A u. S. Warship in the persian gulf accompanied by a bomber plan since washingtons abandonment of the nuclear deal with iran in may 2018 the situation in one of the most volatile regions in the world has been escalating and iran consequently resumed enrichment of uranium in the process itself violating the multinational treaty. Some fear this could put the country on the threshold to becoming a nuclear arms state. Meanwhile the i. N. F. Treaty between the us and russia banning land based intermediate range Nuclear Missiles has effectively collapsed the Nuclear Powers in adversaries of old are now developing new weapons and new strategies. Are we seeing a return to the times of the cold war is the world at risk of a new global arms race 30 years since the last one ended or has it already begun. A Nuclear Bunker under the center of nuremberg built decades ago during the cold war there used to be around 2000 bunkers like this across germany their purpose to provide shelter for at least a section of the population in the event of a nuclear holocaust. Thats on the list of months by 2000 people who were supposed to survive a surface to to nation down here on chairs and bunk beds. 8 hours a day lying down 16 hours sitting down. A brief reprieve from the inevitable 10 meters below ground. Nothing to do but after 14 days the diesel generators would no longer be able to pump in fresh air or fresh water and then it would be worth surviving another 14 days for them to go so why bother. But that was the situation. So. Our guide around this eerie relic of the cold war is philip holtz hes an ambassador for the International Campaign to abolish Nuclear Weapons winner of the 2017 Nobel Peace Prize the bunker symbolizes an era that should be by now history but it seems a new Nuclear Arms Race is on the horizon and this as the world appeared to be looking safer with a range of treaties on disarmament and arms controls. But Nuclear Weapons have never disappeared completely. Also this is a good illustration i think of it still has 1600 warheads ready for deployment in the us 1715 according to these figures. I think of and so theoretically we would see a continuing downward trend in the years to come in terms of absolute numbers. But that could be deceptive in quantitative terms the trend is declining but the warheads are an increasingly higher state of the plant so todays situation is not a relaxed one in fact we have a similar situation to the cold war russia as violated the agreement theyve been violated here for many years and i dont know why president obama didnt negotiate or pull out. That were not going to let them violate the Nuclear Agreement they go out of your weapons and were not allowed to wear that one should have stayed in the agreement and we bonded the agreement but russia is not one fortunately under the agreement so were going to terminate the agreement were going to pull out. In august 2019 the u. S. Withdrew from the i. N. F. Treaty banning intermediate range Nuclear Missiles in 2018 President Trump announced his country would be pulling out of the nuclear deal with iran despite opposition from its european allies. I trump and his advisors and the military in the white house prefer to return to hardline policy to rearmament and deterrence. Every few years the us reexamined said strategy on the deployment of Nuclear Weapons the Nuclear Posture review defines potential adversaries and scenarios 2800. 00 sought trump embark on a radical change of direction. Does practice to be a bit like its the bible of american proto turns of tickets trump wants new weapons the new deployment scenarios and thats exactly what the arms my. Fractures want of on. The u. S. Capitol washington d. C. Weve come here to find the people whose ideas later become policy. Among the many think tanks based in washington are those that provide the theory behind nuclear rearmament and consider a nuclear war to have become feasible again they started working years ago on a new Nuclear Strategy. One of their most prominent figures is political scientist matthew critic in addition to being a professor at the Renowned Georgetown University hes a leading strategist at the Atlantic Council one of the most influential think tanks in the western hemisphere. Im proud to say that at the Atlantic Council where i have an affiliation ive been writing about this issue for several years i think starting in 2014 or 2015 started writing about the threat of russian deescalation strikes and i started writing and doing congressional testimony on the need for the United States to develop low yield Nuclear Options to respond to that Matthew Koenig is also the author of an influential book called the logic of American Nuclear strategy it provides scientific arguments for the concept of Nuclear Deterrence arguments that enjoyed powerful backing at the Atlantic Council. I got some. John rogers chairman of the board of directors used to work in the state department and in the white house and is today executive Vice President at the Goldman Sachs investment bank. President and c. E. O. Of the Atlantic Council as frederick camp formerly a high profile journalist with the wall street journal. Brant scowcroft served as National Security adviser to u. S. President s gerald ford and george bush sr today hes the Councils Chairman emeritus and is also a member of the Advisory Board serving the secretaries of state defense and energy. I would like to thank that my work had some role in informing u. S. Officials about the possible responses and may have had some role and flown in saying the final Nuclear Posture review. Washington has and dozens of think tanks vying for money and influence many of them operate on a global scale. And their staff juggle positions in government ministries and political circles with their jobs in the think tanks among them is elbridge called. Mr colby with with you. In january 2019 right colby was summoned to appear before the u. S. Senate Armed Services committee he had been in charge of the National Defense strategy at the pentagon under then secretary of defense john madis also making him one of the chief architects of the new Nuclear Strategy strategy entails a fundamental shift in the orientation of our Nations Armed forces toward preparing for war against china or russia precisely in order to deter this ship is urgently needed as our military advantages against both have substantially eroded in recent decades. Today called the works for the center for a new American Security one of the many conservative think tanks in washington. I think if you look at the Nuclear Posture review theres some theres some theres some strong rhetoric and but actually its fundamentals its a very an evolutionary document its very consistent with the past history of u. S. And nato policy its basically saying were going to you know rebuild our Nuclear Forces which are getting old and then were going to do a couple of things to make it clear to the russians that they dont have a good strategy to selectively escalate. Hardline rhetoric consolidating washingtons existing Nuclear Strategy and sending a signal to moscow what might initially sound unspectacular in effect means breaking with the disarmament policy of previous decades. Our next stop is the center for strategic and International Studies the director of the centers