Three Countries Could Acquire the Nukes| Geopolitical Trends

All right, hello everybody and welcome to Geopolitical Trends, where truth matters. Excited to be with you. I'm also excited about the topic I'm going to be addressing for you today, the analysis I'm going to be providing you about. And this one has to do with the three countries with the possibility of the consideration of pursuing the nuclear path or trajectory, that is Interesting enough is that I talked about those two— two of those countries mainly in my Iran book, and it's just interesting how these things evolve. So this is what I'm going to be addressing for you in this live stream today. So, uh, I also have an interesting announcement to make for you, but first let me, uh, just— I'm gonna get into it, guys. Today I'm not gonna Give a good to see all the members of the community as always. Um, let me, let me start first with the two major announcements I want to share with you. And this one has to do with some upcoming guests. So there is a reason of why do certain topics, like for example, today's topic that pertains to the nuclear apparatus or nuclear, uh, uh, uh, sort of, uh, uh, uh, topic that is. And the reason for that is because I am going to be bringing two interesting guests, one of them for sure next week, the other one I'm still coordinating the schedule. Those are specialists in their fields, well-renowned. Let me just share a picture with you. What you're looking at is Dr. Ted Postol. He's a professor emeritus at MIT. But his specialty is in missile defense technology. And in my opinion, this is someone you really want to hear from regarding the topics of nuclear aspects of it. And we're going to be talking about Iran, of course, with him. So he's going to be in next week on the 5th. I'll take care of all the details and share them with you. The next person is going to be Melissa Parks. Now, Melissa Parks is a former minister in the Australian government for the international development. She was also an international lawyer with the United Nations, in addition to working on the, uh, her organization for the nuclear, uh, sort of disarmament. Uh, so she's an executive director. So I'm communicating with her office. And she will be in when she goes back to her country and we'll set the date for that. So anyway, it will be very interesting to have conversation with those individuals. So two things I want to mention also about the survey we did for the community, a survey in which I asked you about the question whether Europe should have a role. I didn't say should, but whether Europe a sort of, does Europe have a role into the nuclear, Iran nuclear issue? 24% of you will say yes, 70%, 72% of you said no, and 4% said I don't know. We had about 1.5K votes, or voters rather, on this particular topic. In my opinion, I'm gonna vote for with the 72% because Europeans are weak, they have no say into what's going on, we dictate the term to them. The second survey we did, and this one has to do with the whether Iran should allow the IAEA, the International Atomic Energy Agency, into Iran for a visit to discuss the possibility of continuing cooperation. 5% of you said yes, 93% said no and 2% said we don't know. And we had about almost 2,000 voters on this particular question. Once again, for me, I vote with the, with the nos, with the 93%, because at this point there is no need to even extend any communication with the IAEA or the US for that matter after what happened. So thank you very much, by the way, for taking part of this, uh, uh, survey here. So, all right, let's talk about our topic of today, which is about which countries will soon consider acquiring the nuclear bomb. So let's, let's just, uh, put this on the table first. When I say would soon consider, it does not mean they're gonna go for it, you know, but what you need to think about is that Some of those countries that I'm going to be addressing for you, and again, I'm not surprised because I addressed them in my Iran book. To those who had a chance to read my Iran book, you will, uh, find that out, is that they have the, the, the expertise and the technological knowledge to do so. So what is missing is the political will, and this is what we're gonna be getting into, uh, this war. Of course, this comes on the heels of, or, or against the background of the 12-day war that erupted between Iran and Israel, and of course with the intervention of the US. And all this was following the decades of so-called, uh, uh, if I may use the term, proxy wars, uh, between, uh, those two, uh, arch enemies, Iran and Israel, which by the way increased the tensions, uh, uh, as, as, as it pertained to the Iran's nuclear program. So, and of course, US made matters worse when it conducted the airstrikes on the Iranian facilities, as you may know. And I did a video for you about this one regarding the 3 nuclear facilities in— on June 22nd of this year. So, and of course, that was known as, uh, Operation Midnight Hammer, which by the way wasn't as successful. And I intend to address this with Dr. Ted Apostle when he is here next week. So the strikes, of course, targeted the, uh, Fardow, uh, uranium enrichment plant, so the Natanz and the Esfahan. But it didn't curtail or stop Iran's, uh, nuclear program. And this is where I go back to the original question: why should Iran be negotiating with the US or any other? And they should, uh, develop the, the capabilities to defend themselves. But before we get into the depth of all this, you need to understand the history of nuclear weapons. And I'm gonna be sharing with you a lot of pictures. And I give— first of all, I give credit to the, uh, uh, Melissa Parks organization. ICAN is called ICAN, which stands for the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons. So that's the organization for— I read their stuff. It's very, very spot on as far as the history of the developments. And I figured I'll share it with you, but I give credit to the organization, the ICON organization, for their pictures because that's the one I'm going to be sharing with you. So, so let's start with— and as I said, there are about 35 pictures. So if I'm not mistaken. So let me get to the pictures here because I have them organized certain way so I won't get confused because there are so many. So, so we start with the first one, uh, regarding, uh, right here. This is August, uh, of 1942. Uh, what you're looking at, you're looking at the Manhattan Project, which was established in the United States. You all know what a Manhattan Project, uh, was all about. And this one had to do