Global Security , a Paradox

Can nuclear deterrence work in making the world safer?


Throughout the history of mankind, fellow humans have found a way to unleashed some of the most barbaric, and callous acts on one another. A few have stood out and their after effects are sometimes felt even on to present time. One such was the dehumanizing European African Slave trade, and the eventual enslavement of millions of Africans and their descendants in the Caribbean and America. The other was the Jewish Holocaust conducted by the Germans. Within recent times we saw two blatant acts of genocide committed in the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda in full view of a reticent Europe, and the United Nations. Although these several acts from irked the conscience of many, it was the unloading of two atomic bombs by America on the Japanese people that shook the world and the sensibilities of all. This superior technology resulted in massive instantaneous devastation of the two cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.[1] It also saw the demise of close to 200, 000 lives, many of which were innocent civilians. [2]Most importantly, it did achieve its main objective as planned by then Commander in Chief President Harry S. Truman. It was able to finally coerce the Japanese military and government hierarchy to surrender and end a war that was destine to cost many more American military lives had it prolonged indefinitely.
The fall out from the introduction of this powerful technology in the equation was tremendous. It saw a tremendous spike in interest for nuclear weapons technology by most nations. The United States military power improved and it status already embolden by Europe’s destruction, spiraled upwards to Superpower levels even more. The United States and the USSR began a nuclear arms race and a 40 year ideological Cold War. An interesting fact emerged; no country has since used the nuclear technology on another to the same degree. The two Cold war protagonist huffed and puffed but never used the weapons against each other in fear of the consequences. It did not however stop some 291 interstate conflicts from being fought with conventional arms- many proxy wars of the super powers themselves - that eventually resulted in 22 millions lost lives. [3]
Even after this most convincing data about the amount of conflicts across the globe, there are social scientist that subscribe to the view that the acquisition of nuclear weapons is the best partway to peace. By this they obviously mean, nuclear peace. It should be noted again that none of the eight known countries that knowingly have nuclear weapons ever used it against each other, and this has therefore created a new dilemma. Some new emerging countries with the means at their disposal are tempted to acquire the technology primarily because of this fact. In addition, they have become fearful for their own safety especially since the protective umbrella that existed under the Cold war protection has since evaporated at “the end of history.”
Libya and Iraq are no longer interested, one voluntarily, the other by force. Iran and North Korea are presently under the radar as tensions and post Cold War power realities are seen to prevail in their respective regions. These countries are tempted to resist what they perceive as ethno –centric, Western, neo- imperialist thinking that tend to imply that they as third world countries lack the rational calculations of their more developed counterparts to acquire nuclear technology and use it for peaceful purposes. [4]
The ugly specter of global terrorism has raised its head, and the world is in panic mode. One of the rumors that is often repeated and has fast been accepted as absolute truth is that these are rouge states that sponsored terrorist in the past, and are still terrorist sympathizers. Should they be allowed to follow the Non Proliferation Treaty international law, and get access to peaceful nuclear energy technology like half the world did, they might allow it to get into the hands of dangerous non- state -actors that can possibly use it against the entire world. Apparently it was done before, by US ally and a country that today leads the war on terror - Pakistan, led by ‘nuclear globalization scientist’ Dr A Q. Khan. [5] No one promised an easy gateway to power and peace in “a Hobbesian world that has become according to nasty, brutish and short,”[6] especially with the 1945 introduction of dangerous nuclear weapons technology.
[1] Frank, Richard B. (1999). Downfall: The End of the Imperial Japanese Empire, pp. 285-287, New York: Penguin Books.
[2] Milton Terris, Nuclear Warhead Triggers, (Journal of Public Health Policy, Vol. 23, No. 4. (2002), p. 506.
[3] John Simpson, Nuclear Non-Proliferation in the Post-Cold War Era, International Affairs (Royal Institute of International Affairs 1944-), Vol. 70, No. 1. (Jan., 1994), pp. 17-39.

[4] Kenneth N. Waltz, The Spread of Nuclear Weapons: More May Be Better, Adelphi Paper No. 171 (London: International Institute for Strategic Studies, 1981
[5] Sharon Squassoni, Iran’s Nuclear Program: Recent Developments, Congressional Research Service Report for Congress, Department of Navy, Historical Library, DC, 05 October 2005
[6]Thomas Hobbes, Leviathan, Touchstone edition, 1997,New York http://oregonstate.edu/instruct/phl302/texts/hobbes/leviathan-c.html