"One effect could be that the huge atomic arsenal created in the cold war could be reduced significantly"
About this Quote
Schroder’s line is doing classic statesman work: making the radical sound administrative. “One effect could be” is a soft glove over a hard proposal, a way to float a consequential shift without triggering the reflexive panic that nuclear talk reliably produces. He’s not promising disarmament; he’s rehearsing plausibility. The conditional mood is the message.
The phrase “huge atomic arsenal” carries a moral charge without moralizing. “Huge” doesn’t argue policy details; it implies excess, waste, and an anachronism left over from a rivalry that’s supposed to be over. By naming “the cold war” as the arsenal’s origin story, Schroder frames nukes as historical baggage rather than timeless necessity. That framing matters: if the weapons are artifacts of a concluded era, then reducing them becomes common sense, not naïveté.
Contextually, this sits in the post-1989 European political project: converting geopolitical thaw into institutionalized peace dividends, with arms control as proof that history really did turn a corner. It also reflects Germany’s particular posture. As a country without its own nuclear weapons but embedded in NATO’s nuclear umbrella, Germany’s leaders can champion reductions as maturity and leadership while avoiding the accusation of unilateral vulnerability. The subtext is reassurance aimed in multiple directions: at voters who want money spent on social renewal instead of deterrence; at allies who fear decoupling; and at Russia and the US, invited to treat de-escalation as a rational, mutual upgrade rather than a concession.
The phrase “huge atomic arsenal” carries a moral charge without moralizing. “Huge” doesn’t argue policy details; it implies excess, waste, and an anachronism left over from a rivalry that’s supposed to be over. By naming “the cold war” as the arsenal’s origin story, Schroder frames nukes as historical baggage rather than timeless necessity. That framing matters: if the weapons are artifacts of a concluded era, then reducing them becomes common sense, not naïveté.
Contextually, this sits in the post-1989 European political project: converting geopolitical thaw into institutionalized peace dividends, with arms control as proof that history really did turn a corner. It also reflects Germany’s particular posture. As a country without its own nuclear weapons but embedded in NATO’s nuclear umbrella, Germany’s leaders can champion reductions as maturity and leadership while avoiding the accusation of unilateral vulnerability. The subtext is reassurance aimed in multiple directions: at voters who want money spent on social renewal instead of deterrence; at allies who fear decoupling; and at Russia and the US, invited to treat de-escalation as a rational, mutual upgrade rather than a concession.
Quote Details
| Topic | Peace |
|---|
More Quotes by Gerhard
Add to List
