Economics and the mid-life crisis have much in common: Both dwell on foregone opportunities

C'est la vie; c'est la guerre; c'est la pomme de terre . . . . . . . . . . . . . email: jpalmer at uwo dot ca

. . . . . . . . . . .Richard Posner should be awarded the next Nobel Prize in Economics . . . . . . . . . . . .

Wednesday, August 10, 2005

I Repeat: Canada Needs a Nuclear Weapons Programme

The International Atomic Energy Agency, along with everyone else imaginable, has exhibited a continuing failure to deter Iran and North Korea from developing their own nuclear weapons programmes [also see this, though I cannot vouch for it]. In light of these failures, I would like, once again, to urge that Canada plan to develop its own nuclear weapons programme.

The threat of developing nuclear weapons clearly elicits promises of aid; these promises tend to kept, though not always. The promises of aid are accompanied by threats of diplomatic reactions, which are usually empty and meaningless, of the following type:

You had better stop or face serious diplomatic consequences; or
Dismantle your programme or we'll tell Kofi Anan on you.
In other words, there is little to lose and much to gain from this strategy. I wrote about the proposal earlier here and here. Here is an excerpt:

The U.S. has shown with both Iran and North Korea, especially when pressured by other gubmnts, that it is willing to try to buy off the gubmnts of other countries that appear to be well along the way toward development of nuclear weapons.

For this strategy to work, the Canadian gubmnt would have to get the project well underway, lest the U.S. treat us like Iraq: invade us and demolish it, or hire the Israelis to do it for them [or just nuke us 'til we glow]. But once Canada has a few nukes pointed at New York City, Washington DC, or Burbank California, it would be difficult for the U.S. to threaten pre-emptive strikes. And then we could talk about maybe, possibly dismantling our programme depending on the U.S. position on softwood lumber, beef, and many other trade issues.

I am not a political insider. For all I know, the Canadian gubmnt is already on this path. Let's face it, we have plenty of uranium and a well-developed nuclear power industry, and so movements in this direction would not be out of the question.
I guess it isn't very libertarian of me to propose that the federal gubmnt embark on another spending programme.
Who Links Here