5 ms·

> Might we see the nation-state get replaced by a web of competing mercenaries, each of which effectively serves as a protection racket for their customers? H

> Might we see the nation-state get replaced by a web of competing mercenaries, each of which effectively serves as a protection racket for their customers? How do you envision the deprecation of the nuclear-armed nation state unfolding? The USSR had a unipolar world outside to stabilize and manage its disintegration. How is this accomplished in a multipolar context, with tensions inflamed by intensifying scarcity, competition, environmental instability, etc? Serious questions, not a derogatory comment

idiotsecant 4y ago
there's no reason that things need to unfold such that a nuclear armed state exists one day and then doesn't the next. It could easily evolve from regulatory capture, increased influence of large corporations in governance, capture of public discourse by corporate sponsored narratives, and eventual de-facto private control of government. You'd end up with a nation with a nuclear force exists on paper but in fact the corporate interests were in control of that entity. In fact, of the preceding 5 conditions I would say 4 are already either done or in progress.
- walleeee 4y ago
  Which condition do you figure is the weakest link?
DubiousPusher 4y ago
It's not just the multipolarity you have to consider. I actually think that's fairly resolvable for something like loose nukes as basically every stable power has an interest in catch-alls for such things. But the U.S. the EU and China are all facing internal shifts in thinking about how they relate to the rest of the world. And that's a true wildcard. Those swings, coupled with multipolarity create a very dynamic system that I think is impossible to predict. When a country may stick its thumb in the eye of international treaty simply because it satisfies a belligerent domestic constituency and that alienates a relatively equal strength power, that's a very volatile situation.
BatFastard 4y ago
I would imagine that this would first manifest itself in smaller countries. For example Mali employs the Wagner group out of Russia as a supplement for its Army. And I believe they are used by other countries as well. I don't see nuclear-armed nations using private companies, but possibly being the source of troops and technology. Really I don't see U.S. citizens joining mercenary groups, quality of life is too good. I would imagine 2nd world nations like Russia, Iraq being the main source of these troops, backed by cheap advanced armaments from China.
- vbezhenar 4y ago
  US mercenaries: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackwater_(company) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackwater_(company) One issue with mercenaries is that they're not subject to military laws and will be hang if captured. Like it happens with few american citizens captured in Ukraine by DNR.
  - chiefalchemist 4y ago
    Better known as "private security firms". High risk. Great pay. Two-fingers up to the volunteers \ vets.
  - dragonwriter 4y ago
    > Like it happens with few american citizens captured in Ukraine by DNR. The American and UK citizens captured by Russia and it's proxies have been regular Ukrainian soldiers subject to military law and protected by the Geneva Convention, but that doesn't matter because Russia and their proxies are ignoring international law (and not just where it comes to treatment of prisoners.)
  - tacocataco 4y ago
    I always assumed the mercenaries were mixed with volunteers into Ukraine's foreign legion.
- pmontra 4y ago
  > I don't see nuclear-armed nations using private companies Russia is using Wagner Group in Ukraine. Does that count as a private company?
nostrademons 4y ago
I'm not too worried about loose nukes or nuclear terrorism. Every major nuclear power other than China incorporates PALs [1] into the design of their nuclear weapons. Without a centrally generated & authenticated code, they don't function. The PAL is designed such that disabling it requires dismantling the nuclear weapon, which means you need to have the know-how to build nukes in the first place to re-enable it. This, incidentally, is why Ukraine gave Russia back its nukes after the fall of the Soviet Union. Without the codes in Moscow's possession they were just radioactive waste. I do expect a number of smaller conventional conflicts to break out in the transition, because that's what always happens when a hegemon loses its monopoly on physical force. It's going to be a bloody few decades, but not the end of humanity. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permissive_Action_Link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permissive_Action_Link
- Comevius 4y ago
  A PAL system can be just a combination lock. The people who gain access to the weapons themselves might also gain access to the codes and components necessary to arm them. Who's to say there is a pot of gold at the end of those bloody few decades, with the climate crisis ramping up and natural resources dwindling. We certainly willed the prosperity after the Second World War into existence, by getting better at cannibalizing our natural resources, unsustainably. I would expect the cannibalization of what's left to continue, with pockets of the world doing better for a while, the rest doing worst. I would also expect these pockets to increasingly not be able to share the benefits of innovation with the rest of the world.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- fragmede 4y ago
  Given that Chernobyl is located inside the Ukrainian border, “its nuclear waste” doesn’t seem like that good of an argument as to why they should have gotten rid of them, given recent events.

