Ongoing nuclear weapons race causing anxiety across the globe, not many experts know where they are hidden, scientists warn...
(Representational image: unsplash.com)
New Delhi: At present, the world is witnessing a lot of violence and bloodshed. The Ukraine war is not ending and the growing tension between Iran and Israel has created instability in the Middle East. Then another dangerous and invisible storm is slowly gaining momentum. This is the return of the nuclear arms race. But this time the matter is not limited to just making bombs. Now these dangerous weapons are being hidden. Let us know about it in detail. How many nuclear bombs in the world?
According to a new report by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) and the Federation of American Scientists (FAS), by the beginning of the year 2025, there are a total of 12,241 nuclear weapons in the world. Out of these, about 9,600 weapons are kept in ready condition for military use, that is, they can be used anytime. However, the most shocking thing here is that about 87 percent of these weapons are with only two countries, America and Russia while the rest of the countries have only 13 percent of the weapons. Where are nuclear bombs hidden?
But even more worrying than these numbers is the secrecy surrounding them. While nations continue to talk about peace and stability, behind the scenes, nuclear stockpiles are being modernized and expanded. Not only this, in many cases they are being hidden in places that avoid public scrutiny. From fortified airbase bunkers to roaming submarines, weapons are quietly waiting to be activated.
In Europe, US warheads are stored in Germany, Belgium, the Netherlands, Italy and Turkey under NATO's nuclear-sharing arrangement. These sites are not publicly acknowledged, but security analysts know them well. Control remains with the USA, but their presence signals unwavering support for American allies at a time of global uncertainty. No transparency about stockpiles
While Russia recently announced it had begun deploying tactical nuclear weapons in neighbouring Belarus, international observers suggest this may already be a reality. China and North Korea remain far vaguer, having not disclosed the status or location of their nuclear assets. Suspense over Israel's nuclear arsenal
Israel, on the other hand, remains the most mysterious nuclear power. Unlike other countries, Israel has never officially confirmed or denied the existence of its nuclear arsenal, instead maintaining a doctrine of 'strategic obscurity'. Yet experts estimate the country has about 90 nuclear weapons, perhaps stored in hidden facilities beneath the Negev desert or at the heavily guarded Dimona reactor complex. Experts say the aim of this ambiguity is to create doubt in the minds of enemies like Iran or Hezbollah, so that they avoid attacking without being directly threatened. SIPRI's latest report is worrying
SIPRI's latest report warns that the world is rapidly entering a new, more dangerous and technologically advanced nuclear age. They say that the current trend is similar to the uncontrolled proliferation of the 1960s and 70s, only this time the weapons are much better. They are smaller and harder to detect.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
36 minutes ago
- Business Standard
Best of BS Opinion: Trump's citizenship rules may upend world order
Hello and welcome to BS Views, our newsletter that sums up today's opinion page. Our editorial as well as lead columnist weigh in on President Trump's proposed ban on birthright citizenship and its wider consequences. Our second columnist looks at what plagues India's manufacturing sector and how it might be fixed. The first major shock of the Trump presidency was an executive order banning 'birthright citizenship' in the US. As our first editorial points out, birthright citizenship is the norm in most countries that have inherited British common-law, including the US. President Trump's order faced legal pushback but the US Supreme Court has said that lower courts' decisions cannot amount to a nationwide overturning of the order. In short, the White House might be soon be able to start restricting birthright citizenship. The birthright citizenship law has held good since 1898, and has allowed the US to become a successful multi-ethnic society. That is what enrages some of Trump's followers who oppose the idea that that anyone can be American. If birthright citizenship is indeed rolled back, then it will be an epochal shift in American identity and in its role in the world. The Indian Railways is set to increase fares starting July, a move that is expected to pull in revenue of roughly Rs 700 crore this fiscal year. However, as our second editorial argues, this bump is unlikely to change the dynamics of the railways' revenue - given passenger fares account for less than a third of the total revenue - or help it fund infrastructure upgrades. Instead, losses are covered through cross-subsidies from freight operations and higher fares for premium travel, such as air-conditioned rakes. This, too, may be a losing proposition considering freight traffic has been losing out to road transport, while AC services account for a mere 5 per cent of passengers, forcing it to look to government grants and extrabudgetary support for capital expenditure. The real issue is the lack of clarity on its commercial and social objectives. Without rationalising these contrasting goals, the railways will struggle to become world-class. Our lead columnist Mihir S. Sharma wonders if the West's experiment with open borders is coming to an end, given President's Trump ban on birthright citizenship and European nations' realisation that their openness might have had unintended consequences. Some of his advisors' and party colleagues' are even willing to seek to void citizenship rights of naturalised Americans. What is worrying is that