with developing the first nuclear weapon. That is, uh, uh, the second picture. I think I got one here. This is the atomic bomb that the US, uh, uh, developed and dropped first on, on Japan, which we will get into that as we move forward. Then, uh, you move into, uh, 1945, and this is when the US conducted its first nuclear test known as Trinity. So of course, this was about 15 to 20 kilotons of nuclear weapons south of, uh, uh, Socorro, which is in New Mexico. So that is where— and I'm going to provide you the link, guys, to all this so you'll have an understanding, uh, of what is, uh, going on. Third picture here has to do with 1946— I'm sorry, 1945. This is when the US dropped the atomic bomb on Hiroshima. So, and of course, uh, the sad part of it is that, uh, by the time the bomb was dropped, you're looking at about only few months, 140,000 people perished. So So the US was the first one to ever deploy or use or drop the nuclear bomb. And of course, later on, many died from the radiation aspects of it. So next question has to do with the second bomb, which was also— you remember, they were Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The second bomb, which was dropped on August 9th, 1945, was dropped on Nagasaki. And that one, an estimated of 74,000 people died by the end of 1945. Uh, move to 1946, this is where you see the start of the call, uh, by the United Nations for the elimination of atomic weapons. So, and that was, by the way, the UN, United Nations' first resolution about this particular aspect of it. And of course, it didn't, it didn't hold per se. So, uh, we move into 1949, August again. Most funny— most of those— not funny, but interesting— most of those tests were conducted during August summertime. So this one has to do with August 29, 1949, and this is when the Soviet Union explodes a nuclear weapon. Codename was First Lightning. That was— and it was in the area of Kazakhstan, of course. And by the time the Soviets, uh, did this one, it became the second country, uh, to test this particular, uh, devastating weapons here. So, uh, next one will be 1952. Why is this important? It's because in 1952, specifically on October 3rd, this is when the UK tested its nuclear weapons. And guess, does anybody know? I'm going to ask you guys this question if you happen to know. Do you know which country they tested the nukes in? The UK. They didn't test their nukes in on the UK soil. They tested in another country. Does any of you know which country that, uh, did the testing or, or had the testing of the UK, of its nuclear weapon? And it shouldn't come as a surprise to you guys. Oh, oh, Sorja, you got it, you got it! It was Australia. It was Australia. That is what's surprising about it. This is why you have to understand the reality of the, uh, uh, Australian policy vis-à-vis the UK. So, well, interesting enough on this is that this is where United Kingdom, as I said, or Britain, conducted its first test at Montebello Islands off the coast of Western Australia. So after that came 1952. Why 1952? Because that's when the US tested the first hydrogen bomb. Now don't confuse the two between nuclear bomb and hydrogen bomb. So the US detonated the first hydrogen bomb at Eniwetek Atoll in the Marshall Islands. So, and this— the reality of this bomb, it was about 500 times more powerful than the Nagasaki bomb. So, uh, following that, 1954, exactly on March 1st, 1954, the US conducted another massive test, uh, of, uh, its 17-megaton hydrogen bomb. It was codenamed Bravo. So, and this one was tested at Bikini Atoll in the Pacific Ocean. And of course, what happened with this? Contaminated a Japanese fishing boat, and that's— you all know the rest of this history here. So 1955, this is when you started to notice the call for certain scholars who knows a great deal about the world of nuclear physics, and especially in 1955, July 9th, 1955. '55. This is when the two gentlemen you see on the picture— on the right is Bertrand Russell and on the left is Albert Einstein. And of course there were other leading scientists, those the one that issued a declaration of the dangers of a nuclear war and urging the governments to resolve disputes peacefully. 1958 saw another massive devastation there. Uh, now 1958 specifically Uh, so the UK Disarmament Campaign Forum, yeah, they were calling for this nuclear disarmament. And this is why we're gonna— I decided to reach out to Melissa Parks, uh, because she knows great deal in addition to being an international lawyer at the UN, and she has a great knowledge regarding this aspect. And I wanted the community to sort of learn something from her, uh, when we have her here in due time. So, uh, so the interesting aspect of this one here has to do with, uh, of course this campaign took off, but it didn't make a big, big change. Then comes 1959. And why 1959? It's because, uh, I don't think so, I have a— no, I do have a picture for you here, guys. 1959, this one was a declaration about banning nuclear tests in Antarctica. Antarctica Treaty opens for signatures, and that one established, and I quote here, any nuclear explosion in Antarctica and the disposal there of radioactive waste material shall be prohibited, end of quote. Of course, another Western power had to test its weapons as well, and this one has to do with none other than France. Uh, let me see if I get, uh, I think, uh, no, not this one. Maybe this— no, I'm sorry, not this one. This one here, guys. This is when France tested its first nuclear weapon. In 1960. And of course, this was exploded in the Sahara Desert, and this one yielded about 60 to 70 kilotons of, of detonations there. And later moved its nuclear test to the South Pacific, and they continued to be up to 1996. So France been conducting more tests since— till 1996. So of course, uh, uh, comes 1961, uh, and this one, uh, experienced the largest ever bomb tested that was conducted. And of course, it was the Soviet Union that tested this particular bomb. Which was about 58 megaton atmospheric nuclear weapons, and it was nicknamed— it would still hold the name today— Tsar Bomba. This is why it's massive, and this is why— and the reason I'm bringing this up here, guys, uh, to understand why the West, it keeps pushing the Russians to the corner. You don't want to corner the bear because they will have no other option but to use what they have at their disposal, which would be within their right to do so. So, 19— as I said, that was the largest. Then comes 1962. What happened in 1962, guys? I just want to, uh, remember the history of 1962, a major political event on the