yep. theconversation.com/could-we-liv...
Could we live with a nuclear-armed Iran? Reluctantly, yes
Both Israel and the US claim a nuclear-armed Iran would pose an existential threat. It wouldn’t. Here’s why.
theconversation.com
drbeezee.bsky.social
For Australia-based followers, I joined ‪@patskarvelas.bsky.social‬ on Afternoon Briefing yesterday (17/6) to discuss the Israeli strikes against Iran and the likelihood of this counter-proliferation strike leading to the much wider goal of regime change in Tehran: iview.abc.net.au/show/afterno...
Afternoon Briefing
Your daily download of everything you need to know about politics, national and global affairs. Patricia Karvelas asks politicians the tough questions and talks to key players and experts on the issue...
iview.abc.net.au
drbeezee.bsky.social
Well, look what arrived in the post today - my Third Nuclear Age project merch! @erc.europa.eu It's been an absolute pleasure to have been part of the project since it started. Check out www.thethirdnuclearage.com
drbeezee.bsky.social
Really glad to have an article in this excellent special issue. Mine, with @andrewfutter.bsky.social, is on "The Return of Nuclear Great Power Politics (or why we stopped worrying about terrorists and the bomb)" www.cambridge.org/core/journal...
drbeezee.bsky.social
Wa hey! Congrats mate. Will be terrific to have you back in Oz.
drbeezee.bsky.social
Both a very narrow reading of 19th century great power politics and a very generous reading of the Trump Admin's foreign policy.
thediplomat.com
A Trumpian foreign policy would be a return to the great power competition and balance of power that prevailed between states in the 19th century. That might not be entirely bad for India.
India and the New Trumpian World Order
The new world order would not disadvantage India. On the contrary, it would do well in a Trumpian world.
buff.ly
drbeezee.bsky.social
Good piece on the likelihood of a return to great power tacit collusion. However, big difference b/n Ukraine & Taiwan on the one hand and Greenland on the other given what a sphere in each does for Russia, China & the US. Greenland is the odd one out. www.internationalaffairs.org.au/australianou...
A New Trend in Geopolitics? Great Power Coordination in the Expansion of Spheres of Influence - Australian Institute of International Affairs
www.internationalaffairs.org.au
drbeezee.bsky.social
One of the more significant military developments in Asia over the last year.
drbeezee.bsky.social
It won't, but should be a lesson to all the advocates of "limited" missile defence (and there was a LOT of them) re: wishful thinking. Eg. from @washingtonpost.com @brookings.edu @carnegieendowment.org @csis.org tinyurl.com/bdfn2xm6 tinyurl.com/3xz3u3h9 tinyurl.com/yu3tvyhw tinyurl.com/44j5kucj 4/4
Opinion | A LOOK AT . . . Missile Defense
tinyurl.com
drbeezee.bsky.social
There is absolutely nothing limited about US missile defence plans now and it is openly aimed at 'peers' and 'near-peers' as well as 'rogues.' It is exactly why some of us have said for years that any BMD (even "limited" and only aimed at "rogues") was a worse option than none. 3/4
drbeezee.bsky.social
The official US position on this from Clinton onwards just never got to grips with the fact that they couldn't guarantee that it would only ever be limited and aimed at (what the US would unilaterally decide are) "rogue" states. The 2010 response to Russian concerns illustrated this perfectly. 2/4
drbeezee.bsky.social
Trump's #IronDome executive order on missile defence proves what those of us who have consistently opposed any missile defence always knew: That promises of a "limited" system were just that - promises. Stability between nuclear-armed great powers can never rest only on unilateral promises. 1/4
drbeezee.bsky.social
No idea who the old guy on the right is.