Dr Matthew Harries

There's such a strong link with Hiroshima which gives the meeting huge symbolic importance,” said Dr Matthew Harries, director of Proliferation and Nuclear Policy at the Royal United Services Institute (Rusi) think tank. It is “a moment to re-open the discussion on proliferation

...The concern that some people have had during this war is that out of either desperation or a desire to coerce the Ukrainians or Ukraine supporters in the West, Vladimir Putin might conduct some kind of either nuclear explosion or nuclear strike. And mostly people have been thinking about the possibility of whether Putin would be reckless and stupid enough to think that he could conduct a limited strike without that strike leading to total catastrophe for for Russia and for Putin himself. So the concern has been that Putin could dream himself up a scenario where a limited use of nuclear weapons doesn't lead to the end of the world as we know it and and to the end of Russia as we know it, and instead ends the war on favourable terms to Russia. This is not a new concept or a new worry when it comes to a nuclear power fighting a war, and even nor is it a new concept or a new worry when it comes to Russia fighting war...."

The nuclear threat is rising. But do we really know how to manage deterrence in this new landscape? For some time now, former No 10 adviser Dominic Cummings has been blogging about the fragility of deterrence and the possibility of nuclear catastrophe. But perhaps his most interesting remarks—phrased carefully to avoid spilling official secrets—come on the topic of the UK’s fraying nuclear weapons infrastructure. Whatever you think of Cummings, and whether you support or oppose Trident, the point is worth listening to...."