Russia launches 85 attack drones, ballistic missile on Ukraine overnight, Ukraine says
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Arab News
7 hours ago
- Arab News
Erosion of the nuclear taboo a key global challenge
Eight decades on, relatively few people recall the historical significance of Aug. 15, 1945. Yet, the surrender of Japan on that day, ending the Second World War, was a pivotal moment in 20th-century history. Each year, Victory over Japan Day, known as VJ Day, commemorates that surrender. While Victory in Europe Day — May 8, 1945 — marked the end of the war in Europe, many thousands of armed forces personnel had continued to fight in Asia in what is sometimes seen as a forgotten conflict. Eighty years later, the momentous events of 1945 might appear to be consigned to the history books, yet they have much relevance to the world of today. This core point was highlighted by Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba on this month's 80th anniversary of the dropping of the atomic bomb on Nagasaki, one of the key developments that led to the surrender of Japan. Ishiba vowed to uphold the commitment that his country would never possess, produce or permit the introduction of nuclear weapons. Moreover, he pledged to help bring about 'a world without nuclear war and a world without nuclear weapons.' These are widely seen as noble goals. But today the world faces at least two major threats in this realm, as the post-1945 so-called nuclear taboo preventing the further use of atomic weapons has begun to erode. Firstly, there are still more than 12,000 such weapons stockpiled around the globe, each of which is more powerful than the two devices used eight decades ago by the US in Japan combined. This is a chilling fact, given that the bomb dropped on Nagasaki on Aug. 9, 1945, is estimated to have killed more than 70,000 people, while the one used three days earlier on Hiroshima is estimated to have killed more than 140,000. The events of 1945 might appear to be consigned to history, yet they have much relevance to the world of today. Andrew Hammond Today, there are growing tensions between the US and Russia, each of which possesses more than 5,000 nuclear weapons, together representing about 90 percent of the global total. Just this month, US President Donald Trump engaged in a war of words with former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev over atomic weapons. Medvedev referred to 'Dead Hand,' the Russian nuclear retaliation system, in an apparent threat to the US. In response, Trump claimed he had ordered two US nuclear submarines to move closer to Russia. The reasons this behavior is so alarming are at least twofold. Firstly, there is the risk of miscalculation in the context of growing global investment in new nuclear weapons technology. The US government, for instance, is building a new generation of nuclear weapons and plans to resume nuclear testing. China, too, is rapidly increasing its nuclear arsenal, which is estimated to have approximately trebled in size to about 600 weapons. While still relatively small compared to the US and Russia, the direction of travel is clear. These actions are slowing disarmament and nonproliferation initiatives, such as the efforts to advance the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, the first international accord designed to comprehensively ban nuclear arms. The treaty came into force in 2021 but has so far been ignored by nuclear-armed states and other key parties, including Japan. The origins of the international nuclear disarmament and nonproliferation campaign dates back decades, to at least 1963, when the US, the former Soviet Union and the UK signed the Limited Nuclear Test Ban Treaty. Other landmarks have included the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, which came into force in 1970. With global momentum shifting toward rearmament rather than abolition, a growing list of nations, including South Korea, Ukraine and Turkiye, have expressed an interest in acquiring atomic weapons. Iran, too, is likely to further develop its nuclear capabilities, fueled by the recent attacks by Israel and the US on its development facilities. While many fear the use of nuclear weapons as a conscious choice, as happened in 1945, a growing number are also alarmed about the possibility of deployment in error. This includes the possibility of cyberattacks, especially on systems in which artificial intelligence is utilized. Beyond the state use of nuclear weapons, there also remains the threat of atomic terrorism. Andrew Hammond Beyond the state use of nuclear weapons, there also remains the threat of atomic terrorism. While some assert that the probability of a major nuclear terrorism event remains very low, Robert Gates, a former US defense secretary, noted while in office that 'every senior leader, when you're asked what keeps you awake at night, it's the thought of a terrorist ending up with a weapon of mass destruction, especially nuclear.' This nuclear terrorism agenda first appeared prominently on the international radar in the aftermath of the collapse of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s, amid concerns about safeguarding the former communist empire's extensive nuclear arsenal. More than two dozen states have had at least 1 kg of highly enriched uranium in civilian stocks. Since the 1990s, more than 4,000 confirmed incidents of illicit trafficking, unauthorized possession or loss of nuclear and radioactive material have been reported to the International Atomic Energy Agency. It is the US, which dropped the nuclear bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945, that has been at the forefront of international post-Cold War efforts to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons and materials. However, this agenda is no longer a top priority for Washington. While the international ability to tackle nuclear terrorism might be eroding significantly, the threat could be growing. Yet, given the hurdles that exist to terror networks obtaining weapons-grade material, perhaps the more likely danger is the use of a small nuclear weapon or a radiological dispersal device (a so-called dirty bomb), which could still cause immense damage, especially in a major urban area. The world is therefore facing a growing risk related to the possible use of nuclear weapons. The danger lies not only in the growing threat of the state use of such weapons, but also in nuclear terrorism — a major global effort is now needed to counteract these grim challenges.
