TEHRAN - Prof. Filip Kovacevic believes Trump’s new nuclear doctrine and threats against Russia is just campaign rhetoric because any kind of use of nuclear weapons against Russia or against its allies would quickly lead to mutual destruction.

Recently the U.S. President Donald Trump unveiled his new nuclear doctrine which had remained unchanged since 2010. Many experts consider Trump’s new doctrine which enjoys many ambiguities as just campaign rhetoric. 

To shed more light on the issue we reached out to Prof. Filip Kovacevic, University of San Francisco geopolitics.
Following is the text of interview with him: 

Q: The U.S. new nuclear doctrine was published several days ago. This document had remained unchanged since 2010. What are the reasons for new changes? 

A: According to the U.S. military establishment, the most important reason for changes is that the world has been a more dangerous and geopolitically unstable place. What the generals are not saying, though, is that it was their own actions which are responsible for this state of affairs. The hegemonic U.S. foreign policy, the attempt to force a neo-liberal Pax Americana on the diversity and richness of the world’s cultures and traditions, is the cause of the present world problems.  

Of course, you won’t find this stated openly in the doctrine. What you will find there, in a typical manipulative fashion, are the accusations of others for the problems that the U.S. foreign policy has caused itself. In fact, this hypocritical pattern of behavior, where you take the legitimate reactions of others to your own provocations and aggressive moves as the main cause of tensions and conflicts, goes back many decades into the past. 

Q: What is the most significant difference between the new doctrine and the previous one? 

A: In my opinion, the most significant difference is that a lot more money will be poured into the development of nuclear weapons. This will inevitably lead to a nuclear arms race with other states and to the proliferation of nuclear weapons as more and more countries will want to acquire them. But it will bring tremendous profits to the U.S. military-industrial complex. In fact, the Trump administration is completely under the control of this section of the U.S. corporate oligarchy. Trump is essentially breaking down all the institutional checks and balances in the U.S. political system and paving a way for a military dictatorship. I have no doubt that the next U.S. president will be a military officer. This means that we are about to see more wars and more deaths around the world, including in the Middle East. Many old, frozen conflicts will be re-opened across Asia and, apparently, the U.S. is also setting a stage for the first-time use of a low yield nuclear weapon. Let’s not forget, though, that the bombs with depleted uranium have already been extensively used in the U.S./NATO conflicts, starting with the attack on the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia in 1999, causing horrific public health and environmental problems for generations to come. 

Q: In new doctrine, the use of nuclear weapons is allowed in extraordinary situation. There are some ambiguities around this. What are those extraordinary situations exactly? 

A: The fact that the U.S. reserves the right to respond with a nuclear weapon to a non-nuclear attack is nothing new. In fact, the U.S. dropped nuclear bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki even though there was no nuclear threat from the Imperial Japan. However, what is new in this doctrine is that now the U.S. considers the potential use of a nuclear weapon against a large-scale cyber-attack. This is extremely worrying, because, as is well known, it is very difficult to correctly attribute the source of a cyber-attack. This could make a false-flag attack by some rogue terrorist faction or by the inside provocateurs misinterpreted as an attack by another nuclear power and lead to the nuclear annihilation of all life on Earth.

Q: As the U.S. considers the first strike on Russia acceptable, it means the spirit of the cold war is governing this new doctrine. Why has the U.S. taken this approach? 

A: Provoked by the rapid and aggressive expansion of the U.S. political, economic, and cultural influence in Central and Eastern Europe under the umbrella of NATO, Russia has embarked on the campaign of re-arming and strengthening its defense and security apparatus in recent years. It appears that the U.S. thought that Russia would cave in under its demands and accept to be a third-rate power in Eurasia. However, this was a serious misunderstanding of the Russian history and tradition. Now that Russia pushes back, the U.S. establishment does not know what else to do but to make threats. However, these are empty threats because any kind of use of nuclear weapons against Russia or against its allies within the Collective Security Treaty Organization would quickly lead to mutual destruction. The spirit of the old Cold War has returned, and it will be with us for a long time to come. Accordingly, we will see the flare-up of proxy conflicts and covert actions across the world.

Q: How do you assess the U.S. new doctrine toward Iran? What are the new points? 

A: Iran is one of only four states separately mentioned in the doctrine. The others are Russia, China, and North Korea. Iran is given the least coverage because it is not seen as an immediate nuclear danger to the U.S. The main emphasis is on what will happen after the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) ends in 2031. It is stated that after this period, Iran will be able to produce a nuclear weapon within a year. Interestingly, there is no mention of the U.S. getting out of the JCPOA before that time, which is in contradiction to what the U.S. president Donald Trump has been saying recently. It appears that Trump’s statements are just campaign rhetoric intended to please some important and wealthy interest groups, but that, in reality, it will be difficult for the U.S. to get out of the JCPOA, considering that all other signatories are still backing it. However, this is not to say that the U.S. will not use all other means at its disposal, including its vast media and intelligence resources, to sow discord within the Iranian political elite and create an economic and political crisis in the country.