Intrepid Alliances in a World on the Brink: The Escalating Nuclear Threat

The nuclear threat facing the world today has reached a precarious juncture, exacerbated by shifting geopolitical dynamics and the intrepid recalibration of alliances. Current U.S. President Donald Trump’s foreign policy, marked by a transactional approach and a perceived retreat from NATO commitments, has left traditional allies in Europe and Asia grappling with uncertainty. This has not only strained transatlantic ties but also fueled a global arms race, with nuclear proliferation emerging as a grim possibility.

In Europe, the spectre of a U.S. withdrawal from NATO has prompted nations like England and France, already established nuclear powers, to reassess their strategic postures. France, under President Macron, has even floated the idea of extending its nuclear umbrella to other European nations, signalling a shift toward self-reliance in defence. Germany, traditionally a non-nuclear state, has also entered discussions about nuclear sharing, reflecting the continent’s growing unease. Such moves, while aimed at deterrence, risk escalating tensions and undermining the fragile architecture of non-proliferation.

Across Asia, the situation is equally fraught. Japan and South Korea, long reliant on the U.S. nuclear umbrella, are now contemplating their own nuclear capabilities. This shift is driven by fears of abandonment and the aggressive posturing of North Korea, whose nuclear ambitions remain unchecked. The possibility of these nations joining the nuclear club could trigger a domino effect, destabilising the region and eroding decades of non-proliferation efforts.

Meanwhile, the usual suspects—North Korea, Iran, and Russia—continue to pose significant threats. North Korea’s relentless missile tests and Iran’s nuclear brinkmanship have kept the Middle East and East Asia on edge. Russia’s actions in Ukraine, including veiled nuclear threats, have further lowered the threshold for nuclear use, setting a dangerous precedent. The alliance between these states, along with China, adds another layer of complexity, challenging global stability.

The world was already a hostage to the uncertainty and impasse of the Cold War when near-miss incidents like the Cuban Missile Crisis brought humanity perilously close to annihilation. Is such a grave threat looming again today?

The outcome of this imbroglio is deeply uncertain. On one hand, the proliferation of nuclear weapons could lead to a precarious balance of power, where mutual deterrence prevents outright conflict. On the other hand, it risks catastrophic miscalculations and an arms race that could spiral out of control. The erosion of trust among allies and the weakening of international institutions like NATO and the United Nations only exacerbate these risks.

In this volatile landscape, the world must navigate with caution. Strengthening diplomatic channels, reaffirming commitments to non-proliferation, and fostering international cooperation are imperative. The untiring pursuit of peace and stability, despite the odds, remains humanity’s best hope against the looming nuclear threat.

 

Absolute Truths: Unshackling the Colonial Mindset

For centuries, the Western narrative has been held as the gold standard of truth, objectivity, and rationality, while indigenous perspectives have been dismissed as backwards or unreliable. This ingrained bias is a lingering legacy of colonial rule, where the British systematically cultivated the idea that Western thought was superior, scientific, and unbiased, while local knowledge was suspect. Even our rediscovery of India’s ancient wisdom—whether Ayurveda, philosophy, or mathematics—gained legitimacy only after Western scholars like Max Müller "validated" it. Our own heritage needed a foreign stamp of approval to be deemed worthy. This psychological conditioning persists today, shaping not just media consumption but also our worldview, scientific temper, and even military assessments.

The recent Western media response to India’s Operation Sindoor against Pakistan is a glaring example—despite evidence, major media outlets in the West have rushed to discredit India’s claims, framing them as exaggerated or false. The pattern is unmistakable: any assertion of Indian capability is met with scepticism unless validated by Western sources. This is not accidental. The global military-industrial complex thrives on the myth of Western invincibility. If India’s defence successes—be it precision strikes or drone neutralisation—are acknowledged, it challenges the carefully constructed narrative of Western supremacy in warfare technology. Notably, many of these dismissive reports are penned by journalists with Indian names, lending them an air of credibility. This is a calculated move—using native voices to undermine native achievements, reinforcing the colonial hierarchy of truth.

Even in moments of national crisis, we instinctively turn to Western media for confirmation. When Indira Gandhi was assassinated, Rajiv Gandhi, then a young politician, first sought the BBC for updates—a telling reflection of ingrained trust in foreign narratives. Decades later, during conflicts like Operation Sindoor or even general elections, many still tune into the BBC or CNN, as if the truth is only credible when filtered through a Western lens. This reflexive dependence reveals how deeply colonial-era conditioning still governs our minds.

Breaking free from this mental subjugation requires conscious effort. First, Indians must recognise this systemic bias and question why Western validation is deemed essential. Second, media literacy is crucial—understanding that Western outlets, like any other, have geopolitical and economic interests. Third, India must invest in its own narrative-building institutions, fostering independent, evidence-based journalism that does not seek external approval. Finally, pride in indigenous knowledge systems—whether in defence, science, or culture—must be revived with the confidence to assess them critically.

The colonial hangover will persist until Indians stop measuring their worth through a Western lens. True intellectual decolonisation begins when we trust our own evidence, celebrate our successes without apology, and engage with the world as equals, not as seekers of validation.

 

Stranded in the Stars: The Saga of Endurance in Space Exploration

Sunita Williams, along with fellow astronaut Barry Wilmore, had remained stranded on the International Space Station (ISS) for nearly nine months, a situation that underscores the inherent uncertainties and risks of space exploration. Their extended stay, initially planned for a much shorter duration, was caused by technical issues with their return spacecraft, Boeing's Starliner. The capsule, which was supposed to bring them back to Earth, faced propulsion system malfunctions and helium leaks, raising concerns about its safety for re-entry. This delay highlights the precarious nature of space travel, where even the most meticulously planned missions can encounter unforeseen challenges.

The psychology of being stranded in space is a profound aspect of this ordeal. Williams and Wilmore had had to cope with the isolation, confinement, and the psychological toll of being far from Earth, knowing their return was uncertain. Living in microgravity, with limited personal space and the constant hum of machinery, can exacerbate feelings of detachment. Yet, both astronauts demonstrated remarkable resilience, continuing their scientific work and maintaining their morale. Their endurance is a testament to the rigorous training and mental fortitude required for space travel, as well as the human capacity to adapt to extreme environments.

Given the frequency of space missions, one might wonder why another rocket wasn’t sent to retrieve them sooner. However, space logistics is far more complex than it appears. Coordinating a rescue mission involves significant time, resources, and risk assessment. Sending another spacecraft would have required meticulous planning, ensuring compatibility with the ISS, and addressing potential safety concerns. Moreover, Williams and Wilmore were never in immediate danger; the ISS is well-equipped to support extended stays, and NASA prioritised their safety over a hasty return.

Elon Musk’s SpaceX has now emerged as a key player in their rescue, further cementing his influence in the space industry. SpaceX’s Crew Dragon capsule, a reliable and proven vehicle, brought the astronauts home. Musk’s growing presence in space exploration reflects a shift in the industry, where private companies are increasingly taking the lead in what was once the exclusive domain of government agencies.

This incident offers a new perspective on the risks and realities of space travel. While advancements in technology have made space more accessible, it remains a hostile and unpredictable frontier. Williams and Wilmore’s ordeal reminds us of the courage and determination required to explore the cosmos. Their endurance, both physical and psychological, is a tribute to the human spirit’s ability to persevere in the face of adversity. As they have safely returned to Earth, their story serves as a powerful reminder of the challenges and triumphs of venturing into the last frontier.