London will increase its nuclear arsenal

 Since his arrival in power Boris Johnson has had the intention of carrying out a review of the security of the United Kingdom in the face of changes in the international political scene and the new threats deriving from the variation of geostrategic interests that have followed the different structures of power mainly caused by globalization. This intention was influenced by the exit from the European Union, which required a new design of the defense strategy by London. Although the pandemic has slowed this process, the main threats that the British government assesses as the most dangerous remain Russia and China, and both are nuclear powers. This consideration is the basis of the new British will to change its nuclear non-proliferation policy and to move towards a strengthening of the atomic arsenal. While remaining within the Atlantic Alliance, as one of the main members, the exit from Brussels forces London to act as one of the main countries with a defense strategy not coordinated with other supranational organizations, but based on its own independence and singularity . This does not mean that London does not intend to collaborate with its Western allies, but that, in the first instance, in the event of threats, it wants to have decision-making autonomy and the availability of weapons capable of responding even alone to potential attacks. The forecast is to increase its nuclear warheads from 180 to 260, to also increase a preventive deterrence, which recalls the strategy of the cold war, here, however, applied beyond the bipolar logic. London undertakes not to use atomic weapons against those states that signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty in 1968, however this commitment may be revised in the event of threats against it from countries with arsenals containing similar atomic, chemical, or nuclear weapons. biological or in any case of comparable capacity deriving from future technological progress. The United Kingdom identifies China and Russia as the main threats, but London's attitude towards Beijing seems more cautious: even if the People's Republic is seen as a systemic challenge to British values ​​and principles, commercial relations between the two parties must continue. as long as mutual cooperation can be compatible with British interests and this should not preclude common challenges such as that against climate change. Relations with Moscow are worse, with which the battleground has been on the activity of Russian secret services on English soil, repeatedly implicated in violations, murders and attacks, according to London. On this front, the increase in the nuclear arsenal does not seem to be an instrument aimed at averting the Russian desire to operate with its questionable methods, however the value of deterrence, even symbolic, that London wants to take to warn its rivals is undeniable. . If the desire to carry out nuclear proliferation is always bad news, even for the US, Washington cannot fail to appreciate the desire expressed by London for greater collaboration and cooperation, especially after the replacement of President Trump, a personality who it has often caused clashes with the British prime ministers, with Biden, considered a more reliable interlocutor. The decision to increase the nuclear arsenal has produced heavy criticism in the UK, because it disrupts a long line of prime ministers, both Conservative and Labor, who have committed themselves to reducing nuclear weapons. One last consideration is still necessary: ​​that a controversial and often unpredictable personality like Boris Johnson has an even larger nuclear arsenal at his disposal, is not good news for the world order and their balance; finally, the credibility of one of the members of the Iranian nuclear treaty, which increases its atomic power, takes on a very equivocal meaning: if Tehran said it wants the atomic bomb as a deterrent against what it considers threats, what could London stand up to?