world that put, uh, the world on edge regarding the nuclear, uh, weapons? Does anybody know? Uh, let me see in the chat box. Cuba, that is indeed missile crisis. Uh, you guys got it. Bamboo Soja, you got it. Ball Taiwan still. Uh, the Bay of Pigs, Lloyd Johnson. You guys got it, you got it. The, the Cuban Missile Crisis. And this one was a tense moment, you know, of course, because the United States and Soviet Union came close. So, and finally the US, uh, uh, uh, sort of backed down, uh, after 13-day crisis, which brings, as I said, the US and, uh, the Soviet Union on the brink of a nuclear war. So, uh, move to 1963. And this is where you started to see some sort of a conversation, uh, regarding what can we be doing about this one. So 1963, this is where the Partial Test Ban Treaty opens up for signature. And this one, this treaty was banning nuclear testing in the atmosphere, outer space, and underwater. And it was signed in Moscow following large demonstrations in Europe and America against nuclear testing. And didn't— of course, uh, it's not gonna— because other countries will have to think about their own strategic interests, and rightly so. So they're going to say to themselves, why should we allow the Americans or the Soviet Union back then to be the only one with the nukes? That's why France moved forward with it, the UK moved forward with it. But in 1964, you got another country that conducted a test. And that— which, which country was it, guys? 1964. Let me see in the chat box. Oh, oh, Bamboo Soja, you got it! It was China. Indeed, indeed, it was China in 1964, explode its first atomic bomb, uh, at the Lop Nur testing, uh, uh, site near Xinjiang Province, you know. Uh, uh, so by doing that, China entered into the nuclear club because you have to sometimes for strategic matter, you're gonna have to do what you have to do. What is interesting about this development as China moved into this, 1967 marks some sort of a turning point But a turning point for whom? Not for the major powers. Turning point for those countries, but not in a good way. My reference here of 1967 is to Latin America, which became nuclear-free. So a treaty prohibiting nuclear weapons in Latin America, it's called the Treaty of Tlatelolco, which is signed in Mexico or at Mexico City, and parties to this treaty agree not to manufacture, test, or acquire nuclear weapons. But we all know what it means. You look at now Africa, for example. You look at now Southeast Asia, for example. Or you look at now the West Asia or Middle East, with the exception of Israel. So those countries end up being at the under the thumb of the, uh, the powers, major powers, uh, so to speak. So not all of them, of course. 1968, this is where you started to see the Non-Proliferation Treaty. That is, this is, uh, uh, what's his name, Lyndon Johnson. I, I draw a blank because he is from the state of Texas. So 1968, this is where you see the NPT opens for signature. In other words, we were asking countries to sign up, uh, for not, uh, developing nuclear weapons. How ironic, isn't it? So fast forward to 1974, and 1974, this is where— when, rather, India conducts its first nuclear test, uh, and, and, and it was conducted at Pokhran, which is in the Rajasthan desert. And with the code name of Smiling Buddha. Interesting, uh, code name that is. So move forward to 1979, and that's when you start to see also developments of a nuclear explosion in the Indian Ocean. And this, uh, uh, sort of, uh, was a nuclear test explosion occurred over the South Indian Ocean off the Cape of Good Hope, and it is thought to have been conducted by— does anybody know which country at that time in 1979? Just think about geography. Good Hope or Cape of Good Hope, that should give you a hint as to which country. No, not Pakistan, not France. No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, not France, not, not Europeans. Oh, oh, DW, you got it. South Africa. Because South Africa had a nuclear program, and guess who was assisting South Africa into this? It was Israel. That is what's interesting about these aspects of it. So South, uh, South Africa did have a nuclear program, but they gave it up. So fast forward to 1982, this is when you had the million people rally, or million people march for disarmament. I think I have a picture for you here, right here. 1982, this is what, uh, uh, and this one, the 1 million people, uh, march was in New York Central Park in support of a nuclear freeze movement. Uh, 1985, so the Rainbow Warrior ship destroyed I don't know if you were familiar with the Greenpeace, uh, the Rainbow Warrior. It was destroyed. I was familiar with that, uh, uh, incident, that is. Uh, so it was destroyed in New Zealand. Uh, which, speaking of, by the way, of New Zealand, something just came to my attention yesterday. Uh, the US, the, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the FBI, is opening an office in New Zealand. Makes you just wonder what the heck is FBI is doing in New Zealand. FBI is supposed to operate domestically here in the US. So anyway, uh, fast forward to 1985. This is where the South Pacific became sort of a declared or became a nuclear-free zone. This is why, uh, uh, at the time, New Zealand, Australia, and all the But Australia now going with this nuclear submarine, even though it ain't gonna be happening anyway, but still the fact that they are changing their posture regarding this. So what happened in 1985? The South Pacific Nuclear Free Zone Treaty was signed in, uh, in the Cook Islands, and the treaty prohibits, like the one in Latin America, the manufacturing, the stationing, or testing of a nuclear weapon within the area. And right after that, you have again nuclear physicists and scholars came forward for their— this was in 1985, anti-nuclear doctors won the Nobel Peace Prize. And this was for the international physician, uh, those in, in physics. For the prevention of nuclear war receives the Nobel Peace Prize. So, and the key one now comes in 1986. Now that I was very aware of, this one has to do with Israel nuclear program revealed. Even though Israel has been working on its nuclear program from way back, late '60s, by the way, guys, in early '70s, that's when Folie-à-Thinx was developed. And, uh, and I think even the US wasn't really read on, on everything regarding the Israeli nuclear program. But anyway, suffice it to say, 1986, the Israeli program came to the surface, and it was disclosed by none other than the Sunday Times, uh, which supplied by an Israeli nuclear technician, and his name is Vanunu. So, which lead experts to conclude