What Is Trump Up To?

• 18.10.2026, 17:06

Today, people compare the situation in the world to that of 1914 and 1939, but there is one important difference.

Is U.S. President Donald Trump willing to use nuclear weapons at any time to stop an adversary and prevent a major war? For decades, the nuclear arsenal has served as Washington’s ultimate deterrent, but its effectiveness depends on whether the U.S.’s adversaries believe the American president is willing to take that extreme step, writes The Wall Street Journal.

The current international situation is often compared to the periods leading up to the world wars of 1914 and 1939. However, the most important difference today lies in the existence of nuclear weapons and the unspoken taboo against their use.

“The nuclear taboo has proven useful in preventing nuclear war. But it has not helped deter conventional wars,” writes the WSJ.

During the Cold War, the U.S. openly warned that it might be the first to use nuclear weapons in the event of a Soviet invasion of Western Europe. This threat was intended to offset the Soviet Union’s potential superiority in conventional weapons and deter Moscow from attacking.

Now, the columnist argues, a similar dilemma has arisen. If conventional weapons are insufficient to stop an adversary, is the American president prepared to back up threats with the actual use of nuclear weapons? Or will Washington’s adversaries conclude that the fear of catastrophic escalation will prevent the U.S. from crossing that line?

The mere existence of a nuclear arsenal does not guarantee deterrence. But if the threat of its use ceases to be taken seriously, it could alter the calculations of potential adversaries and increase the risk of a major military conflict.