Nearly eight decades after the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the threat of nuclear conflict remains a global concern. Despite peaceful uses of nuclear energy, the risk of devastating nuclear war looms large. With 13,000 weapons held by nine nations, the world remains vulnerable to catastrophic consequences.
By Ambassador Srikumar Menon
a 5 mins read.
Almost eight decades have passed since the horrific events of August 1945 when the first atomic bombs were dropped in Nagasaki and Hiroshima in Japan. Since then, the world has been fortunate not to have been a witness to a repeat of such a catastrophic occurrence. However, over the years, the continuing proliferation and testing of nuclear weapons has pushed the world several times, closer and closer to the precipice.
Despite there being no use of nuclear weapons since 1945, the nuclear threat continues to be a grim reality even today. The greatest danger to World Peace and global security and stability is the scary scenario of a possible outbreak of nuclear conflict between countries possessing nuclear weapons not to mention the prospect of unintended accidental use of such weapons of mass destruction.
A thermo-nuclear war could have a devastating impact on the global environment and climate, severely exposing humans, flora and fauna to the harmful effects of radiation, environmental contamination, life-threatening conditions like cancer, genetic defects and other health implications.
It must be conceded that there are several peaceful uses of nuclear power, which go a long way in meeting the energy needs of developed and developing nations as a ‘Clean Energy’ source. It’s also a harsh reality – underscored by the fact that 9 countries possessing nuclear weapons (the United States, Russia, France, China, the United Kingdom, Pakistan, India, Israel, and North Korea), hold a combined global nuclear stockpile totaling about 13,000 weapons. So it is not without reason that the world is obsessed with the need to rein in the threat and prevent the disastrous effects of intended or accidental use of nuclear weapons.
Historical perspective
The subject of nuclear weapons is a vast and complex canvas. It’s a well-known axiom that Global Security is dictated by Geopolitical, Economic and Military developments. Security, as we understand it in general terms, is not a product, but a dynamic changing process. So it is, in the case of the current international security environment.
Russia’s annexation of Crimea in 2014 was a geo-strategic victory, as it provided Russia the opportunity to leverage its nuclear assets to strengthen the new status quo on the ground.
The negative aspects of technological progress have on many occasions seriously impacted the lives of ordinary people around the world. We live in a constantly advancing world, driven by new cutting-edge technological and scientific innovations. However, there are negative elements that come out of these technologies, posing a serious challenge to man’s pursuit of security, peace and stability.
Unfortunately, successive generations have failed to learn the lessons, despite the tragedy and violence that followed in the wake of the two world wars and other multiple wars in recent decades that had pushed the world several times closer to a nuclear flash point. A new evolution of potentially realistic doomsday scenarios called “Mutually Assured Destruction” has taken shape.
The Cold War era witnessed a bipolar nuclear world. Subsequently, the 1990s witnessed the decline and break-up of the Soviet bloc, providing the United States to wield global power in a unipolar world. This brief phase soon gave way to the new world order – characterized by the emergence of multi-polar power equations – with Russia and China aggressively pursuing their own industrial, military and nuclear development agenda.
Russia’s annexation of Crimea in 2014 was a geo-strategic victory, as it provided Russia the opportunity to leverage its nuclear assets to strengthen the new status quo on the ground. Its subsequent war in Ukraine is a pointer to Russian ambitions to reassert and reclaim its place as a big power player with the stated aim of containing “NATO’s expansionist policies”.
There have been several recent nuclear-related incidents that continue to raise the threat levels of a nuclear war. Terrorist organisations and non-state actors around the world have leveraged IT and Cyberspace to pursue covert activities from remote locations to disable national assets and critical infrastructure like power grids, transport network logistics and nuclear infrastructure.
Paul Bracken of Yale University in his interesting book: “The Second Nuclear Age” writes about the reemergence of nuclear weapons as a vital element of statecraft and power politics, implying thereby that ‘we have entered the second nuclear age’ while the Cold War period was the ‘first nuclear age’. The book flags the need for the world to pay fresh attention to nuclear weapons and recognise how their presence will transform the way international security crises develop and escalate in the new world order.
While several nations oppose nuclear proliferation, there is a school of thought that lends credence to the deterrence doctrine. It can be said that possession of nuclear weapons helps states to coerce their opponents into changing their aggressive behavior yet there are chances that such a coercive policy could miserably fail in a highly volatile military crisis.
