That’s because they *are* winning.
I was at a meeting with @BrunoTertrais @KoriSchake @AndreaRBerger and others where one of our otherwise likeable colleagues was asked to present on the humanitarian impacts initiative, which led to the ban treaty. (1/4)
His presentation was entirely mocking. He made it clear that (1) he had never heard of @nuclearban before, (2) that his “research” consisted entirely of looking at their website, and (3) that there was nothing of substance there, in his opinion. It was all a big joke. (2/4)
My intervention, not terribly well-received, was @nuclearban was winning and any viable constituency for the trans-Atlantic relationship would have to include many people deeply skeptical of nuclear weapons. The general attitude was complacency. And now it’s panic. (3/4)
If someone can’t see @nuclearban coming, what makes us think his assessments of Russia, China are any better? If someone sees @beafihn’s argument as naive instead of deadly effective in a public debate, then god help him. (4/4)
