The Consequences Of Nuclear Weapons

Two main theorists of international relations, Kenneth Waltz and Scott Sagan have been debating on the issue of nuclear weapons and the proliferation of nuclear weapons in the 21st century. In their book The Spread of Nuclear Weapons: An Enduring Debate, they both discuss their various theories, assumptions and beliefs on nuclear proliferation and nuclear weapons. To examine why states would want to attain/develop a nuclear weapon and if increasing nuclear states is a good or bad thing. In my paper, I will discuss both of their theories and use a case study to illustrate which theory I agree with and then come up with possible solutions of preventing a nuclear war from occurring.

Since the invention of nuclear weapons, they have presented the world with a significant danger, one that was shown in reality during the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. However, nuclear weapons have not only served in combat, but they have also played a role in keeping the world peaceful by the concept of deterrence. The usage of nuclear weapons would lead to mutual destruction and during the Cold War, nuclear weapons were necessary to maintain international security, as a means of deterrence. However, by the end of the Cold War, reliance on nuclear weapons for maintaining peace became increasingly difficult and less effective (Shultz, et. al, 2007). The development of technology has also provided increasing opportunities for states

Nuclear weapons pose a direct and constant threat to people. Not even close from keeping the peace, they breed fear and mistrust among nations. These ultimate instruments

It has been seventy years since the last military nuclear bomb was successfully executed and many of us feel that nuclear threats have decedent or vanished, but Schell informs us that they are full of life. The Seventh Decade examines how the nuclear bomb has continued to cast a dark shadow over global politics and has advocated for the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons. The book takes on a robust roadmap to a nuclear bomb free world that looks at the historical dark uncertainties of the Cold War, where the odds of a nuclear attack were extremely high during the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis to the spread of nuclear knowledge and technology in the 1990s to unstable nations like Iraq and Pakistan, increasing the risk and fear of a nuclear war.

The consequences that hurt so many were not taken into consideration when the United States dropped the atomic weapons on Japan, during the final stages of World War II. The United States was the first and the only country to ever use an atomic weapon during war. President Harry Truman and Winston Churchill, who supported the bombing, shared a belief that the atomic weapons would end the war quickly. However, Truman and the United States did not think about how the bomb would affect the regular people of Japan. The day of the bombing the people of Japan had no warning, no way to protect yourself, and no explanation.

Nuclear bombs can bring a genocide to countries and people within less than a minute. Nuclear bombs, an enormous war bomb, can kill thousands of people and start and end wars. World War 2 bomb “Little Boy” measured 9.8 feet tip to tail and let off a chain reaction explosion that killed more than 80,000 people. Nuclear bombs are made out of uranium which is one of the most potent materials for bombs. If a bomb such as “Little Boy” were to be dropped on Los Angeles, California it would kill 100,330 people and leave 154,240 injured (Wellerstein).

The instrument of nuclear deterrence has been the primary reason that no full scale war between major world powers has taken place since WWII. Ensuring the credibility of the United States nuclear arsenal is the best way for the nation to secure future peace. Advances in nuclear physics, computational modeling, and engineering have made full nuclear-explosive testing unnecessary to maintain the nuclear

“If the Third World War is fought with nuclear weapons, the fourth will be fought with bows and arrows” Lord Mountbatten. This quotes, by a famous British Naval Officer, summarizes the threats nuclear weapons present to the entire world. With the development of the atomic bomb during the Second World War, a new war was started: the Cold War. The ideology behind this war continues on to this day and has led to many treaties and other attempts to stop the production and potential use of nuclear weapons. Nuclear weapons are a scientifically impressive feat; however, they present a difficult situation in terms of the global political system.

Why do some leaders want to blow each other up? In the past, the present, and hopefully not in the future and when leaders wanted to prove how powerful they were they used nuclear weapons.  The harm they cause to the people, plants, and animals around the explosion site is unbelievable. To launch nukes just to terminate a enemy that can be dealt with without using weapons of mass destruction is ridiculous. The effects of using  nuclear weapons has changed the world but if we keep using them we put our future at risk!

