Get Tough on Saudi Nuclear Plans

Journal of Political Risk, Vol. 14, No. 8, August 2026

By Anders Corr

Nukes should be a no-go for authoritarian countries, including Turkey and Egypt.

Decommissioned Titan II intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM)  at the Titan Missile Museum, Green Valley, Sahuarita, Arizona. Source: Stephen Cobb.

Decommissioned Titan II intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) at the Titan Missile Museum, Green Valley, Sahuarita, Arizona. Source: Stephen Cobb.

Saudi Arabia wants to build nuclear power plants using U.S. technology. This would be a boon to the U.S. civil nuclear energy industry and limit Russian and Chinese nuclear cooperation with Riyadh. The deal is expected to endure 30 years and yield tens of billions in revenues to U.S. companies. Westinghouse Electric Company would likely benefit from at least some of the contracts that result. China has for years outcompeted Westinghouse in exports, so a win in Saudi Arabia would be a win for the United States.

However, there is a nuclear weapons proliferation risk, especially with Saudi Arabia. The authoritarian country and U.S. ally is suspected of seeking nuclear weapons, including through reported nuclear weapons cooperation with Pakistan. According to Tim Willasey-Wilsey, who worked as a diplomat for the British government, “Saudi Arabia had helped fund Pakistan’s nuclear programme since the early 1970s, and Pakistan had reciprocated by providing troops to defend the holy cities of Mecca and Medina.” Willasey-Wilsey was informed in 2010 that “two nuclear-armed aircraft (probably Mirage IIIs at the time) with Pakistani air and ground crews would be placed at the disposal of the Saudis at moments of crisis.” Continue reading

How a $0.03 Nitrile Glove Could Shut Down America’s Reindustrialization

A Nitrile Butadiene Rubber production facility in the countryside, surrounded by grassy land, with steep hills in the background.

Blue Star NBR’s nitrile butadiene rubber facility in Wytheville, Virginia, May 2023. Photo courtesy of the author.

Journal of Political Risk, Vol. 14, No. 2, February 2026

By Scott Maier 

The U.S. spent more than $200 billion to establish a thriving domestic semiconductor industry. It  recently took urgent action to secure critical minerals and rare earth metals for defense, AI, and other critical technological applications. It took these actions because it is unsafe to continue relying on a foreign adversary, China, for critical goods and the raw materials used to produce them. 

What all of the above items have in common is that nitrile gloves are required in their manufacturing process. While most people associate nitrile gloves with doctors and nurses, healthcare represents only 30% of their use. The majority of gloves, 50%-60%, are used in an industrial setting. All of the  critical manufacturing areas where the Department of War is supporting reshoring efforts require  workers to wear gloves: critical minerals, rare earth elements, composite materials, batteries,  industrial magnets, and energetics (TNT, C4 and other explosives). 

Continue reading

The Risks of AI: An Interview with Georgetown’s Helen Toner

Journal of Political Risk, Vol. 10, No. 1, January 2022

Helen Toner's headshot depicts her smiling wearing a green shirt and grey blazer.

Helen Toner, Director of Strategy at the Center for Security and Emerging Technology (CSET) at Georgetown University.

Anders Corr, Ph.D.
Publisher of the Journal of Political Risk

The JPR interview with Helen Toner, the Director of Strategy at the Center for Security and Emerging Technology (CSET) at Georgetown University, was conducted via email between 4 January 2022 and 13 January 2022.

Corr: What are the national security risks and benefits of AI?

Toner: This is a huge question! AI is a general-purpose technology, meaning that—like electricity or the computer—its impacts will be felt across practically all industries and areas of society. Accordingly, it presents a huge range of potential risks and benefits from a national security perspective. One way of trying to summarize the possibilities might be as follows: the benefits will largely be in line with the kinds of benefits we have seen from increasingly sophisticated computing technology more generally: greater efficiency and accuracy, as well as the ability to perform tasks at scales impossible for humans (think: how Google search trawls the web). In terms of risks, one breakdown proposed by Zwetsloot and Dafoe is to think in terms of risks from accidents (i.e. unintended outcomes from using AI), misuse (i.e. the deliberate use of AI to cause harm), and structural changes (i.e. how progress in AI shapes surrounding systems and dynamics). I realize this is fairly abstract, but it’s impossible to enumerate specific risks without narrowing the scope to particular application areas, time frames, and actors.

