This is CBSI in the world.

I'm John Batchel.

With Henry Sikovsky of the Nonproliferation Policy Education Center.

The departure point is a presentation by Mark Rudy, the General Secretary of NATO,

at the Chatham House in London most days ago,

in which Mr. Rudy laid out the numbers for China in ships,

and the numbers for Russia in armored vehicles in tanks and drones and his kinder missiles,

and underlines the fact that questions need to be answered about what NATO is capable of doing in the next five years,

because Mr. Rudy's opinion is Russia will be ready to attack a NATO nation by 2030.

I come to this remark, however, I'll write up in the London Telegraph responding to Mr. Rudy's remarks.

The question is asked by a columnist and by the editorial board. If Russia used a nuclear weapon in the Baltics, can those countries truly count

on Starmer, the Prime Minister of Britain, and Macron, the President of France, to make the

conscious choice to plunge into

nuclear exchange. The reason this rhetoric is used is that Mr. Stamer and Mr. McCrone, in their

talks in London, Mr. McCrone was in Britain for a state visit with dinner at Windsor Castle.

The reason they made these remarks is that their nuclear

arsenals are going to work together to defend NATO. So I come to Henry on this matter,

because we did not deal with the nuclear option dealing with China, but this is NATO talking

about using the nuclear option. Do you believe it, Henry? Well, if I was a European,

the only reason I'm even thinking about a French-British assist on nuclear guarantees is because

I'm nervous the Americans might not follow through.

And in all fairness, if they can't be clear about whether we would do it, why could they be

...