4 ms·

South Africa had a successful nuclear weapons program that they chose to dismantle, so it's not an inevitability. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Africa_an

South Africa had a successful nuclear weapons program that they chose to dismantle, so it's not an inevitability. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Africa_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Africa_and_weapons_of_ma...

macintux 8y ago
South Africa has some distinct geopolitical advantages not shared by Pakistan, North Korea, India, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Israel, etc. They're not technically at war with a nuclear-armed power (North Korea). They're not faced with a neighbor with incalculable manpower advantages (India, Pakistan) or nuclear weapons (same). Anyway, I would characterize South Africa as a unique situation vs a reason for optimism, but I'm also deeply pessimistic about nearly everything.
- wp381640 8y ago
  Is South Africa's situation really that unique when most of the world isn't at war with a neighbour? If anything, the situation in Pakistan, North Korea, India, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Israel etc. are the unique cases - that is essentially a whose-who of regional conflicts
  - macintux 8y ago
    I'll grant that most of the world is at relative peace, but as long as a few feel that their existence is at risk, it will be nearly impossible to get rid of nuclear weapons, which was the original point. South Africa shows that a country can get rid of its weapons, but it's not a particularly relevant example to those that still have them, or are likely to add them.
    - kosievdmerwe 8y ago
      There's also the point that a lot of countries aren't at war precisely because they and/or their opponents have nukes. If the nukes disappeared then so would the reasons for the cease fire.
  - mandevil 8y ago
    South Africa dismantled their program because the ruling white minority- watching de Klerk negotiate with Mandela to end Apartheid- didn't trust the ANC (read: Nelson Mandela) to have nuclear weapons. Absent that political handover, I'm not sure that they would ever have dismantled the program. It is hard to destroy military-industrial bureaucracies, once created and given resources.
    - wp381640 8y ago
      I know - but that wasn't the argument being made
      - sangnoir 8y ago
        It is relevant though, because the political calculus between South Africa and its neighbors changed with the handover to the ANC. There were a lot of skirmishes between South Africa's apartheid government and its neighbors that supported/harbored the ANC military wing. Asking why South Africa developed nukes in the first place and why it voluntarily gave them up can provide a useful template for denuclearization. Aside: the fissile material is still stockpiled and there was a break-in attempt at the storage facility a few years ago

macintux 8y ago

South Africa has some distinct geopolitical advantages not shared by Pakistan, North Korea, India, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Israel, etc. They're not technically at war with a nuclear-armed power (North Korea). They're not faced with a neighbor with incalculable manpower advantages (India, Pakistan) or nuclear weapons (same). Anyway, I would characterize South Africa as a unique situation vs a reason for optimism, but I'm also deeply pessimistic about nearly everything.

wp381640 8y ago
Is South Africa's situation really that unique when most of the world isn't at war with a neighbour? If anything, the situation in Pakistan, North Korea, India, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Israel etc. are the unique cases - that is essentially a whose-who of regional conflicts
- macintux 8y ago
  I'll grant that most of the world is at relative peace, but as long as a few feel that their existence is at risk, it will be nearly impossible to get rid of nuclear weapons, which was the original point. South Africa shows that a country can get rid of its weapons, but it's not a particularly relevant example to those that still have them, or are likely to add them.
  - kosievdmerwe 8y ago
    There's also the point that a lot of countries aren't at war precisely because they and/or their opponents have nukes. If the nukes disappeared then so would the reasons for the cease fire.
- mandevil 8y ago
  South Africa dismantled their program because the ruling white minority- watching de Klerk negotiate with Mandela to end Apartheid- didn't trust the ANC (read: Nelson Mandela) to have nuclear weapons. Absent that political handover, I'm not sure that they would ever have dismantled the program. It is hard to destroy military-industrial bureaucracies, once created and given resources.
  - wp381640 8y ago
    I know - but that wasn't the argument being made
    - sangnoir 8y ago
      It is relevant though, because the political calculus between South Africa and its neighbors changed with the handover to the ANC. There were a lot of skirmishes between South Africa's apartheid government and its neighbors that supported/harbored the ANC military wing. Asking why South Africa developed nukes in the first place and why it voluntarily gave them up can provide a useful template for denuclearization. Aside: the fissile material is still stockpiled and there was a break-in attempt at the storage facility a few years ago