Nuclear weapons are the most dangerous weapons on earth. One can demolish a whole city, potentially killing millions, and exposed the natural environment and lives of future generations through its long-term catastrophic effects. According to the UNODA- United Nations Office for Disarmament Affairs (2011), “Although nuclear weapons have only been used twice in warfare- in the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945-about 22,000 reportedly remains in our world today and there have been over 2,000 nuclear tests conducted to date.” Nuclear weapons have been viewed as a threat to peace by world leaders. There have been debates of whether to let Iran and North Korea acquire nuclear weapons, leaders all around the world along with Liberals believe that it is a threat to peace and should limit the spread whereas neo realist have another belief that nuclear weapon can make the world a peaceful place. Because states would fear to attack each other. For example the Cuban missile crisis in 1962 and cold war- there were only threats and war did not happen because of nuclear deterrence. The Cuban missile crisis has frequently been portrayed as the only time where the world stood in the point of nuclear war between the superpowers. This is an example of how nuclear weapons were used to threaten the rival. Another examples would be that of India and Pakistan before they acquire nuclear weapon , they fought three bloody wars after having their independence but since 1998, after acquiring

The existence of nuclear weapons for better or worse have indubitably impacted our lives in one way or the other. There are the some who find these weapons to be singularly beneficial. For example Defence Analyst Edward Luttwak said “we have lived since 1945 without another world war precisely because rational minds…extracted a durable peace from the very terror of nuclear weapons.” (Luttwak, 1983). Moreover, Robert Art and Kenneth Waltz both extrapolate that “the probability of war between American and Russia or between NATO and the Warsaw Pact is practically nil precisely because the military planning and deployments of each,

The not-so wild 1950s frontier were vastly sprawling lands comprised of gorgeous geology. The dry ecosystem inspires carnivorous creatures to roam the desert in search of their next meal. The sun bleeds into cascading mountains within the day, blurring the horizon with harmonious colors, leaving no doubt of natures undisturbed beauty. Those moments, were then interrupted with a blinding light. An accession of a mushroom cloud followed behind, indicating the destruction of all in total annihilation. The aftermath leading to the extinction of life as we know it.

Since the creation of nuclear weapons, nuclear force has only been used twice. Nuclear bombs were dropped on both Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Japan by the United States, ending World War II. The destruction, both material and living, produced a sudden realization of the consequences of using nuclear weapons. Following World War II, states soon realized the potential of and the dangers of nuclear weapons. With the potential to destroy entire states, people and all, in a matter of seconds, treaties and agreements were quickly drawn up to prevent the use of nuclear arms. Treaties such as the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Force Treaty (INF), the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START), the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT), and the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) called for a decrease in the production and a cease in testing of nuclear weapons to prevent the possibility of nuclear world wars and unnecessary destruction to the environment. When a nuclear bomb explodes, there are immediate effects from the nuclear blast such as thermal radiation and several kinds of radiation. Long term effects also occur such as fallout which destroys the climate and atmosphere of the earth. As such, the United States and Soviet Russia entered a Cold War once both states obtained nuclear capabilities since neither one would gain anything by using nuclear force because of mutually assured destruction (MAD). MAD meant that if one state were to launch a nuclear attack, the immediate

“Nuclear weapons are unique in their destructive power, in the unspeakable human suffering they cause, in the impossibility of controlling their effects in space and time, and in the threat they pose to the environment, to future generations, and indeed to the survival of humanity.” – International Committee of the Red Cross, 2010

In a speech to the US Congress, Winston Churchill once said, “Be careful above all things not to let go of the atomic weapon until you are sure, and more than sure, that other means of preserving peace are in your hands” (1952). Although said more than 60 years ago, this quote brings up a common controversial issue argued perhaps more today than ever before: the existence of nuclear weapons. Each opposing side feels that either the existence or the proliferation of nuclear weapons will lead to global chaos and destruction on a scale larger than ever before. In a global situation like this, the United States is commonly looked to as a leader, because of the high number of nuclear weapons that they possess. In response to this, the United States should not pursue the goal of nuclear disarmament at home and abroad.