The Greatest Immediate Danger to Humanity
by David Krieger, July 19, 2007
(Vaya
aquí para la versión española ) |
It is perhaps the least talked about and most worrying
irony of our time. The United States has a massive
defense budget, but spends relatively little addressing
the most immediate danger to humanity.
Global security is vital to family life, the growth of
business, the wise husbanding of resources and the environment. And
yet, all our hopes and plans for the future exist under
the shadow of a catastrophic threat – one that could
kill millions of people in a few moments and leave civilization
in shambles.
Although there are other significant threats, such as
global warming and infectious diseases, it is nuclear weapons
that are the greatest immediate danger confronting our
species. We must stop ignoring this threat and start
providing leadership to eliminate nuclear arsenals around
the globe.
Let’s look at some of the facts about nuclear weapons. They
are the only weapon capable of destroying civilization
and the human species. They kill indiscriminately,
making them equal opportunity destroyers. In the
hands of terrorists, they could destroy a country as powerful
as the United States. A nuclear 9/11 could have
resulted in deaths exceeding one million and the collapse
of the US and world economies.
There are currently some 27,000 nuclear weapons in the
world, and 12,000 of these are deployed. Of these,
3,500 nuclear weapons are on hair-trigger alert, ready
to be fired in moments.
Nine countries currently possess nuclear weapons: the
United States, Russia, UK, France, China, Israel, India,
Pakistan and North Korea. More than 95 percent of
the nuclear weapons in the world are in the arsenals of
the US and Russia. The UK, France, China and Israel
are estimated to have arsenals numbering a few hundred
each. India and Pakistan are thought to have arsenals
under 100, and North Korea to have up to 12 nuclear weapons. As
many as 35 other countries have the technological capability
to become nuclear weapons states, including Japan, South
Korea, Taiwan, Brazil, Iran and Egypt.
Nuclear weapons give a state sudden clout in the international
system. India, Pakistan and North Korea all increased
their stature in the international system after testing
nuclear weapons. Recently, Brazilian President Luiz
Inacio Lula da Silva emphasized the perceived prestige
that nuclear weapons potential gives a country. He
said: “Brazil could rank among those few nations
in the world with a command of uranium enrichment technology,
and I think we will be more highly valued as a nation --
as the power we wish to be.”
Nearly all countries in the world are parties to the Nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). Only three countries
have not signed the treaty: Israel, India and Pakistan. A
fourth country, North Korea, withdrew from the NPT in 2003. All
of these countries have developed nuclear arsenals.
The NPT obligates the nuclear weapons states that are
parties to the treaty to engage in good faith negotiations
for nuclear disarmament. The International Court
of Justice has interpreted this to mean that negotiations
must be concluded “leading to nuclear disarmament
in all its aspects.”
As the world’s only remaining superpower, the United
States can lead the way in fulfilling this obligation. It
has failed to do so. The US missile defense program
has been provocative to other countries, particularly Russia
and China, and has resulted in these countries improving
their offensive nuclear capabilities. The US has
also sought to upgrade and improve its nuclear arsenal,
and has proposed replacing every thermonuclear weapon in
the US arsenal with the so-called Reliable Replacement
Warhead. The US has, in effect, said to the world
that it intends to rely upon its nuclear arsenal indefinitely.
In addition, the US has failed to provide legally binding
security assurances that it will not use nuclear weapons
against non-nuclear weapons states. In fact, the
US indicated in its 2001 Nuclear Posture Review that
it was developing contingency plans for the use of nuclear
weapons against seven countries – two nuclear weapons
states (Russia and China) and five non-nuclear weapons
states (Iraq, Iran, Syria, Libya and North Korea, which
at the time was not thought to have nuclear weapons).
US nuclear policy undermines the security of its people. The
more the US relies on nuclear weapons, the more other countries
will do so. Former United Nations Secretary General
Kofi Annan has stated: “The more that those states
that already have [nuclear weapons] increase their arsenals,
or insist that such weapons are essential to their national
security, the more other states feel that they too must
have them for their security.” Reliance on
nuclear weapons will assure their proliferation.
The more nuclear weapons in the world, the more likely
they will end up in the hands of terrorist extremists incapable
of being deterred. The longer nations rely on nuclear
weapons for security, the more likely it is that they will
be used, by accident or design.
The US needs to work urgently for a treaty for the phased,
verifiable, irreversible elimination of nuclear weapons
under strict international control, just as we have already
done with chemical and biological weapons. To do
this requires political will, which has not been demonstrated
by the current US administration. Continuing with
existing US nuclear policies is a recipe for disaster. The
Cold War ended more than15 years ago, and new problems
now confront humanity. It is time for a drastic change
in US nuclear policy – change that will require strong
and effective leadership.
David Krieger is the President of the Nuclear Age Peace
Foundation (www.wagingpeace.org)
|