that Israel may have up to 200 nuclear war weapons. So, to my knowledge, was about 180 at that, or of course they probably developed more. So, but at least my knowledge of it was 180, uh, uh, nuclear weapons. So then comes an interesting thing, and I remember this one because I was again really, even at that time, I was paying close attention to the talks between the Soviet Union and the United States. This what you see is Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev with their, uh, uh, translators there. So this was the US and Soviets, uh, discussing the abolition of nuclear weapon, which was nothing but just a smoke screen. And that meeting, I remember it because it was in Reykjavik in, in Iceland took place there, and I really stayed up late at night to watch on TV at that time. Uh, there was no way they're gonna do it, you know, because who's gonna— because the element of trust was never there. So, but they discussed it to a degree, but nothing major, major happened. What happened, however, in 1987 It was the Intermediate Range Missile Ban. The, uh, the, uh, uh, the— this one is the Soviet Union and the United States signed the Intermediate Range Nuclear Force Treaty. So, and the elimination was about sort of, uh, uh, basically what they wanted to have is they wanted to have the two states, uh, be, uh, only having all land-based missiles held by the two states with a range between 300 and 3,400 miles. That's it. Uh, 1991 saw South Africa join NPT, which was a mistake, uh, strategic on their part, but again, it's their country, they can decide whatever they want. South Africa accedes to the non— uh, the NPT Treaty, and the government claimed to have made 6 nuclear weapons and had to dismantle them all. So can you imagine? Hmm, I found it interesting. 1995, the same sort of, uh, in another geographical area, which was the South, uh, Southeast Asia becomes also nuclear-free zone. And the nations of Southeast Asia create a nuclear weapon-free zone stretching from Burma or Myanmar in the west to the Philippines in the east, Laos and Vietnam in the north, and Indonesia in the south. But again, seeing what Philippines is allowing its territory to become, once again, I am convinced that the 9 bases we have in the Philippines, we only declared 5. The other 4, most likely, uh, uh, they— we stored the nuclear, uh, weapons there of sort without the knowledge of the Filipinos. That's my assessment. So, uh, 1996, it's a major development. What you all know what happened in 1996, because following 1990 1. So, and this one has to do with Ukraine because that's when Ukraine became a nuclear-free state. We are the one asked Ukraine to turn over its nuclear weapon. So, because, uh, the— which was transferred from, uh, the Soviet Union, uh, uh, following the disintegration, uh, of, of the, the USSR in 1991. Then comes 1996, uh, that one is— oh, I don't have a picture. Anyway, it's not a problem. And this one has to do with the ICJ. ICJ rules on nuclear weapons. And again, all these international institutions might not amount— you might have sort of a push by a regular organization than you have with the likes of the ICJ or the ICC. Because when we look at now what's going on in Gaza, none of them had the teeth to really make a change on the ground. Heck, both of them didn't have the gut to move forward and establish that there is an ongoing and systemic starvation. They didn't even rule on that one. And I'm gonna ask, uh, uh, Melissa, uh, Parks when she's here in addition to my other contact who is, who is an international lawyer regarding this. And the, the last two I'm going to share is 1996, which you need to know. In 1996, this one pertains to Belarus removes its last nuclear missile. And, uh, of course Belarus turns it— last— turns its last nuclear missile over to Russia for destruction, and it joined Ukraine and Kazakhstan as former Soviet republics that have given up all the nuclear arms. However, you need to know that the Russians have sort of placed now some tactical nukes in, in Belarus. So that's an arrangement that was made between the two. The next one has to do with Pakistan. 1998, this is where India and Pakistan conducts nuclear tests. India conducts 3 underground nuclear tests, its first in 24 years. One is a thermonuclear weapon. And later in May of the same year, Pakistan tests 6 nuclear weapons in response to India's test. And of course, what's interesting about both is that both of them were conducted, conducted under the nose of the US and the CIA because the agency had no clue as to what was going on in Pakistan and India. This is one, one, one choke points that we have. We couldn't get over it. So, but that's, you know, life goes on. And of course, the last one I'm going to end with before I'll jump in into my conversation here has to do with 2006. 2006, so North Korea testing its nuclear weapon. The North Korean government announced that it has successfully conducted a nuclear test. And once again, this leads me to the point that I've always made before, that we dare to sort of threaten North Korea or even issue whatever because we know what's going to happen. And North Koreans don't bluff, especially with Kim Yo-jun, the sister of Kim Jong-un. So, you know, that's just the way it is. So anyway, guys, uh, so I just once again, I want to give credit to ICAN, the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons, for this brief history regarding this. So now let's move on into our analysis here about the 3 countries. But before I'll do that, I'm gonna play this quick clip for you guys. Liking this video so far? Don't just be a watcher, go ahead and hit the like, share, and subscribe button. And don't forget to tap the bell so you will not miss any of my videos or live streams. This way you will be supporting a channel that stands for the truth and objective reporting. The choice is yours. Thanks for your support. And I mean it when I say I greatly appreciate your support, guys. So to those who are new here on the channel, please make sure to subscribe, and thank you for that. So now we have about 9 countries that possess nuclear weapons: United States, Russia, China, France, the UK, Pakistan, India, Israel, and North Korea. So there are those who will add, uh, Iran into the category, and I am not going to jump into this because they are part of this conversation. I want to leave it till I get with my guest, Dr. Ted Postol, who has a substantive knowledge about all this. But I do feel comfortable saying that Iran now is considered a nuclear— not in a way like the US, Russia, and so forth, but