these ideas are finding echoes across the Atlantic. Germany's decision to open borders to asylum-seekers from West Asia have had a ripple effect in the continent's politics. In the UK, Brexiteers oversaw migration grow manifold from non-European nations, including India. As a result of populist backlash against what is seen as unbridled immigration, mainstream politicians across Europe are slowly closing the continent off, following hesitantly in Trump's footsteps about foreigners among their midst. India's manufacturing sector and it's role as a solution to persistent issues of employment and economic growth have long been the subject of debate. While the need of the hour is more local manufacturing, points out our second columnist Debashis Basu, it's share in GDP has actually slipped further. The much-touted Production-Linked Incentive (PLI) scheme hasn't quite taken off. A genuine manufacturing ecosystem takes years of reform which, in India's case, has been sporadic. Had it taken off, he says, it could have addressed both joblessness and poverty. Instead, the government has focused on cash transfers and welfare schemes, killing any incentive to work. India's demographic dividend, Basu warns, is fast turning into a demographic liability.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
CIA chief told lawmakers Iran nuclear programme set back years with strikes on metal conversion site
CIA Director John Ratcliffe told skeptical US lawmakers that American military strikes destroyed Iran's lone metal conversion facility and in the process delivered a monumental setback to Tehran's nuclear programme that would take years to overcome, a US official said on Sunday. The official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss the sensitive intelligence, said Ratcliffe laid out the importance of the strikes on the metal conversion facility during a classified hearing for US lawmakers last week. Details about the private briefings surfaced as President Donald Trump and his administration keep pushing back on questions from Democratic lawmakers and others about how far Iran was set back by the strikes before last Tuesday's ceasefire with Israel took hold. "It was obliterating like nobody's ever seen before," Trump said in an interview on Fox News Channel's "Sunday Morning Futures". "And that meant the end to their nuclear ambitions, at least for a period of time." Live Events Ratcliffe also told lawmakers that the intelligence community assessed the vast majority of Iran's amassed enriched uranium likely remains buried under the rubble at Isfahan and Fordo, two of the three key nuclear facilities targeted by US strikes. But even if the uranium remains intact, the loss of its metal conversion facility effectively has taken away Tehran's ability to build a bomb for years to come, the official said. Rafael Grossi, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, said Sunday on CBS' "Face the Nation" that the three Iranian sites with "capabilities in terms of treatment, conversion and enrichment of uranium have been destroyed to an important degree". But, he added, "some is still standing" and that because capabilities remain, "if they so wish, they will be able to start doing this again". He said assessing the full damage comes down to Iran allowing in inspectors. "Frankly speaking, one cannot claim that everything has disappeared, and there is nothing there," Grossi said. Trump has insisted from just hours after three key targets were struck by US bunker-buster bombs and Tomahawk missiles that Iran's nuclear program was "obliterated." His defence secretary, Pete Hegseth, has said they were "destroyed". A preliminary report issued by the US Defence Intelligence Agency, meanwhile, said the strikes did significant damage to the Fordo, Natanz and Isfahan sites, but did not totally destroy the facilities. As a result of Israeli and US strikes, Grossi said that "it is clear that there has been severe damage, but it's not total damage". Israel claims it has set back Iran's nuclear program by "many years". The metal conversion facility that Ratcliffe said was destroyed was located at the Isfahan nuclear facility. The process of transforming enriched uranium gas into dense metal, or metallisation, is a key step in building the explosive core of a bomb. Secretary of State Marco Rubio in comments at the NATO summit last week also suggested that it was likely the US strikes had destroyed the metal conversion facility. "You can't do a nuclear weapon without a conversion facility," Rubio said. "We can't even find where it is, where it used to be on the map. You can't even find where it used to be because the whole thing is just blackened out. It's gone. It's wiped out." The CIA director also stressed to lawmakers during the congressional briefing that Iran's air defence was shattered during the 12-day assault. As a result, any attempt by Iran to rebuild its nuclear programme could now easily be thwarted by Israeli strikes that Iran currently has little wherewithal to defend against, the official said. Ratcliffe's briefing to lawmakers on the US findings appeared to mesh with some of Israeli officials' battle damage assessments. Israeli officials have determined that Iran's ability to enrich uranium to a weapons-grade level was neutralised for a prolonged period, according to a senior Israeli military official who was not authorized to talk publicly about the matter. Tehran's nuclear programme was also significantly damaged by the strikes killing key scientists, damage to Iran's missile production industry and the battering of Iran's aerial defence system, according to the Israeli's assessment. Grossi, and some Democrats, note that Iran still has the know-how. "You cannot undo the knowledge that you have or the capacities that you have," Grossi said, emphasising the need to come to a diplomatic deal on the country's nuclear programme.
