No, but MAD has so far worked to prevent use of nuclear weapons even in self-defense. MAD hasn't done anything with respect to non-nuclear[1] war using ever more capable non-nuclear weapons.

The large issue now, as it was a big issue then, is still whether or not the powers will get involved, and how if they do.

[1] - It's hardly conventional anymore, just non-nuclear-warhead.

The scenario imagined in the article is more the less the “The Button” sequence from Yes Minister; when _do_ you initiate a full-blown nuclear war? You probably don’t.

The most frequent ending in the card game I mentioned is that as soon as it becomes apparent that one player will lose, they take everyone else with them.

(sure, it may be just a game, but I claim there is at least one nuclear power that (a) cannot credibly claim a "no first use" policy, and (b) has been known to have leaders who fail to accept defeat graciously)

It is of course the duty of psychological warfare operatives to provide a non-button path for losing entities (does "cooling the mark out"* assume there are no psyop-immune "Doomsday Machines" in the launch path?); how confident are we they can do so effectively?

* https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/00332747.1952.11...

A leader can only press the first button, they can't press the last button.

Every country has allies to retreat to.

"Gentlemen, we must not have a mineshaft gap!"

I have that I {heart} Nuclear War bumper sticker on the back of my car. The computer game was also awesome. A very hard game to win.