they do have the capabilities. So, and this is where it becomes the question of some countries have the capability to develop nuclear weapons, so, and they have done so, except that they have not publicly acknowledged it. So, and this, of course, uh, all this what I'm going to be doing for you here is an analysis that came through Uh, uh, the— it was an article, series of articles known as The Coming Nuclear Age. So, and this one was published by some sort of experts in the Federation of the American Scientists, uh, here in Washington. So this is what part of why I wanted to share with you, because to my surprise, when I read this, it coincided with what I wrote in my, uh, Iran book. So, and this leads us to the question of this nuclear arms race. So, because as you know, since the end of World War II, and for about nearly 80 years now, the United States by itself has sought to limit the spread of nuclear weapons through diplomacy, incentives, agreements, sanctions, and even military interventions with few exceptions. And this is exactly what I wrote back then in my Iran book. As a matter of fact, uh, let me see if I can get the exact, uh, uh, uh, excerpt, uh, if you allow me, guys, because I want you to understand. Because here's the thing, what I wrote back then is that current shifts in the international politics indicate that this success may not continue in the future. Members of the exclusive nuclear club in the late '60s this sort of, uh, in the nuclear power have since risen to 9 states. And Israel was likely the first to join the nuclear club in the late '60s, despite not yet acknowledging its possession of nuclear weapons. Of course, India followed with that in the '70s, and followed of course by its neighbor Pakistan. So, and all the states have not signed DNPTE. So this is what I found interesting. Of course, North Korea was the only state to have signed the treaty, but when they saw this going that way and the US provocations and so forth, they decided in 2003 to withdraw before conducting their first nuclear test, which was in 2006. So when you consider about the 191 countries that have signed the NPT, including Iran, which has, by the way, been a long been accused of this, uh, by, by the West or adversaries of having these nuclear weapons and so forth. Well, in my opinion, you may as well just move forward with it and put it up on the table and dare the US or Israel or any other force to attack Iran. So, and this is why I'm coming to the conclusion, uh, that you can, you can now per se, uh, consider these countries that could move into this direction, the 3 countries I'm going to be talking about, into 3 groups. The first group, those are the US allies, be they in Europe, the equivalency of, let's say, Germany, let's say even Poland. I will go as far as Or you can consider the allies, so-called allies in Asia, the likes of Philippines, Australia, South Korea, and Japan. So, and of course, the article, which I found very ironic, the article had to include Taiwan into this as a US allies. Well, we're talking about sovereign states. Taiwan is not a state. And this is again with that misleading aspect. But where the concern is, in my opinion, is the statements coming out of the White House regarding Taiwan when they stated— but they are not reporting this openly or aggressively— is that there is a consideration in Washington of extending the nuclear umbrella to Taiwan. We all know what it means, and I don't think so China will or should tolerate that. Straightforward. So I don't understand why they are including Taiwan into this, but, but anyway, why is this important to mention about those countries? It's because these countries possess the knowledge. They do have the knowledge. They do have the technology. They do have the resources. To develop nuclear weapons. And even if you think they might not, they could easily acquire it if they choose to. And the reason why there is now this consideration is because they are starting to lose trust and confidence in the United States' security commitments. Because are you going to trust what the American administration is saying? You know, it will be a strategic mistake, it will be a grave mistake to trust what the US government is saying, and especially now in light of the Trump administration's sort of erratic, ill-conceived, fragmented, fractured, uh, foreign policies, if we call it foreign policy to begin with. The second group, this may include countries in West Asia the Middle East, which is closely monitoring Iran's alleged nuclear ambition. Well, which country are we talking about? One is Israel, and this is the reason why we wanted to maintain it that way. The third group— this may include countries directly affected by the previous two groups, you know, and those sort of could find themselves adjacent or near the countries that possess nuclear weapons— neighbors, if I may say the term. So, so countries that possess the technology, the material, the expertise necessary to build this kind of capability, uh, in a short period, but have not yet made the decision actually to build the bomb. Because why? Some argue, some analysts argue that because their commitments to international treaties. Well, I would say you're gonna have to revisit that commitment. It's because when you are committed to those treaties, some other parties are not, like the United States. And the best example is when we drew out of Iran, GCP way. So I'm going to start with the first country. I'm going to talk about the 3 countries that I believe, uh, should— or, or not should, rather, are on the verge of, if they choose to, they could easily acquire the nuclear. I'll start with Iran. Of course, for Iran, given so many years, we're talking about way back, even during the era of the Shah, which, by the way, it was the US that helped Iran at that time build its nuclear, uh, sort of, uh, uh, infrastructure for civilian use. That is, it was still the revolution of 1989, and when Ali Khamenei— I'm sorry, I'm sorry, not Khamenei, Ali Khomeini. There's a pronunciation there, Khomeini versus Khamenei. The current supreme leader, the current spiritual leader is Ali Khamenei. The previous one, the late, is Ali Khomeini. So Ali Khomeini said no nuclear weapons. It was his decision. So with Iran going back and forth, so, and of course when you consider Israeli sabotage, ongoing sabotage, and of course the recent tensions, uh, or recent war or conflict, if I may use the term, between Israel, the 12-day war between Iran and Israel, and the American military attack, Iran finds itself now facing a