I think that more detail would have to be given in terms of what exact guidelines are being sought to align answers.  If it's the general principles of the poem, I would say that understanding the reality of mutually assured destruction is going to be a critical need in a nuclear world.  The use of nuclear weapons represents a point of no return, a state where there can be little, if any, opportunity to learn from one's mistakes.  Therefore, it is essential for nations to adopt the perspective of understanding the opposing nation, borrowing ideas from the poem of the lack of a foreign element in the process.  If nuclear weapons can be seen as totalizing in their destructive element, then it might compel individuals to view nations in more relative and more connecting terms.  If it is possible to grasp the idea that nations are not "foreign," but rather closer to noe another in understanding the fully destructive impacts of nuclear warfare then its use might be diminished in the understanding that when one nation uses against another, the issue of responding in kind will wipe out both countries.