34 United States The EconomistJanuary 20th 2018
2 unilaterally reimposes sanctions, Ameri-
ca, as one of six signatories to the deal
along with Britain, France, Germany, Rus-
sia and China, would be in clear breach of
its commitments. This, in turn, would re-
lease Iran from its obligations: allowing it
to reinstate, if it chose, those nuclear activ-
ities banned under the terms of the JCPOA.
This is an unfolding nightmare for the
Europeans. They remain firmly committed
to the painstakingly negotiated deal (as are
Russia and China), convinced that its bene-
fits vastly outweigh its flaws. The day be-
fore Mr Trump’s announcement, at a meet-
ing in Brussels of the British, German and
French foreign ministers that was attended
by their Iranian opposite number, Javad
Zarif, they reiterated their unwavering sup-
port for the JCPOA. They pointed out that
nobody opposed to the deal has produced
a better alternative. They do not deny that,
in an ideal world, the things Mr Trump is
insisting on would be nice to have. But
they firmly reject the idea that a superior
deal would have been possible if only they
and the Obama administration had been
tougher on the Iranians.
Even with an international sanctions
regime throttling the life out of the Iranian
economy and the possibilityof war still
rumbling, the diplomats who were there
believe that the Iranian negotiating team
could not have been pushed further with-
out being repudiated by hardliners at
home, including the supreme leader, Ali
Khamenei. With no international support
for the reimposition of nuclear-related
sanctions, the Europeans regard it as fanta-
sy to suppose that the Iranians would now
bow to demands from Mr Trump that re-
late more to rash campaign promises than
real-world diplomacy.
The president has nonetheless made it
clear that he expects America’s European
allies to help him get what he wants. “If
other nations fail to act during this time,”
he declared, “I will terminate our deal with
Iran.” Both the French and the British, ea-
ger to show willing, say they too are keen
to discuss follow-on agreements with Iran
about missile development and regional
interference. But they maintain that any
such talks should be open-ended and not
linked to the JCPOA, which is achieving ex-
actly what it set out to do.
It is far from clear how this will play out.
In particular, nobody knows whether Mr
Trump’s national-security team, who also
want to preserve the deal, can persuade
the president to accept some face-saving
compromise in which more sanctions are
targeted on individualsconnected to the
missile programme and support for terro-
rist groups, while the Europeans undertake
to try to tweak the nuclear deal over time.
Or whether Mr Trump will be quite happy
to blow the deal up, blaming the spineless
Europeans for siding with Iran. The latter
looks more likely. 7Nuclear fearsThinking the unthinkable
T
HE alerts mistakenly sent to residents
of Hawaii, warning them that a mis-
sile was on the way, were a reminder of
an era when terror was measured in
kilotons. In the 1950sand 1960s public-
service broadcastsinformed Americans
about what to do in case of a nuclear
attack. Since then, with nuclear conflict
seeming less likely, such knowledge has
seemed esoteric, like taking an interest in
Brutalism or taxidermy. Here is a remind-
er of something we hope you will never
need to know.
If a nuclear bomb exploded in an
airburst, around 90% of people would
die instantly near the centre of the blast: a
roughly 1.9km (1.2-mile) radius for a 300-
kiloton (KT) device—the estimated force
of the weapon North Korea tested in
September. Within a 15-square-kilometre
area, at least half the population would
die more slowly, from radiation and
burns. Those who make it through the
blast orare farther away can take steps to
increase their chance of survival.
An explosion would generate a fire-
ball of light many times brighter than the
sun. Do not look at it or you may go par-
tially blind. Instead, do asthe cold-war
safety film featuring Bert the Turtle ad-
vised: duck and cover. Lie down, ideally
underneath something. This is to prevent
serious burns from a thermal pulse, or
heatwave, lasting several seconds that
will sear through the area, setting off fires.It is also to avoid shattered glass and
flying debrisas a blast wave, with hurri-
cane-strength winds, follows.
The energy from the fireball would
draw a column ofdust and debris three
miles into the atmosphere for over ten
minutes; itstop will flatten into the cap of
the mushroom cloud. During that time,
blast survivorsneed to find shelter. Ra-
dioactive fallout—highly contaminated
debris that settles on surfaces—follows. It
is most lethal justafterthe blast.
The ideal shelter is below ground and
well-sealed. If you are in a building
above ground, go to its centre, preferably
avoiding the ground or top floors. With
luck your shelter has bottled water and
non-perishable food; a radio and batter-
ies for emergency information; wet-
wipes and plastic bags for personal san-
itation; and your identification docu-
ments. Assume mobile phones do not
work. Distance from the blast is a matter
of luck. Surviving thereafter is mostly a
matter of finding shelter, says Alex Wel-
lerstein of the Stevens Institute of Tech-
nology in New Jersey. After about two
days the worst of the radiation will have
decayed. It may be safe to go outside.
The best step, though, is not to have a
nuclear missile come your way at all.
Which is why some in the Trump admin-
istration argue for a strike on North Korea
soon; and why most other people think
that would be insane.How to increase your chances of surviving an atomic blastToons you can use