When political power is concentrated in the hands of a small circle of people, a country invariably ends up with technological stagnation.
Aleksei Kiselev
{
"authors": [
"Godfried van Benthem van den Bergh"
],
"type": "other",
"centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
],
"collections": [
"U.S. Nuclear Policy"
],
"englishNewsletterAll": "ctw",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"programAffiliation": "NPP",
"programs": [
"Nuclear Policy"
],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"North America",
"United States",
"East Asia",
"China",
"Caucasus",
"Russia"
],
"topics": [
"Nuclear Policy"
]
}Source: Getty
Nuclear weapons have unintended beneficial consequences, argues Godfried van Benthem van den Bergh. They can make the intended development of a more peaceful global and political order possible. The Carnegie Nonproliferation Program presents this paper in hopes of furthering international dialogue and debate on the nuclear order, including the abolition of nuclear weapons.
In this Policy Outlook Godfried van Benthem van den Bergh, an eminent Dutch scholar, argues that nuclear weapons have unintended beneficial consequences. They can make the intended development of a more peaceful global and political order possible. The Carnegie Nonproliferation Program presents this paper in hopes of furthering international dialogue and debate on the nuclear order, including the abolition of nuclear weapons.
Summary
About the Author
Godfried van Benthem van den Bergh was professor of international relations at Erasmus University, Rotterdam, and the Institute of Social Studies, The Hague. He has been a Harkness Fellow at Harvard University and the University of California at Berkeley; chairman of the Board of the Netherlands Association for International Affairs; and member of the Advisory Council for International Affairs of the Dutch Ministries of Foreign Affairs and Defense. Among his publications are The Nuclear Revolution and the End of the Cold War: Forced Restraint (Basingstoke and London, 1992) and Naar een Nucleaire Wereldorde (Amsterdam, 2008).
Godfried van Benthem van den Bergh
Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.
When political power is concentrated in the hands of a small circle of people, a country invariably ends up with technological stagnation.
Aleksei Kiselev
Two divergent trends—Putin’s hardline vision of how to prosecute the war in Ukraine, and a growing desire for change in Russia—could tear the regime apart.
Tatiana Stanovaya
Official discussions about mini oil refineries are unlikely to come to anything—but the mere fact they’re happening reveals the regime is failing to deliver a functioning economy.
Sergey Vakulenko
The security forces are targeting Arkady and Boris Rotenberg’s patronage network—and in Putin’s Russia, it’s extremely hard to stop a purge once it’s under way.
Mikhail Komin
Andrey Melnichenko’s essay offers no answer to the fundamental question of how, under any kind of negotiated settlement, Europe can protect itself from the Russian ressentiment that is inevitable in all scenarios except for an outright victory for Putin.
Leonid Bershidsky