How would the global risk calculus of individuals, organizations, and governments shift if a weapon of mass destruction were detonated in a heavily populated city?Would such an event promote closer cooperation between countries in fighting the spread of WMDs or would it drive countries further apart and back within their sovereign borders?

The detonation of a weapon of mass destruction (WMD) in a heavily populated city would have profound and complex implications for the global risk calculus, shaping the responses of individuals, organizations, and governments. The aftermath of such an event would likely involve a combination of heightened security concerns, geopolitical shifts, and collaborative efforts to prevent future occurrences. Here are some potential dynamics:

1) Increased Security Measures: Individuals, organizations, and governments worldwide would likely reevaluate and intensify their security measures. This could lead to stricter border controls, enhanced surveillance, and increased investments in counterterrorism and intelligence efforts.

2) Global Cooperation: The severity of the event might prompt an international response aimed at preventing the proliferation of WMDs. Countries could engage in closer cooperation on intelligence-sharing, joint military actions against proliferators, and the development of international agreements to strengthen arms control.

3) Humanitarian Response: The international community would likely come together to provide humanitarian assistance to the affected population. This could involve medical aid, disaster relief, and support for recovery efforts.

4) Economic Impacts: The economic consequences of a WMD attack would be substantial, affecting global markets, trade, and investment. The cost of recovery and reconstruction, coupled with potential disruptions to global supply chains, could have widespread economic implications.

5) Geopolitical Dynamics: The geopolitical landscape could shift as countries reassess their alliances and strategies in response to the attack. While there might be calls for collective security measures, there could also be tensions and blame games, potentially straining international relations.

6) National Security Priorities: Governments may prioritize national security concerns over other issues, potentially leading to increased surveillance, restrictions on civil liberties, and changes in domestic policies.

7) Divergent Responses: Responses to a WMD attack could vary among countries. While some might advocate for closer international cooperation, others may adopt more isolationist or nationalist stances, focusing on protecting their own interests and borders.

In summary, the detonation of a WMD in a heavily populated city would likely prompt a multifaceted response. While there may be increased global cooperation in some areas, such as preventing the spread of WMDs, the overall impact on international relations would depend on the specific circumstances, the nature of the attack, and the responses of individual countries. It has the potential to both foster closer cooperation and, in some cases, lead to more inward-looking, protective measures by certain nations.