Continue reading

Chinese Communist Party Cooperation with Gangs and Politicians in Canada: Book Review

Journal of Political Risk, Vol. 9, No. 5, May 2021

The book cover depicts the words "Wilful blindness" in white against a red backdrop and a world map in black.

The book cover of Wilful Blindness, by Sam Cooper.

Anders Corr, Ph.D.

Publisher of the Journal of Political Risk

Wilful Blindness How a Network of Narcos, Tycoons and CCP agents Infiltrated the West, by Sam Cooper, Optimum Publishing International, 2021, $28.95 CAD.

An investigative reporter in Canada, Sam Cooper, is at the tip of the spear, where China injects money, drugs, spies, and underage prostitutes into all of North America. Cooper provides us with a front-row seat of China’s espionage, drug supercartels, support to terrorism, money laundering, and, for a pledge of support to Beijing, campaign donations to the politicians who lurk around China’s United Front groups in Vancouver, Toronto, and Ottawa. Add to that investigations of trafficking in weapons. Heads of state, including Donald Trump and Justin Trudeau, are linked by the author to the nefarious characters from China who are doing this dirty business.

It sounds too crazy to be true.  

But Cooper’s new book, Wilful Blindness, is nonfiction, and based on five years of his investigative reporting on the topic, and confidential sources in Canadian intelligence and police agencies. It vindicates, and brings up to date, a joint Canadian Security and Intelligence Service (CSIS) and Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) report that in 1997 made many of the same claims. That report, called “Sidewinder”, was suppressed by Ottawa, which at time was trying to ink new trade deals with Beijing. 

Continue reading

War In The Taiwan Strait Is Not Unthinkable: Some Will Lose More Than Others

Journal of Political Risk, Vol. 7, No. 11, November 2019

A still taken from a Chinese news broadcast. Three men are visible against a sandy background. Characters can be seen in red, white, and black at the bottom of the screen.

Screen capture of Chinese state media video of People’s Liberation Army (PLA) troops training for an assault on Taiwan’s presidential office. Pictured is a mock building at the Zhurihe military base in China, that mimics the actual building in Taipei. The video aired July 5, 2015. CCTV via Apple Daily.

Grant Newsham
US Marine Officer (Ret)

Whether anyone actually ‘wins’ a war is a philosophical debate.  The Germans and Japanese in 1945 might have thought wars do indeed have winners.  But perhaps it’s better said that in most conflicts some parties ‘lose more than others.’

Such would be the case if Beijing attempted to militarily subjugate Taiwan.  And Xi Jinping just might do so.  He declared in a January 2019 speech that “we (China) do not promise to renounce the use of force and reserve the option to use all necessary measures (to take Taiwan.)”[1]

The Battle for Taiwan would have truly global consequences, akin to the invasion of Poland by the Soviets and Germans in 1939.

However, much of the debate over a Taiwan Strait conflict focuses on preparation for and conduct of the PRC’s attack: whether Beijing will or won’t attack, what an attack might look like and Taiwan’s ability to defend itself, whether the US will or should get involved and whether it ought to sell Taiwan ‘this or that’ weapon.  Such discussion is useful, but the actual consequences and longer-term ripple effects of a fight over Taiwan deserve much more attention.[2]

This paper examines key aspects of what happens once the shooting starts, and the follow-on global economic and political effects.  The envisioned scenario is a full-scale PLA assault against Taiwan, but it’s worth noting that even a ‘limited’ assault–such as against one of Taiwan’s offshore islands–may not stay limited for very long: given Beijing’s oft-stated determination to take all of Taiwan, an off-shore island assault would only constitute a tactical objective in the march on Taipei, and would also have serious and wide-ranging political and economic consequences.

Continue reading