🔥 Back in the year 2017, the global security agenda was shaken by the debates held at the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) that led to the adoption of the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW) that should have set a framework towards the world, free of nuclear weapons. It has been the consecutive inherently political move forward, following the humanitarian impacts of nuclear weapons initiative.
🔎 Yet, the discourse around the novel legal framework among scholars has been intense, gripped over an argument that the TPNW may spark nuclear-armed states to intensify the political measuring of nuclear weapons as a deterrence factor essential for national security. Even though some scholars tend to think positively about the Treaty, it seems reasonable to record that it has been out of the loop since 2017.
⚡️ The ongoing modernization of nuclear forces in Russia, China, the United States, and the UK, along with the recent Russian withdrawal (2023) of its ratification of the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT) have demonstrated the untimeliness of the TPNW. The heating tensions worldwide have revoked the decisiveness of nuclear weapons. Exempt from nuclear-armed states, those states that have the potential of acquiring nukes (listed in the Annex II of the CTBT) seem to approach the TPNW skeptically as well.
👤 More about the TPNW and why the Treaty has become an unwanted legal instrument can be found in the article by Maksim Sorokin, PIR Center Information & Publications Program Coordinator and Editor of the "Yaderny Control" E-Bulletin.
🔥 Back in the year 2017, the global security agenda was shaken by the debates held at the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) that led to the adoption of the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW) that should have set a framework towards the world, free of nuclear weapons. It has been the consecutive inherently political move forward, following the humanitarian impacts of nuclear weapons initiative.
🔎 Yet, the discourse around the novel legal framework among scholars has been intense, gripped over an argument that the TPNW may spark nuclear-armed states to intensify the political measuring of nuclear weapons as a deterrence factor essential for national security. Even though some scholars tend to think positively about the Treaty, it seems reasonable to record that it has been out of the loop since 2017.
⚡️ The ongoing modernization of nuclear forces in Russia, China, the United States, and the UK, along with the recent Russian withdrawal (2023) of its ratification of the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT) have demonstrated the untimeliness of the TPNW. The heating tensions worldwide have revoked the decisiveness of nuclear weapons. Exempt from nuclear-armed states, those states that have the potential of acquiring nukes (listed in the Annex II of the CTBT) seem to approach the TPNW skeptically as well.
👤 More about the TPNW and why the Treaty has become an unwanted legal instrument can be found in the article by Maksim Sorokin, PIR Center Information & Publications Program Coordinator and Editor of the "Yaderny Control" E-Bulletin.
The Russian invasion of Ukraine has been a driving force in markets for the past few weeks. "There is a significant risk of insider threat or hacking of Telegram systems that could expose all of these chats to the Russian government," said Eva Galperin with the Electronic Frontier Foundation, which has called for Telegram to improve its privacy practices. Telegram has become more interventionist over time, and has steadily increased its efforts to shut down these accounts. But this has also meant that the company has also engaged with lawmakers more generally, although it maintains that it doesn’t do so willingly. For instance, in September 2021, Telegram reportedly blocked a chat bot in support of (Putin critic) Alexei Navalny during Russia’s most recent parliamentary elections. Pavel Durov was quoted at the time saying that the company was obliged to follow a “legitimate” law of the land. He added that as Apple and Google both follow the law, to violate it would give both platforms a reason to boot the messenger from its stores. Additionally, investors are often instructed to deposit monies into personal bank accounts of individuals who claim to represent a legitimate entity, and/or into an unrelated corporate account. To lend credence and to lure unsuspecting victims, perpetrators usually claim that their entity and/or the investment schemes are approved by financial authorities. "Someone posing as a Ukrainian citizen just joins the chat and starts spreading misinformation, or gathers data, like the location of shelters," Tsekhanovska said, noting how false messages have urged Ukrainians to turn off their phones at a specific time of night, citing cybersafety.
from de
