In partnership with

The Daily Newsletter for Intellectually Curious Readers

Join over 4 million Americans who start their day with 1440 – your daily digest for unbiased, fact-centric news. From politics to sports, we cover it all by analyzing over 100 sources. Our concise, 5-minute read lands in your inbox each morning at no cost. Experience news without the noise; let 1440 help you make up your own mind. Sign up now and invite your friends and family to be part of the informed.

Join for free today!

Bottom Line Up Front

• Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD) once kept great powers in check, but its fragile logic is now cracking under new regional tensions

• India and Pakistan remain the world's most volatile nuclear flashpoint

• European and Asian powers are losing faith in U.S. nuclear guarantees

• Tactical nukes are a dangerous myth—once the threshold is crossed, escalation becomes uncontrollable, and everyone loses

• Nuclear warfare is most effective in our imaginations, let's keep it there

Hey everyone—
Welcome to The Under Report, your weekly intelligence brief about the stories that move the world without making headlines. Share The Under Report and as usual, please check out our sponsors to keep the Under Report rolling.

Also we have an audio option now! Click the button if you want to listen to this week's deep dive.

— Eric

P.S. In case you need a refresher on the nuclear bomb.

1. Bert the Turtle

Everyone in my middle school class would have been vaporized.

That didn't stop us from practicing duck and cover drills. These drills started in 1950 as a part of the US civil defense system meant to preserve American lives in case of nuclear war. It even came along with an animated hero called Bert the Turtle, who taught kids what to do when the bombs dropped. But the planners of the Civil Defense eventually came around to the same conclusion we have today: when nuclear weapons are launched, the world ends.

The fullest of stops.

So why, after 80 years of non-proliferation, are the world's most powerful nations looking to gain nuclear arms? How come great powers are refurbishing stockpiles? Why is everyone getting nukes?

For decades, the doctrine of Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD) held that nuclear-armed rivals would never dare strike first. Throughout the Cold War arms race, the United States and Soviet Union jockeyed for position, war-gamed alternatives and eventually came down to a simple strategy. Once a nuclear launch is detected, we launch everything in return. That way, no one launches anything, ever. 

But it worked. Mutually Assured Destruction is like both sides of a hostage situation putting a gun to their own head and threatening to shoot. Either we sort out our business some other way, or everyone gets it. In the parlance of game theory, ‘there is no premium on initiating nuclear war.’ There's a mad beauty in the creation of a weapon so destructive that it could never be used. But now, the equilibrium is teetering like Bert the Turtle turned on his back. 

2. India, Pakistan, and the Bomb

With a recent flare up of hot war across the Indus River, India and Pakistan might be the best candidates for pushing the red button. The immediate neighbors have a long history of war and ceasefire violations in disputed Kashmir. Both have bombs and delivery capabilities (around 160 warheads each if you're into counting that kind of thing). Not only do tensions run high in this region, but there is no buffer zone between the two powers which means little warning for a rapid escalation.

The recent conflict shows how quickly things can go south. In April 2025, a gunman attacked Indian tourists in Kashmir, killing 25 people. India blamed Pakistan-based militants for harboring the terrorists. Tit-for-tat strikes across the shared border ensued and then nukes entered the chat.

India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi warned that India would hit terrorist targets on its own terms, 'precisely and decisively,' and would not be deterred by Islamabad’s 'nuclear blackmail.' In other words, Pakistan’s army publicly invoked its nuclear command, and world observers noted that Pakistan’s top generals were on alert. 

Things have deescalated somewhat, but India and Pakistan are not the only nations flirting with nukes

3. Europe Eyes Proliferation

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has shattered long-standing taboos in Europe. NATO members in Eastern Europe are openly asking: if the US might not fully defend us, should we take our own nuclear destiny in hand? The United States has pivoted away from Europe and urged the EU to raise its own armies. While armies take decades to train and field, nuclear weapons provide immediate security guarantees. 

Poland’s leaders have been most explicit. Polish President Andrzej Duda says a nuclear-armed Russia makes Poland feel ‘in a clear and present danger.’ He has publicly urged the US to redeploy U.S. nuclear weapons to Poland, arguing it would deepen America’s commitment to Polish security. Meanwhile Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk told parliament that Poland is in talks with France about coming under France’s atomic umbrella. Tusk even said Poland must 'reach for the most advanced capabilities,' including nuclear, noting that Ukraine gave up nukes and now faces invasion. 

Given that Poland has historically served as a World War superhighway, he's not wrong.