Asharq Al-Awsat
10 hours ago
- Asharq Al-Awsat
Putin Agreed to Let US, Europe Offer NATO-Style Security Protections for Ukraine, Trump Envoy Says
Special US envoy Steve Witkoff said Sunday that Russian leader Vladimir Putin agreed at his summit with President Donald Trump to allow the US and European allies to offer Ukraine a security guarantee resembling NATO's collective defense mandate as part of an eventual deal to end the 3 1/2-year war. "We were able to win the following concession: That the United States could offer Article 5-like protection, which is one of the real reasons why Ukraine wants to be in NATO," he said on CNN's "State of the Union." He added that it "was the first time we had ever heard the Russians agree to that." European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, speaking at a news conference in Brussels with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, said that "we welcome President Trump's willingness to contribute to Article 5-like security guarantees for Ukraine. and the 'Coalition of the willing' -- including the European Union -- is ready to do its share." Witkoff, offering some of the first details of what was discussed at Friday's summit in Alaska, said the two sides agreeing to "robust security guarantees that I would describe as game-changing." He added that Russia said that it would make a legislative commitment not to go after any additional territory in Ukraine. Zelenskyy thanked the United States for recent signals that Washington is willing to support security guarantees for Ukraine, but said the details remained unclear. "It is important that America agrees to work with Europe to provide security guarantees for Ukraine," he said, "But there are no details how it will work, and what America's role will be, Europe's role will be and what the EU can do, and this is our main task, we need security to work in practice like Article 5 of NATO, and we consider EU accession to be part of the security guarantees." Witkoff defended Trump's decision to abandon his push for Russian to agree to an immediate ceasefire, saying the president had pivoted toward a peace deal because so much progress was made. "We covered almost all the other issues necessary for a peace deal," Witkoff said, without elaborating. "We began to see some moderation in the way they're thinking about getting to a final peace deal," he said. Secretary of State Marco Rubio insisted there would be "additional consequences" as Trump warned before meeting with Putin, if they failed to reach a ceasefire. But Rubio noted that there wasn't going to be any sort of deal on a truce reached when Ukraine wasn't at the talks. "Now, ultimately, if there isn't a peace agreement, if there isn't an end of this war, the president's been clear, there are going to be consequences," Rubio said on ABC's "This we're trying to avoid that. And the way we're trying to avoid those consequences is with an even better consequence, which is peace, the end of hostilities." Rubio, who is also Trump's national security adviser, said he did not believe issuing new sanctions on Russia would force Putin to accept a ceasefire, noting that the latter isn't off the table but that "the best way to end this conflict is through a full peace deal." "The minute you issue new sanctions, your ability to get them to the table, our ability to get them to table will be severely diminished," Rubio said on NBC's "Meet the Press." He also said "we're not at the precipice of a peace agreement" and that getting there would not be easy and would take a lot of work. "We made progress in the sense that we identified potential areas of agreement, but there remains some big areas of disagreement. So we're still a long ways off," Rubio said. Zelenskyy and Europeans leaders are scheduled to meet Monday with Trump at the White House. They heard from the president after his meeting with Putin. "I think everybody agreed that we had made progress. Maybe not enough for a peace deal, but we are on the path for the first time," Witkoff said. He added: "The fundamental issue, which is some sort of land swap, which is obviously ultimately in the control of the Ukrainians -- that could not have been discussed at this meeting" with Putin. "We intend to discuss it on Monday. Hopefully we have some clarity on it and hopefully that ends up in a peace deal very, very soon."
Asharq Al-Awsat
10 hours ago
- Asharq Al-Awsat
Trump Gives Putin 'Peace Letter' from Wife Melania
US President Donald Trump handed Vladimir Putin a special item at their Alaska summit: a letter written by his wife, First Lady Melania Trump, pleading for the Russian leader to make peace in the name of children. The first lady's office on Saturday reposted a Fox News article on X containing the short letter, a day after Trump and Putin failed to find a breakthrough at their high-stakes meeting. Putin read the "peace letter" immediately after Trump handed it to him, while delegations from both sides looked on, according to Fox News. "In today's world, some children are forced to carry a quiet laughter, untouched by the darkness around them," read the letter, which was signed by the first lady and did not mention Ukraine by name. "Mr Putin, you can singlehandedly restore their melodic laughter," it added. "In protecting the innocence of these children, you will do more than serve Russia alone -- you serve humanity itself." "Such a bold idea transcends all human division, and you, Mr Putin, are fit to implement this vision with a stroke of the pen today," the letter read. "It is time." In July, the US president had said that his wife, who was born in Slovenia, had helped change his thinking about Putin. "I go home, I tell the first lady, 'you know, I spoke to Vladimir today, we had a wonderful conversation,'" Trump said. "And she said, 'Oh really? Another city was just hit.'" Trump attempted a rapprochement with Putin shortly after starting his second term, having campaigned on a pledge to end the Ukraine war within 24 hours. During the early months of his new term, he largely directed anger at Ukraine for the lack of a deal, but gradually began expressing frustration that Putin continued his attacks on Ukraine. Before the summit in Alaska, Trump had warned of "severe consequences" if Russia did not accept a ceasefire. However after meeting with Putin, Trump dropped his demand for a ceasefire, saying the best way to end the war "is to go directly to a peace agreement." Putin has long argued for negotiations on a final peace deal -- a strategy that Ukraine and its European allies have criticized as a way to buy time and press Russia's battlefield advances.