very, very fateful decision. And I did talk about this before, that you can't be rational or reasoning with the West when they are not giving you the same currency. And this is why Iran now is at a really crossroads regarding its military nuclear ambitions. So despite the US strikes, by the way, Tehran is believed to still have the expertise and the possible resources necessary to cross that nuclear threshold if they decide to do. And like I said, because back in the '70s under the Shah, Iran nuclear program began with the assist— the assistance of Western, uh, uh, countries, mainly the US. And within this context, you look at, for example, uh, uh, uh, this time Iran sort of is turning its sight eastward towards Pakistan, which has then less than a decade away from testing the nuclear, uh, bomb. Back then, this is what happened. And that's why you have the Pakistani nuclear scientist Abdul Qadir Khan, uh, it's right here. He's considered the father of Pakistan's nuclear, uh, weapons because he's the one who developed it for them. And, uh, so, but it was Abdul Qadir Khan that sold the Iran centrifuges to enrich uranium to Iran for to purify the level needed to make a bomb. So, and this according to Western sources. Uh, I was, I was aware of what was taking place with Abdul Qader Khan back in 2002 when we pressured at that time Pervez Musharraf to turn him over, and he said, hell no, you are not going to have Abdul Qader Khan because it will be a riot in Pakistan if ever Pakistan turned over, uh, Abdul Qader Khan. He passed away, by the way, guys, in I think 2020, somewhere around there. So, and the reason for Iran acquiring this, because that's highly enriched isotopes of U-235, uh, uh, that's how you develop with centrifuges. So Iran Iran is one of those countries now at a threshold. Should they go for the bomb or not? And all it's missing is the political will. And I said, I became clear to me that Iran will not, uh, if it doesn't develop some form of deterrence, we will see a repeat of what took place, uh, uh, with Israel and the US against Iran. So, 'cause remember, uh, just, uh, as we negotiating, uh, uh, the terms of the JCPOA and reached an agreement in 2015, only to turn around and the US pulled out of that in 2018. So, so here is what I wrote in my Iran book, an excerpt about this one pertaining to this topic here. In addition to their established economic and business ties, Iran and South Korea are also beginning to explore potential cooperation in a formerly off-limits sector nuclear energy. So following the 2015 nuclear deal, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, GCPOA, uh, Iran is now seeking to expand its peaceful nuclear energy ties with other countries. Meanwhile, advances made by South Korean nuclear industry, which makes both small modular reactors and large nuclear power plants, have made it an attractive supplier in recent years. This is what I argued back then about Iran and South Korea. So, uh, because you have to consider these changes within the US administrations, uh, and the changes that's going on, it's leading now to that conclusion that Iran might not have any other option but to go for the bomb. So, and we shall see, because we witnessed what happened in June with the US strikes. Uh, if Iran shouldn't assume that the US will not do it again, Iran shouldn't assume that Israel will not try again. But if Iran sort of, uh, uh, which by the way, with the, with the Khorramshahr-5 ICBM, it could be sending messages gradually That's just how I see it moving forward. Next country is Japan. In 2025, Japan is, by the way, is going to be, uh, commemorating the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II, specifically with the V-J Day, which is Victory Over Japan Day, on August 15th. This day, of course, August 15th, marks the surrender of Japan and the end of the war. Additionally, there are commemorations for the 80th anniversary of the Battle of Iwo Jima and the Battle of Okinawa. So why is this important about Japan? Japan is often described as some sort of— the way they think about it as an epitome, if I may use the term.— why? Because Japan is strongly— yeah, because it has that capability, but is also strongly committed, uh, to nonproliferation, the NPT, that is treaties, but also possess the necessary and the capabilities to acquire the nuclear weapon really in such a short period if they want to. Yeah. And of course, when you consider Japan is the only country that suffered the, uh, the effect of an atomic bomb dropped by the US, so this is why Japan maintains some sort of a strict domestic prohibition on the issue of the nuclear weapons. But I think Japan now is reconsidering, and the reason for that is because so far Japan relies on the US nuclear umbrella. And who's to say that we could turn our back on Japan if things gets bad? So then what? So, and that is why for Japan is arguing that there will be no nuclear weapon, there will be no permit of presence of nuclear weapons on its territory. Is Japan sure about that? Because remember, when we deploy— this is one problem when you allow military bases in your country, you have no control over what's coming to your country, because those military bases are not off limits, of course, to farm, because it has sensitive information and so forth. That's like, uh, the example I can give you guys is Pine Gap. Pine Gap in Australia, you know, there are certain sections inside the Pine Gap that even Aussies with the top security clearance cannot get in, into that section, beside maybe just the Prime Minister of Australia, if ever. And usually we will never allow anybody like that to get in into those specific sectors of the base. And the same thing, arguments I can make about Japan. So what is different in the case of Japan is just Japan has an advanced civilian nuclear industry. It's a very, very advanced. So, and also has the infrastructure. Of course, that comes with a risk. You all remember, uh, Fukushima Daiichi, uh, nuclear disaster that took place. So, but what Japan has is both the enrichments and the reprocessing, uh, facilities for uranium and so forth. So there is one other key elements that Japan has, and that is it has a stockpile of pure plutonium, which one can be used to manufacture a large number of nuclear warheads. This is why in the case of Japan, should it decide to do it, they can move on it quickly, because Japan's domestic, uh, plutonium, uh, capacity or the processing of, uh, plutonium, uh, capacity domestically, sort of, uh, at least for them, they using it as a nuclear deterrent. I don't know, I