Reykjavik Revisited?

In a recent interview with former Soviet Union president Mikhail Gorbachev, he gave some thoughts about the possibility for a new arms race and the need for the U.S. and Russia to make steps towards a world without nuclear weapons.  A notable passage from the article:

Gorbachev speculated on "whether it could be considered realistic that ultimately one country might remain with an amount of conventional weapons nearly surpassing the arsenals of all other countries together, that is, that this country might have absolute military dominance in the world." "I would like to be sincere: Such a situation would be an insurmountable obstacle to ridding the world of nuclear weapons. Therefore, if we do not bring up the issue of demilitarization of global politics, the reduction of nuclear budgets, the termination of the development of new types of weapons, and the prevention of the militarization of outer space, all the talk about a nuclear-free world will remain empty," he said.

The most interesting of the steps mentioned to try to allay fears of massive conventional inferiority, currently an "insurmountable obstacle to ridding the world of nuclear weapons," is the "demilitarization of global politics."  The phrase in some respects parallels the Interim Report's (HASC being briefed on final findings 6 May and SASC 7 May) statement that

It is clear that the goal of zero nuclear weapons is extremely difficult to attain and would require a fundamental transformation of the world political order. [emphasis added]

Fundamental transformation of the world political order could, and probably does, mean a litany of things.  This would probably include steps like a decreased emphasis on sovereignty to allow the intrusive inspection regimes necessary to ensure verification.  Demilitarizing global politics, although intertwined to some degree with sovereignty concerns, may be an even larger fish to fry.  This would require countries around the world to completely reshape the way they understand threats, defense, etc.  Currently, it seems unlikely that Russia and China will accept conventional imbalances but it is perhaps even more unlikely countries will want to, or be able to, unthink the military focus that has driven international politics for centuries.  This gets back to why a world 0 is currently seen as an example of visionary politics but nonetheless will require some serious work at some point on type of questions should the conditions for this world to emerge ever come to fruition.