Germany, too, is reconsidering old assumptions. The German Chancellor Friedrich Merz recently said Germany can’t rely on the U.S. so it must look to the United Kingdom and France for protection. NATO’s nuclear-sharing already spans Germany, Italy, Belgium, Netherlands and Turkey with U.S. bombs. But now even non-hosts like Italy and Nordic countries are talking casually about nukes.

But, unfortunately, it doesn't end there.

4. Asia’s New Nuclear Curveballs

In East Asia, Japan and South Korea have long shunned nuclear weapons, relying instead on the U.S. 'nuclear umbrella.' But that consensus is fraying under Pyongyang’s growing arsenal and doubts about America’s reliability. Surveys and officials show rising support for going nuclear:

In South Korea polls find roughly 70–80% of South Koreans favor building their own bomb. The mayor of Seoul, Oh Se-hoon, recently argued publicly that South Korea 'cannot be bound by the goal of denuclearisation' and should have the nuclear option ready. He noted North Korea already has dozens of miniaturized warheads and warned the days of convincing the public to refrain from nukes are over. Other senior officials (and presidential candidates) have echoed this sentiment or even proposed redeploying U.S. tactical nukes on the peninsula.

Japan’s pacifist policy is still firm, but discussion of nuclear options has edged into public discourse. A 2022 survey by Sankei News found nearly 85% of Japanese supported at least discussing nuclear-sharing with the U.S. (though not necessarily developing a bomb). While some Japanese politicians worry about dependence on the US Former Prime Minister Shinzo Abe's faction occasionally discusses indigenous nuclear weapons. (It should be mentioned here that Japan's doctrine bans nukes, but doctrine changes, and the public is sending strong signals for new options).

The post cold war order is fraying. Bert the Turtle is curling up in his shell. 

Let's not forget about the Middle East.

📬 Learned something new? →  Subscribe and share to keep The Under Report free.

5. The Middle East Chain Reaction

The fate of the Iran nuclear deal (JCPOA) is another critical piece. Since 2019 Iran has dramatically expanded its nuclear program, rolling back all limits under the 2015 pact. Iran now has enough enriched uranium for many bombs, and IAEA inspectors have only partial access. Negotiations to revive the deal have stalled. Hardline Iranian leaders insist on retaining enrichment ‘as non-negotiable’ while the U.S. demands curbs.

If diplomacy fails and Iran crosses the threshold the world will know immediately. Saudi Arabia and other Sunni Gulf states have warned they will race to acquire nuclear weapons. Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman famously said in 2018: ‘If Iran developed a nuclear bomb, we would follow suit as soon as possible.’ Moreover, a nuclear-armed Israel is likely to do anything in its power to prevent their rival from getting their hands on the bomb. 

The post-1979 security arrangement in the Gulf presumed Iran would not have nukes; if that changes, long-dormant nuclear ambitions in the Middle East will awaken. To put it simply, if regional proliferation is able to begin, it will trigger an arms race in a region of historic instability.

Eric’s Tinfoil Hat 🎩 

Here's a question that I got about my piece Sahara Scramble: Russia and China in Africa.

Q: Is the concern that (Russia and China) have the potential to weaken us-centric counter-terrorism and aid efforts? Same goes for increasing instability. In theory, if a country like China is coming in to boost Burkina's infrastructure and economy, couldn't it be argued that that would actually create more stability in the area? 

A: Stability is always relative. Stability according to who? This is where we get a divergence in point of view. The US believes in ridding Mali, Niger, and Burkina Faso of terrorist groups (specifically the Islamic State) while building up institutions and democracy in the area. This is a slow unwieldy approach which entrenches a western trained army with (hopefully) a democratically elected government. And (theoretically) the democratic mandate of the people will surface policy representative of the communal needs.

My cynical point of view: the west hasn't been great at helping develop wildly successful states, but it doesn't stop us from trying. It has helped in some notable instances. I believe personally that all nations deserve to be led by popular mandate rather than rule of the strongest.

China and Russia have a different take on stability. They work to shore up power through individuals, economics, and might. Since democracy isn't a 'must have’ for them, they can work with whoever works the best. Does this lead to an optimally functioning society? Not certain, the West was kicked out and now the East has their shot.

About Eric

Eric Czuleger is a journalist and travel writer who has lived and worked in over 47 countries. He holds a masters degree from the University of Oxford and he is completing a National Security degree from the RAND school of public policy. He's the author of You Are Not Here: Travels Through Countries That Don’t Exist, and host of the “This Is Not a PsyOp” TikTok channel. 

📚 Liked today’s brief? Dive deeper—check out my book You Are Not Here: Travels Through Countries That Don't Exist and explore the world’s unrecognized countries.

💬 Hit reply with your spiciest take—top comment gets featured next week.