don't know, but that's what they're saying. So, and because by the end of, uh, I recall 2020, uh, Japan possessed about, uh, if I remember, about between 40 and 45 tons of plutonium. That's how much they have. And even for that, when I argued back in, in my Iran book, I wrote back then— here is the excerpt— because there are countries in the Middle East, they were looking at Japan. So I wrote, similarly, Jordan has agreed with South Korea to build a non-nuclear research reactor. The Korean Atomic Energy Research Institute in, uh, and Daewoo, on the other hand, reached out to Japan after its failed negotiations with South Korea to launch the building of Turkey's nuclear power plant. As for Saudi Arabia goes, it has been widely reported that the kingdom has a number of nuclear bombs stored in Pakistan. Based on how much money Saudi Arabia provide Pakistan, one infers that if and when the kingdom needs something in return, like a nuclear bomb, Pakistan would reciprocate. That's the possibility, is there. So suffice it to say, for Japan, this duality meaning the nuclear civilian technologies and the capability of producing a nuclear weapon. So this duality makes Japan now unique in this context of these three countries. Yeah, because it is also on the threshold of the nuclear, uh, uh, uh, uh, deterrence. So to Japan, if the geopolitical calculations goes a different direction or change drastically. So let's say hypothetically, uh, a worst-case scenario will be a major issue in the Korean Peninsula. Uh, another major issue will be, uh, that if the US pushes Japan into Taiwan against China and China reacts or retaliates. In case Philippines end up conducting some crazy maneuvers, uh, near China's borders and China reacts. All those are this kind of geopolitical calculations or scenarios, uh, that could really, uh, threaten Japan, but forcing it into a complete pivot towards, uh, the acquisition of a nuclear weapon. Why? It's because you'll be looking at the complete erosion of trust in the American, uh, protection. And this is why in this case Japan may consider to posture in the future. However, when you think about the cost-benefit analysis of a nuclear weapon, we're looking at a different outcome. Because remember, where is that picture of that massive devastation? Right there. So when you think about the cost-benefit analysis of this one here, what are you coming up with is that sort of this nuclear deterrence could be more effectively directed towards developing advanced military capabilities in turn instead, rather. So this is what Japan is kind of thinking in terms, and this is even true for us because now you look at, at the cost of maintaining or upgrading. For us now, we are expected— the government, that is— to spend about $1 trillion. Yeah. In modernizing and developing the nuclear capabilities over the next decade. $1 trillion. Just imagine putting the $1 trillion into the economy here. So Japan might be doing the same calculations. So the— except the problem in Japan is you might not be able to, because when you are controlled by another country, when we have massive troops presence on, on the Japanese soil, that gives you an idea Japan might not be in a position to dictate when it comes down to the nuclear apparatus. I will say Japan, Australia, Germany, and South Korea. Nonetheless, I wanted to bring this to the conversation. So, so, and this is why, uh, Japan is one of the list— on the list, rather, for countries that could consider the nuclear trajectory. And the third country and violent country I'm going to talk about is South Korea. Now, South Korea is one of these examples of Oh, you are staunch ally. Except that for South Korea, it possessed the capabilities, the technology, the knowledge, and the resources to develop a nuclear weapon. So will they do it? It's unlikely, unlikely. So because when you look about South Korea, it has really one of the advanced civilian energy, uh, nuclear energy, uh, programs that exist. And they've been helping other countries around the world on the civilian aspects of it. So because what you need to know, and that's not been disclosed openly, is that back in the 1970s— remember, when was the Korean War at that time? Does anybody know roughly the years of when, or the decades when the Korean War took place? Oh, Zoyan, you got it. 1950 to 1953, that is correct. Taiwan Steel, you got it. You guys got it. Chris H, you got it. Gothic, you got it. 1950s, early '50s, that is. So why is this important? It's because right after that, for us, the Americans, the decision was made prior to 1953. Decision was made in 19— to my knowledge, between 1951 and 1952, when a secret meeting took place of the MJ-12 at that time. And the consideration was, we need to get involved in conflict but not winning a war. And we started with the Korean War, then Vietnam, Gulf War, Gulf War II, Afghanistan, Iraq, then Ukraine, and soon to be South China Sea area. Because it's coming, make no mistake about it. So back in the '70s, in the '70s, South Korea— here is where you see the double standard of the international. This is why this should be a lesson for Iran. In the early '70s, or during the '70s rather, South Korea engaged secretly in a nuclear program developed at that time under President Park Chan-hee. And why is that? It was driven by fears that the United States might withdraw from its security commitments. So however, of course, because this— so what the outcome of the Korean, uh, with the North Koreans. This is why Japan and South Korea, even though we have a massive troop presence, they don't trust the Americans. We could walk out anytime. Anytime. However, back in the '70s, the program was halted, not because South Korea wants to, it's because the US pressure. We pressured South Korea, and South Korea at the time joined the Nuclear NPT Treaty by signing in 1975 as a non-nuclear weapons state. So Once again, I did argue in my Iran book about South Korea. This is why I found, uh, this article very interesting, because, uh, when I addressed this, I found similarities into the arguments. So, uh, because when you consider South Korea's case, you know, in which reports claim— this is what I wrote back then— they claim that it conducted undeclared nuclear experiments Yet the IAEA, the International Atomic Energy Agency Board of Governors, decided against filing a formal non-compliance report. Now that economic sanctions have been lifted on Iran, might Iran and South Korea begin to cooperate economically? The answer is yes. Evidence suggests that South Korea has already begun this initiative. For