Missile Defense program ian williams shares the view that the new strategy chosen by the u. S. Constitutes a fundamental change of course. The number one goal of the 28 team review is is Nuclear Deterrence it doesnt even have arms control and Nuclear Reductions on the list of priorities it it has a full throated endorsement of the value of Nuclear Weapons in defending us interests and defending the core interests of the United States which is something that is quite a shift from from the tone of the 2010 policy review. But what exactly are the interests of the u. S. Washingtons deterrence concept is based on the Nuclear Triad a 3 sided military force structure consisting of land launched intercontinental Nuclear MissilesNuclear Armed submarines at sea and strategic aircraft with Nuclear Bombs and missiles. The objective to deter an adversary from launching an attack and deploying Nuclear Weapons due to the threat of being destroyed with an overwhelming nuclear counterstrike the american strategists however believe that the threat situation has now changed primarily as a result of moscows change in stance. Because what the russian strategy attempted to do was to force the United States and nato into this suicide or surrender problem that if we get into a war in Eastern Europe that russia could use one or 2 or 3 small Nuclear Weapons early in the conflict. And then that would place a dilemma on the west. At the 2018 annual meeting of the valdai forum in Sochi Russian president Vladimir Putin openly threaten to use Nuclear Weapons in response to an attack on his country i believe you saw on that show was in which there was a museum used. To make sure. You know and we. Can look at which egypt but youre right. Any of those distortions. It was when you look at most of the i mean theres a casings. And so what the Nuclear Posture review was to try to provide options between suicide and surrender to say that if russia conducts a limited Nuclear Strike that the United States and nato can respond with a limited Nuclear Strike of our own. Hans kristensen is an expert on Nuclear Weapons at the federation of american scientists he too sees a fundamental change in american strategy. And. Theres the other element which is that it seemed to and the idea that its a priority of the United States to work to reduce the Nuclear Arsenals and reduce the role of Nuclear Weapons. That was a primary objective of the one ministration this one seems to you know go in the other direction and say you know not only do we need more of them we also are now officially in bracing a great power competition. Washington sees itself at the heart of the confrontation for power and influence in a globalized world the renewed competition between the major powers also promises new Business Opportunities new strategies require the development and manufacture of new weapons. And the arms manufacturers are already in a state of readiness they begin investing before decisions of the political level have even been made and some of the funding for think tanks comes from corporations involved in the arms trade. They include the likes of airbus and boeing as well as European Companies including Italys Leonardo and france based saffron. They donate hundreds of thousands of dollars every year to think tanks like the Atlantic Council and the center for a new American Security. If you look at these companies donations its clear what interests the views are represented in these think tanks. The arms manufacturers want to sell their Nuclear Weapons and present their ideas to politicians. You could also say that you basically think tanks serve as advertising agencies for the government and the Arms Companies and think things you need there are going to in. Amsterdam spring 2019. The city is hosting the annual general meeting of the airbus one of the biggest arms manufacturers in europe. And members of the pax activist group have come to talk to shareholders. To take. Pressure. They are outraged at the gate valve much of the airbus and other companies and Nuclear Weapons programs such as that of the french state well the most thing is that they. Work on all kinds of weapons and thereby you make a lot of profit off it and that changed the inquiry. In their treaty. While they are working towards a new Nuclear Weapons in europe so its for our safety well. Important to stand up against them to become police that make profit over break weapons that could murder the entire world if they want. My kidneys conducts analysis for pax another lands based organization that scrutinises Companies Involved in the Global Nuclear arms business. Is a Global Company but their headquarters in the netherlands and the netherlands itself of course is not allowed to have or produce Nuclear Weapons so i think its its a bit strange that they allow a company thats headquartered in that country to have to be involved. But the activists are unable to confront airbus shareholders at the a. G. M. Most of them arrived via the underground car park does your yes im an errand vanderveen are committed to challenging the arms related operations of the. Of the worlds Biggest Aerospace and Defense Companies they want the shareholders and investors to see the growing sensitivity of the issue and to put the spotlight on the corporations activities well the most the most important thing for me is to to let people see who makes the profit go into big shareholders with big money to make big profits of these weapons i think the main one in europe is of course our boss but you also have for example layer nardo an italian company. And actually layer nardo and airbus together with the u. K. Company be an east instance theyre in a joint venture m. P. T. A joint venture that together produces missiles for their French Nuclear arsenal so france has an estimated arsenal of 300 Nuclear Warheads the airbus group is co owned by the french spanish and German Governments and is as such indirectly involved in frances Nuclear Weapons program. Yet some must be about the same to see launched m 511 missile developed in the joint venture of airbus and suffering together with the area group because this is another french project the a s m p a this time involving a number of european countries. Airbus defense and space is based in munich be a e systems in britain the mia nardo in italy. From tyrion so we have a tremendous amount of money to play with the raw military 700000000000. 00 plus 716000000000. 00 we are going to develop the weapons. The us has new Nuclear Strategy promises to generate trillions of dollars for Defense Companies in the decades to come they stand to profit from both the maintenance and modernization of existing carrier systems and the development of new Nuclear Weapons and cruise missiles. And while the Nuclear Arsenals are overhauled and restart it seems to always be the same companies turning a tidy profit out of the business as i can embassador feel the pulse shows that. Weve selected for examples of Nuclear Weapons that are currently in use are currently being graded. As you can see its always the same names theres boeing 3 times systems 2 and the b. 6112. 00 nuclear bomb is the one that will replace the american bombs in germany and throughout europe so its an issue that is not only in america but its also a european one and especially germany will. Be 6112. 00 is an