• Hi Guest!

    The costs of running this forum are covered by Sea Lion Press. If you'd like to help support the company and the forum, visit patreon.com/sealionpress

Multipolarity and Nuclear War

0.42@632

Active member
One argument for bipolarity (and unipolarity for that matter) is that a multipolar world would have a higher chance of nuclear war due to the higher number of nuclear powers. That aside, how would a "regional" nuclear war between 2 powers in such a world be fought and what would the effects of the Small War be on other powers?
 
Having more nuclear powers located closer to each other would greatly increase nuclear tensions.

The distance between the Soviet Union and the United States played a major role in helping to reduce nuclear tensions. A bomber based attack could be detected hours out, while an attack from land based nuclear missiles would take at least half an hour to arrive. Even a surprise attack from ballistic missile submarines located offshore would still leave enough time for forces located in the interior to respond. It helps that the Soviet Union/Russia and the United States are among the largest countries in the world too, as is the People's Republic of China.

Countries that are closer to each other and smaller would have much less time to respond, especially if they don't have a credible second strike capability based on submarines. The United Kingdom invented nuclear missile silo technology for housing the Blue Streak ballistic missiles only to abandon both programs when it was realized that they would likely take too long to respond even in a launch on warning scenario (it was estimated there would be no more than a four minute warning). That decision was made in the early 1960s, well before even more capable first strike systems such as the RSD-10 Pioneer/SS-20 Saber, Pershing II, and Ground Launched Cruise Missile were developed.

The destabilizing effects of shortening the decision window for a nuclear strike are well recognized and helped lead to the 1987 Intermediate Nuclear Forces Treaty.
 
It would be certainly easy for certain neighboring countries to strike at each other and collapse both into anarchy, like Pakistan and (North) India or Britain vs. France, or even a nuclear Arab-Israeli war
 
Countries that are closer to each other and smaller would have much less time to respond, especially if they don't have a credible second strike capability based on submarines.
1627181829365.png
Fig. 1: Map of 30 largest countries by size

1627181954940.png
Fig. 2: Countries which have (red and gray) or were seeking nuclear weapons (dark blue, green, orange)

I'm more interestered in the aftermath of such a war, preferably a European nuclear slugout between UK, France, (not nazi) Germany, Italy and Russia
 
Last edited:
Back
Top