Alphabet letters set on a bright yellow wall

A-Z of IR: M is for 'Money' and N is for 'Nuclear Weapons'

This article was published on

Inspired by the British Academy’s focus on Engaging the Public with Humanities and the Social Sciences (2023), in October 2024, Adrian Gallagher (Leeds) launched an A-Z in International Politics online and free of charge. This 26 part series over 26 weeks introduces key concepts such as A is for Anarchy, B for Balance of Power, C for Cooperation and so forth. They are released on Instagram (Prof_Politics), TikTok (Professor_Politics), LinkedIn, and YouTube (@ProfessorGallagher). 

In the first few months alone, Instagram generated more than 38,000 views, 2000 interactions and 1200 followers, TikTok 22,243 views, YouTube over 1000 views, and LinkedIn around 10,000 views.

This week we look at the letters 'M' and 'N'.

M is for 'Money'.

On 30 November 2024, Donald Trump tweeted that if BRICS countries created a new currency or supported any other currency replacing the US dollar, they would face 100% tariffs. 

To understand this, we need to go back to the Bretton Woods system created in 1944. The dollar would underpin the world's economy, but its value would be fixed to gold. Once ounce of gold would equal roughly $35. Governments around the world accepted this, but it was built on the proviso that if any government wanted to exchange its dollars back to gold, the US Federal Reserve would honour this.

By the late 1960s, the US was haemorrhaging and didn't have enough gold in reserve. France announced that it wanted to trade French US dollars for gold, and the US faced a major crisis. In August 1971, President Nixon announced that the US was suspending the gold standard and fixed exchange rate. This changed the way the world works. Other governments around the world went along with this, as it allowed them to create more money, leading to an explosion of borrowing and debt, and can be seen as a '70 year experiment'. Nixon's move is a reminder that a very small number of decision-makers can make decisions with global implications. 

US power is built on the dominance of the US dollar. Elites are terrified that we may be moving into a post-dollar New World Order, and this can help explain Donald Trump's reaction. 
 

N is for 'Nuclear Weapons'.

2025 has 1930s vibes about it. However, there is a fundamental difference: Nuclear weapons.

Of 193 nations in the UN, only 9 have nuclear weapons. The five permanent members of the UN Security Council; the US, Russia, China, the UK, and France, as well as India, Pakistan, Israel, and North Korea.

12 days after taking office, President Truman was warned by advisors that nuclear weapons represented a revolutionary change in the relationship between humans and the universe. Despite this, some academics argue that nuclear weapons make the world more peaceful by preventing wars between nuclear states. From this perspective, nuclear weapons act as a deterrent. If a state has second-strike capabilities, it would be mutually assured destruction (M.A.D.) to go to war with them. Even if you conduct a nuclear strike, they could strike back against you.

Kenneth Waltz took this logic and argued that Iran should be allowed to develop weapons. He believed this would bring more stability to the Middle East through a bipolar nuclear balance with Israel. For critics, there are a huge number of reasons why we should ban the bomb. Firstly, the horror of the war itself and the devastating consequences for survivors. Nuclear meltdowns, such as that at Chernobyl, also give pause for thought. Maintenance of nuclear arsenals costs tens of billions of dollars that could be better spent elsewhere. What if nuclear weapons fell into the hands of terrorists? The story of the Soviet nuclear submarine that lost communication with Moscow, leading to the assumption that it may have come under attack and led to a debate about nuclear launch, reminds us that accidents could also occur. 

As tensions mount between great powers, it may be that nuclear deterrence fails and civilisation as we know it ends. Will the idea that nuclear war is madness hold? Could this technology avert World War III?



 

Photo by Robert Stump on Unsplash