idiotsecant 4y ago

there's no reason that things need to unfold such that a nuclear armed state exists one day and then doesn't the next. It could easily evolve from regulatory capture, increased influence of large corporations in governance, capture of public discourse by corporate sponsored narratives, and eventual de-facto private control of government. You'd end up with a nation with a nuclear force exists on paper but in fact the corporate interests were in control of that entity. In fact, of the preceding 5 conditions I would say 4 are already either done or in progress.

walleeee 4y ago
Which condition do you figure is the weakest link?

DubiousPusher 4y ago

It's not just the multipolarity you have to consider. I actually think that's fairly resolvable for something like loose nukes as basically every stable power has an interest in catch-alls for such things. But the U.S. the EU and China are all facing internal shifts in thinking about how they relate to the rest of the world. And that's a true wildcard. Those swings, coupled with multipolarity create a very dynamic system that I think is impossible to predict. When a country may stick its thumb in the eye of international treaty simply because it satisfies a belligerent domestic constituency and that alienates a relatively equal strength power, that's a very volatile situation.

BatFastard 4y ago

I would imagine that this would first manifest itself in smaller countries. For example Mali employs the Wagner group out of Russia as a supplement for its Army. And I believe they are used by other countries as well. I don't see nuclear-armed nations using private companies, but possibly being the source of troops and technology. Really I don't see U.S. citizens joining mercenary groups, quality of life is too good. I would imagine 2nd world nations like Russia, Iraq being the main source of these troops, backed by cheap advanced armaments from China.

vbezhenar 4y ago
US mercenaries: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackwater_(company) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackwater_(company) One issue with mercenaries is that they're not subject to military laws and will be hang if captured. Like it happens with few american citizens captured in Ukraine by DNR.
- chiefalchemist 4y ago
  Better known as "private security firms". High risk. Great pay. Two-fingers up to the volunteers \ vets.
- dragonwriter 4y ago
  > Like it happens with few american citizens captured in Ukraine by DNR. The American and UK citizens captured by Russia and it's proxies have been regular Ukrainian soldiers subject to military law and protected by the Geneva Convention, but that doesn't matter because Russia and their proxies are ignoring international law (and not just where it comes to treatment of prisoners.)
- tacocataco 4y ago
  I always assumed the mercenaries were mixed with volunteers into Ukraine's foreign legion.
pmontra 4y ago
> I don't see nuclear-armed nations using private companies Russia is using Wagner Group in Ukraine. Does that count as a private company?

nostrademons 4y ago

I'm not too worried about loose nukes or nuclear terrorism. Every major nuclear power other than China incorporates PALs [1] into the design of their nuclear weapons. Without a centrally generated & authenticated code, they don't function. The PAL is designed such that disabling it requires dismantling the nuclear weapon, which means you need to have the know-how to build nukes in the first place to re-enable it. This, incidentally, is why Ukraine gave Russia back its nukes after the fall of the Soviet Union. Without the codes in Moscow's possession they were just radioactive waste. I do expect a number of smaller conventional conflicts to break out in the transition, because that's what always happens when a hegemon loses its monopoly on physical force. It's going to be a bloody few decades, but not the end of humanity. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permissive_Action_Link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permissive_Action_Link

Comevius 4y ago
A PAL system can be just a combination lock. The people who gain access to the weapons themselves might also gain access to the codes and components necessary to arm them. Who's to say there is a pot of gold at the end of those bloody few decades, with the climate crisis ramping up and natural resources dwindling. We certainly willed the prosperity after the Second World War into existence, by getting better at cannibalizing our natural resources, unsustainably. I would expect the cannibalization of what's left to continue, with pockets of the world doing better for a while, the rest doing worst. I would also expect these pockets to increasingly not be able to share the benefits of innovation with the rest of the world.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
fragmede 4y ago
Given that Chernobyl is located inside the Ukrainian border, “its nuclear waste” doesn’t seem like that good of an argument as to why they should have gotten rid of them, given recent events.