All Clear for Nuclear

At present, America has strong nuclear weapons capabilities and is also a big persuader of which nations can and cannot pursue nuclear proliferation. Our actions on this crucial issue have shown once and again to be antagonistic towards our enemies. It is possible to change course and formulate sustainable solutions; however we must do so with a new set of belief systems.

It’s easy to see how pervasive nuclear proliferation has become. In the 21st century around $40 billion a year, or 10 per cent of the annual US military budget, is spent on nuclear weapons (1). At a time when our defense budget is already well-beyond that of any other nation, nuclear proliferation is widening this disparity. Moreover, there is no certainty that more nukes will increase our safety and security. Consider the widespread ecological devastation resulting from the “average” nuclear bomb:

“The radioactive waste created in the manufacture of an average nuclear bomb includes 2,000 tons of uranium mining waste, 4 tons of depleted uranium and 50 cubic meters of ‘low-level’ waste. ‘Clean up’ following nuclear weapons production and testing in the US will cost more than $300 billion through to the year 2070” (2).

In an era of severe environmental insecurity, the expansion of nuclear warfare only exacerbates our Earth’s rapidly diminishing resources. Were a nuclear bomb to be used today, the impact would affect a long line of generations. “Even today, there are more babies born dead or deformed in Hiroshima and Nagasaki than in other areas in Japan” (3). It’s crucial to think in terms of a decent future when contemplating nuclear proliferation. By focusing more on waging peace with other nations, the need for nuclear bombs suddenly vanishes. As a whole, the world would be safer when there is increased trust generated among nations. Fear and hostility, on the other hand, only breed more of the same.

One could say that having nuclear weapons dissuades potential enemies from attacking their country. While this might be the case, a few nations having nuclear weapons while everyone else doesn’t can easily breed distrust. Like a little brother wanting all of his big brother’s privileges, an uneven playing field often leads to conflict. Sending a more appropriate message involves relying on stable international relationships. Trust is the glue holding societies together. As a result, it’s essential to understand everyone’s viewpoint before making permanent decisions. Disregard, callousness and fear can end up becoming-like the nukes themselves-highly destructive.

A key aspect to study regarding this topic is the language that different nations use to describe nuclear weapons. For example, despite American mass media insisting that Iran is pursuing nuclear bombs, the facts depict quite the opposite. Here’s a relevant statement made by Iran’s Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi:

“We do not see any glory, pride or power in the nuclear weapons-quite the opposite…The production, possession, use or threat of use of nuclear weapons are illegitimate, futile, harmful, dangerous and prohibited as a great sin” (4).

It is easy for one to label this statement as a cover-up for nuclear proliferation; however, looking at the important message laid out provides teachings for others to follow. The United States could heed the wisdom of Mr. Salehi, but doing so would require a complete transformation. The fact is that “as of September 2009, it possessed 5,113 nuclear warheads, including tactical, strategic, and non-deployed weapons” (5). A long and winding road lies ahead for American nuclear nonproliferation. In 2010, President Obama ignored pledges for nuclear disbarment and requested “over $7 billion” for increased nuclear weapons development. Part of this money is said to be spent on boosting “a new plutonium production facility in Los Alamos, New Mexico” (6). By downsizing our massive nuclear arsenal, the United States could send a much-needed message of trust to both allies and enemies alike.

There are many noticeable dilemmas regarding nuclear disarmament; however, effective solutions exist and they aren’t as difficult to grasp as one might believe. One such remedy is for nations currently pursuing nuclear development to align with those that have completely abandoned or are lessening their dependence on nuclear weapons. Take for example this statement made on the United Nations Office on Nuclear Disarmament:

“The nuclear powers should actively engage with other states on this issue at the Conference on Disarmament in Geneva, the world's single multilateral disarmament negotiating forum. The world would also welcome a resumption of bilateral negotiations between the United States and Russian Federation aimed at deep and verifiable reductions of their respective arsenals” (7).

America has the chance to send a positive and promising message to the world by focusing its efforts on downsizing, rather than increasing nuclear weaponry. Even more effective would be to collaborate with other nations and reach resolutions regarding nonproliferation. Trident, the nuclear weapons system in Britain, is currently under heated debate. Its submarines are said to expire in 2028, and most British citizens-63%-are against replacing them. On cnduk.org, it lists some important reasons why; here is one of them:

“A key factor in the growth of popular opposition is the cost of replacement – now over £100 billion – and the opportunity cost it presents for spending in more socially useful areas such as health, education and jobs” (8).

U.S. citizens can easily make a similar argument; ‘Our empire is bankrupt and it’s high time to seriously consider living on less’. Some Americans are voicing their complaints on this issue, but the mass media and mass society definitely have not. By ignoring petty differences and joining together on nuclear disarmament, our society can formulate a voice loud enough to be heard by politicians.

      References
1. Natural Resources Defense Council, ‘Nuclear Insecurity – A Critique of the Bush Administration’s Nuclear Weapons Policies’, 2004, www.nrdc.org/nuclear/insecurity/critique.pdf
2. ‘The Environment and the Nuclear Age’, Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom, www.reachingcriticalwill.org/technical/factsheets/environmental.html
3. Kate Hudson, CND – Now More Than Ever, The Story of a Peace Movement, Vision Paperbacks, 2005.
4. http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/the_ayatollah_is_right_about_one_thing_nuclear_weapons_are_sinful_20120229/
5. http://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/unitedstatesprofile
6. http://www.democracynow.org/2010/2/2/despite_non_proliferation_pledge_obama_budget
7. http://www.un.org/disarmament/WMD/Nuclear/sg5point.shtml
8. http://www.cnduk.org/campaigns/no-to-trident