Today I think is plausible, but not likely, as we have the same big players used to deal on brinkmanship on the last 70 years. But the prospects are getting wor

Today I think is plausible, but not likely, as we have the same big players used to deal on brinkmanship on the last 70 years. But the prospects are getting worse, not better, as they are pushing smaller countries toward proliferation, breaking promises toward non-nuclear states. E.g: Iraq, gave up on nukes, while promised peace. Got invaded. Libya, gave up on nukes, while promised peace. Got invaded. Iran agreed to sign the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), but got double-crossed a few years later, and now routinely faces assassination of government officials. Ukraine, gave up on nukes, while promised peace. Now got invaded. On the other hand, North Korea held on their nuke program, despite lots of threats and sanctions. Nobody ever dared to mess with them. The message sent here is clear. I think the superpowers are fumbling big time with non-proliferation. If we have N nuclear-capable nations, there is N²/2 possibilities for conflicts between them. As superpowers break their promises toward smaller countries that gave-up on nukes, N will only grow, and so the risk of nuclear armageddon.