instance, South Korean President Uh, Park Jin-hee visited Iran, the first visit of a Syrian president in 54 years. This cooperation is not limited only to agriculture, petroleum, and technology, but also include energy, nuclear energy. I just want to share this, but my point is about the secret program Iran, uh, North Korea, South Korea was conducted And the IAEA find out about it but did not file a formal complaint, uh, compliance report. Yet we saw the reports coming out of Iran by the IAEA which flip the truth. This is why you can't trust the IAEA. If I were advising the Iranian government, I say forget about even allowing them in the country. As a matter of fact, you might want to make a decision is to withdraw from the NPT altogether. Now, the concern for South Korea remains the sort of the most, uh, concern that South Korea has, uh, regarding its nuclear ambitions has to do with the escalation threat from its neighbor North Korea. Well, actually, the issue is not from North Korea because North Korea has no interest in escalating If it's not bothered, they're not gonna bother anyway— anybody. It's the US that is causing these tensions to persist because we wanted to keep that. So, but of course, North Korea was forced to go the route of developing its own nuclear deterrence, and this is why Pyongyang's nuclear arsenal is growing, and the US understand the reality of it. When North Korea tests an ICBM, that's the message to the Americans that dare to threaten us, because we will wipe out whatever we need to wipe out. And those ICBMs are within reach, within— across the continent, by the way, continent US. And this is why when North Korea has now dozens of its nuclear warheads, especially the ICBM directed, uh, towards South Korea, first of all, and some of them towards the US, but also because it's within reach to massive presence of over 33,000 troops we have in South Korea. Why, why are we having that, man? So, so The interesting aspects is that the media is not disclosing is that the South Korean people are in support of South Korea developing its own nuclear weapons. But it's not because of North Korea, it's because of what we created. And we have about 35,000 troops, by the way. So, and this is what I need you guys to understand, this reality of why is this important. And, uh, uh, uh, when you hear like the former president of North— of South Korea, uh, I thought I had a picture of him. Uh, no, no, I don't. Sorry guys, I don't have a picture. So, but anyway, uh, the former Yoon Sook-yeol is the one who sparked the controversy uh, when he stated that if North Korea's provocation escalates, his country might have to consider introducing tactical nuclear weapons or developing them themselves, end of quote. You know what I said, it's not about the— it's about the presence of the US troops. Remove the US troops, North Korea is not going to bother you at all. So that's the way I see it. So, uh, here is my conclusion for you guys regarding those three 3 countries that could consider pursuing nuclear, uh, uh, weapons or deterrence: Japan, Iran, and South Korea. So, and this is where you're going to have to think in terms of how this is going to shape the trajectory, uh, for the rest of the world moving forward. Of course, who wants to have, uh, uh, uh, more nukes around? But also, who wants to only allow few with the nukes. Either get rid of it all, no exception, or allow countries who have the means, resources to develop it, develop it. That's the way I see it. Because the case of Iran, if Iran sort of came forward earlier and said, you know what, we will retaliate with whatever deter— nuclear deterrence we have, Israel will think twice, the US will think twice. But Iran might have its own strategy of dealing with all this. And we are seeing now with the, uh, Khorramshahr-5, uh, missile that Iran, uh, developed, uh, and who's to say their nuclear facility could develop the necessary enriched uranium to develop a bomb. So, and once again, I will be having an interesting conversation with Dr. Ted Postol about this particular aspect, in addition to my other guests and Melissa Parks. So, all right guys, I hope you all enjoy this and, uh, I wish you a good weekend and I look forward to seeing you next time. By the way guys, please hit that like button, uh, and subscribe if you have not done so. And I would greatly appreciate if, uh, for those who are supporting my upcoming Asia trip, I am planning on leaving within 3 weeks We are about 41%. Let me share the screen with you about where we are. Add, add another $60 or $80 to this number. I didn't upgrade it, so we are almost about 48%. I would greatly appreciate it if you could support this particular Asia trip for us to reach this goal of $5,000 by August 24th. So that would be, uh, greatly if you could do that. So, and let me share the link for those who wants to support, uh, this, uh, uh, trip here. Uh, I'm gonna put it in the chat box for you guys. I'm also gonna put a link to the channel for those who wants to support the channel. You You all know the research that I do for you guys. I just spend time in, in conducting the research, acquiring the information. I even get YouTube messages that they're gonna demonetize a video because I said the copyright of a video clip that I played from the AP, the Associated Press, which I disclosed to you guys. That is why I said this is a clip from— hey, what— that anyway. It won't matter. So, uh, because I want you guys to, uh, understand and learn, uh, what's need to be done. To those who are interested in purchasing a copy of my book, uh, uh, Eran one, that is, you can get that one there, uh, in on that link. And for the last one is for my speaking engagements. I'm going to put the link for you guys in the chat box. To those who might know someone who might be interested in a speaker Uh, and again, I am that type of speaker. I am straightforward about when I share information with the entities that invites me to speak. I make it clear, I'm not gonna tell you what you want to hear. I'm gonna tell you what's factual. And they respect that with me, uh, uh, for most of my speaking engagements that I did. So I greatly appreciate, uh, you guys. And, uh, I don't know if I'm gonna do a livestream for you tomorrow. I'm not sure yet about that, but But in case if I don't, I wish you, uh, uh, safe weekend. Enjoy. Oh, actually, I'm not doing livestream. I have an event to attend to as well. So I will see you next week, guys. So as always, remember, geopolitics impacts your daily life in more ways than one. Till next time, bye-bye.