NATO vs Russia in the fight of Missile Control

Kevin Chalu


Recently NATO has been increasing their missile defenses in different places even when

Russian officials have given their criticisms of the actions. This is due to the reliable information

that Moscow has nuclear weapons in Kalliningard. The fear that NATO has, is that Russia will

violate the 1987 Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces Treaty, which is an agreement between the

United States and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics to get rid of all fo their short range

missiles.

There are multiple things that can be considered dystopian in these acts. They include the

increases of defense by NATO and Russia violating their treaty in the Unites States. If Russia

violates their treaty with the United States there may be an all out war with two major world

superpowers, which may lead to a possible World War 3. This is due to both of these countries

may have large scale nebular weapons or weapons of mass destruction. This could cause the

battle filed shift from their countries and then be placed in third would countries, thus them to be

a battle filed. If the battle field does not move to a third world country and stays within the

borders of the own countries, it could send very developed places like New York City or Los

Angles and Moscow into a chaos or a state of emergency. If this happens, it will up-route

millions of people lives and may even count the lives of millions of civilians.

Another way that this can turn dystopian is due to the fact that , NATO is increasing their

nuclear missile in many different places. This can then lead to major problem. Officials in

Moscow say that NATO’s missiles violate the I.N.F Treaty because the missiles could be used

offensively. Vladimir Putin says that the only possible target for NATO’s missiles is Moscow.

This is because, Iran has agreed to limit their nuclear weapons program. This is leading to the

building of tension between NATO and Russia, which if pushed too far can lead to an all out war

between major superpowers in the world.This can be considered dystopia because, right now we

do not know any specifics about nebular weapons in any country, we are just taking their word

On the other hand, NATO increasing its nuclear weapons could also be considered

utopian in some circumstances. It could be that NATO is only “flexing it's guns” as a form of

intimidation in order to stave off Russia from causing an all out war. All of this is dystopian

because, in our world, everyone is just trying to live a peaceful life (which most of us have found

in a general sense). If NATO continues to “flex it gun’s”, and Russia does not back down, it can

lead to a war that may destroy our lives, thus turning our would to a dystopia.Basically, there is a

possibility that NATO is bolstering itself in order to preserver the peace that we are living in

today. Another way that this seemingly aggressive act can be seen as utopian is by having a

defensive plan if Russia does in fact decide to intimidate a war with us. This would then be

protecting us form the Russian government which is a federal presidential republic.This is where

the president is the dominate figure within the government and the other parts take a back seat to

it. If Russia does cause a war, it is a toss of a coin to see who will win. So depending on how

Russia reacts to the actions by NATO’s, it can be considered either utopia or dystopian.