Recent incidents of nuclear flashpoints around the world
The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) underlined its concern about a nuclear fallout from the Russia-Ukraine war, following a drone strike in March this year on one of the six nuclear reactors at the Russian-controlled Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant in Ukraine. The incident raised fears of a “Chornobyl-like” disaster and a potential nuclear fuel meltdown endangering the lives of hundreds and thousands of people in neighboring regions including central Europe.
Russia and its neighbouring ally Belarus conducted joint exercises a few months ago in June, for the training of army personnel in handling tactical nuclear weapons – with the obvious intention to discourage and deter NATO and Western nations from ramping up their support for Ukraine.
Russia’s decision to send weapons to Iran substantially alters the power balance in West Asia and the Gulf region, something which the United States and Israel would be acutely wary of. There have been reports that Iran could “declare itself a nuclear weapons state by the end of the year”.
On the other hand, Russian statements have hinted that it would set aside its self-imposed “red lines” and would not hesitate to match the West’s nuclear threats, ipso-facto making it clear that Russia was ready to use nuclear weapons if its sovereignty was threatened.
Nuclear-armed North Korea reacted sharply to the recent deployment of a U.S. aircraft carrier battle fleet in South Korea, describing the action as a provocation and underlining its right to defend itself (read with nuclear weapons). North Korean nuclear missiles have the capability of striking US targets.
The nine nuclear-armed states have continued modernizing their nuclear weapons as part of the policy of nuclear deterrence. The silver lining, amidst all this belligerent and combative talk, has been the recent peace declaration at the Nagasaki Peace Park in August, which called on leaders of all nuclear weapons states and their allies to shift their policy focus toward completely abolishing nuclear weapons.
The Option is to say no to nuclear weapons and to pledge our support for all initiatives that are aimed at achieving this.
International efforts to rein-in nuclear weapons threat
International agencies like the United Nations and the Geneva-based ICAN – The International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons have played a salutary role in sensitizing the world population about the dangers of a nuclear war.
The International Day Against Nuclear Tests observed on August 29 every year, aims to raise global awareness about the threat of nuclear weapons to human life. It’s a reminder for the world to take measures to prevent a potential nuclear holocaust. Since 2014, the UN and member countries have annually commemorated the International Day for the Total Elimination of Nuclear Weapons. It provides an ideal platform for the international community to reaffirm its commitment to global nuclear disarmament.
The UN Secretary-General António Guterres made a profound remark in one of his recent statements wherein he said – “Eliminating nuclear weapons would be the greatest gift we could bestow on future generations”.
The importance of states coming together to ensure world order and security for citizens is therefore of paramount importance – more so in the increasingly volatile and unstable security scenario that we find ourselves in today. As the global citizens of this planet, we have a responsibility to each other and future generations. We do not have the option of MAD – Mutually Assured Destruction. The Option is to say no to nuclear weapons and to pledge our support for all initiatives that are aimed at achieving this.
In April 2024, the US and Japan introduced a resolution in the UN Security Council, calling on nations not to deploy or develop nuclear weapons in Space. The UN Secretary-General on his part highlighted the need for a joint “No first-use agreement” between nuclear weapon states, while calling for the resumption of dialogue, reaffirmation of moratoriums on nuclear testing and speeding up of implementation of disarmament commitments.
Mahatma Gandhi described the deployment of the atom bomb in 1945 as the “most diabolical use of science for the wholesale destruction of men, women, and children.”
The last word on nuclear disarmament must be the manifesto signed by world-famous intellectuals – Albert Einstein, Bertrand Russel and others in 1955, prophetically warning the world about the dire consequences of a nuclear war. There is so much wisdom in these following lines for the present generation of leaders, politicians and military strategists to take note of, to learn and adopt…
“There lies before us, if we choose, continual progress in happiness, knowledge, and wisdom. Shall we, instead, choose death, because we cannot forget our quarrels? We appeal as human beings to human beings: Remember your humanity and forget the rest. If you can do so, the way lies open to a new Paradise; if you cannot, there lies before you the risk of universal death”.
(Ambassador Srikumar Menon, IFS (Retd.), former Ambassador of India to South Sudan, Angola and Sao Tome & Principe. The views expressed are of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The News Analytics Journal.)
