What about the first probability—the probability of emergence of Plutonia? There are many options, some are more likely, some are less. In my opinion, Russia is seriously likely to turn into Plutonia in the next decade, and it was going in that direction last 20 years. The alternative would be a democratic transformation, and, looking at similar cases, I would estimate the chance less than 50%.
How would “democratic transformation” solve that? Do you think current Russian government is the only reason behind things getting more tense on that front? Have you considered Russian perspective on that issue? For example, there’s at least one country that has made quite a history invading other countries, for made up reasons. That same country happens to spend almost half of entire Russian GDP on their military every year. What would happen to Russia in a world without nuclear weapons?
For example, there’s at least one country that has made quite a history invading other countries, for made up reasons.
That country also has a history of threating to use nuclear weapons. It also worrisome that it’s executive has a history of lying to it’s population and it’s legislative to make it easier for a generals to lunch nuclear weapons.
It is worrisome indeed. I would say, it definitely does not help and only increases a risk. However, I don’t think this country-that-must-not-be-named would start the nuclear war first, simply because it has too much to lose and its non-nuclear opportunities are excellent. This may change in future—so yes, there is some probability as well.
Well, “democratic transition” will not necessarily solve that (like basically it did not completely resolve the problem with the end of the Cold War), you are right, so actually, the probability must be higher than I estimated—even worse news. Is there any other options for decreasing the risk?
From a Russian perspective. Well, I didn’t discuss it with officials in the government, only with the friends who support the current government. So I can only say what they think and feel, and of course, it is just anecdotal evidence. When I explicitly discussed with one of them the possibility of the nuclear war, he stated that this possibility is small and as long as the escalation will be beneficial for Russia he will support it.
I don’t want to go here into politics and discuss what type of government would be better for Russia. I was more interested to estimate the probability of the nuclear war (or other catastrophes mentioned on the main post).
How would “democratic transformation” solve that? Do you think current Russian government is the only reason behind things getting more tense on that front?
Have you considered Russian perspective on that issue?
For example, there’s at least one country that has made quite a history invading other countries, for made up reasons. That same country happens to spend almost half of entire Russian GDP on their military every year.
What would happen to Russia in a world without nuclear weapons?
That country also has a history of threating to use nuclear weapons. It also worrisome that it’s executive has a history of lying to it’s population and it’s legislative to make it easier for a generals to lunch nuclear weapons.
It is worrisome indeed. I would say, it definitely does not help and only increases a risk. However, I don’t think this country-that-must-not-be-named would start the nuclear war first, simply because it has too much to lose and its non-nuclear opportunities are excellent. This may change in future—so yes, there is some probability as well.
Well, “democratic transition” will not necessarily solve that (like basically it did not completely resolve the problem with the end of the Cold War), you are right, so actually, the probability must be higher than I estimated—even worse news.
Is there any other options for decreasing the risk?
From a Russian perspective. Well, I didn’t discuss it with officials in the government, only with the friends who support the current government. So I can only say what they think and feel, and of course, it is just anecdotal evidence. When I explicitly discussed with one of them the possibility of the nuclear war, he stated that this possibility is small and as long as the escalation will be beneficial for Russia he will support it.
I don’t want to go here into politics and discuss what type of government would be better for Russia. I was more interested to estimate the probability of the nuclear war (or other catastrophes mentioned on the main post).