India.com
3 hours ago
- India.com
How America Redrew The Middle East: Every Time It Intervened
New Delhi: The Middle East has seen the map of power redrawn time and again in the long shadow of the United States. Each turn of the Washington's wheel – whether in Iran, Lebanon, Iraq or Gaza – left behind a trail of upheaval. The reasons varied. Oil, ideology and rivalries. The results often followed a similar pattern. Regimes fell, alliances shifted and people suffered. Let's trace the most defining episodes where America's hand shaped the region and how each one ended up altering not just borders, but lives. 1953, Iran In the early 1950s, Iran's elected leader wanted control over the country's oil. British companies resisted. The United States stepped in, fearing a tilt toward the Soviet bloc. Its Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) backed street protests, media manipulation and palace intrigue. The elected government crumbled. Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, the Shah of Iran, returned to power. He ruled with American support for decades. The resentment brewed slowly. In 1979, it exploded into revolution. Tehran has never forgotten that coup. 1958, Lebanon Tension was rising in Lebanon. The Cold War had reached Arab soil. The president, leaning west, faced revolt at home. The United States invoked its new Eisenhower Doctrine and sent troops. Marines landed at Beirut airport. Their mission was to keep things calm, not to fight. It worked for the moment. But it left Lebanon's delicate sectarian balance shaken. The long-term fire had not been put out. Just postponed. 1973, Yom Kippur War On a holy day, Israeli soldiers were caught off guard. Egypt and Syria launched a surprise attack. The United States responded with an airlift of weapons and supplies to Israel. The war turned. But the cost was global. Arab states punished the West with an oil embargo. Long fuel lines. Soaring prices. A warning shot for American dependency. And yet, the US-Israel military bond grew stronger than ever. 1991, The Gulf War Saddam Hussein crossed a line literally. His tanks rolled into Kuwait. The world responded with resolutions and warplanes. America led a coalition of dozens. The campaign was swift. The footage, cinematic. Desert Storm was hailed as a success. But it left Iraq isolated, sanctioned and smoldering. A decade of internal repression followed. Children died of hunger and medicine shortages. Saddam stayed in power, but Iraq's spirit dimmed. 2003, Iraq Again A file. A fear. A flawed case. Washington claimed Saddam had weapons of mass destruction. None were found. Still, the invasion went ahead. Baghdad fell. Saddam vanished and then was captured. The regime collapsed. But what came next was chaos. Armed groups clashed. Militias rose. The Islamic State grew from the wreckage. Democracy was promised. Instead, instability took hold. Millions displaced. Hundreds of thousands dead. The scars remain. Across Decades, a Pattern Intervention did not always mean invasion. Sometimes it came in secret. Sometimes with soldiers. Sometimes through sanctions or airstrikes. But rarely did it end as planned. Regimes were toppled. But peace rarely followed. Trust evaporated. Generations grew up under rubble and barbed wire. Each time, Washington claimed to act for freedom, stability or self-defense. Each time, the ground beneath shifted. Sometimes for a week. Sometimes forever. What lingers is the memory. In the cities where bombs fell. In the markets where sanctions bit. In the homes where sons never returned.
