If you are afraid of nuclear war, the thing to fear is a nuclear state's capacity to retaliate being questioned. These supercomputers are the alternative to live tests. Taking them away doesn't poof nuclear weapons, it means you are left with a half-assed deterrent or must resume live tests.
> the abandonment of the course of nuclear disarmament treaty
North Korea, the American interventions in the Middle East and Ukraine set the precedent that nuclear sovereignty is in a separate category from the treaty-enforced kind. Non-proliferation won't be made or broken on the back of aging, degrading weapons.
> repeated talk of a coming war against certain Asian powers
One invites war by refusing to prepare for it.
That's why nuclear capabilities and capacities are best reduced by universal compact. It is certainly not helping when they are being _enhanced.
Also, I'm worried about the US initiating more than I do about it retaliating.
> North Korea, the American interventions in the Middle East and Ukraine set the precedent that nuclear sovereignty is in a separate category from the treaty-enforced kind.
I don't understand this sentence because I'm not familiar with the combined term "nuclear sovereignty".
Regardless - it is certainly the case that non-proliferation won't be made on the back of aging and degrading weapons; there must a continued commitment to NP in the sense of not developing new weapons.
> One invites war by refusing to prepare for it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question
Anyway, the US initiates most of its wars, so the "invitation" is irrelevant.