This month, the United Nations will vote on a global ban on nuclear weapons. In the run-up to this, the Dutch branch of International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War organized (IPPNW) a meeting. The theme doesn't seem to really concern citizens. The fact that there are nuclear weapons on Dutch territory is an open secret. But the threat is greater than ever, says Sico van der Meer of the Clingendael Institute.
Rising political tensions between East and West lead us to witness a revival of the Cold War (1945-1991). During that period there was an arms race between a limited number of nuclear-weapon states. Despite the Non-Proliferation Treaty, which dates back to 1968, the threat from nuclear weapons has not diminished. The number of states with nuclear weapons has grown from five (United States, China, France, Great Britain and Russia) to eight. “As a result, the chance of the use of nuclear weapons has increased rather than decreased,” says Sico van der Meer of the Clingendael Institute.
Red button
The three new nuclear powers are India, Pakistan and North Korea. “The threshold for using a nuclear weapon is unparalleled, because deploying one is actually suicide,” said Van der Meer. But the three new nuclear powers are not exactly the most stable states. “There are regular major escalations between India and Pakistan, with the countries openly threatening nuclear weapons. The threshold for using them is quite low in these countries. Pakistan has a military doctrine to use small nuclear weapons in minor conflicts, such as harassing an army column. This can easily escalate.” Van der Meer is also not reassured about the president of North Korea. “A Kim Jong-un with a red button in front of him is a very scary idea.”
The number of nuclear weapons has declined sharply since the Cold War, from 65,000 then to 15,000 now. The danger is therefore no less because the current nuclear weapons are modern variants, with a much greater destructive power. The bomb dropped by the United States on Hiroshima in 1945 is "a small one" by comparison, according to experts.
Currently, America is modernizing its nuclear weapons arsenal, costing many billions of dollars. Great Britain also has plans. The 15,000 nuclear weapons worldwide is a fairly stable estimate that experts have made, based, among other things, on the number of fissile material production facilities. Accurate calculations are problematic because nuclear warheads are also stored that, although they have been taken out of service, can still be screwed onto a missile relatively quickly.
Also, the number of eight nuclear-weapon states may not be exact. For example, experts suspect that Israel also has nuclear warheads at its disposal. Van der Meer:“Science assumes that a country has nuclear weapons if this has been demonstrated by the country itself. Israel never did that; they neither deny nor confirm and have never openly conducted nuclear tests.”
Transparent nuclear weapons state
The new nuclear powers are unreliable and the fuses are short, but Van der Meer also says he has little faith in the five 'old' nuclear powers. For example, the United States and Russia have an alarm system that can fire nuclear weapons before an enemy weapon has arrived. “People have to make decisions in fractions of seconds based on information on a screen.”
Accidents with nuclear weapons have occurred regularly in the past, and humanity has been through the eye of the needle several times. We know a lot about accidents in America because various archives have been opened there. “The US is a transparent nuclear weapons state. It is very different in Russia and we know almost nothing about incidents in Asian countries, not to mention North Korea.”
Terrorist organizations or individuals affiliated with the organizations have also shown interest in nuclear weapons in recent years. According to Van der Meer, another specter is cyber manipulation, in which a country or organization digitally hacks into another country's nuclear weapon systems.
Nuclear winter
It is precisely this uncertainty that makes countries without nuclear weapons, but also large groups of citizens and professional groups such as doctors and lawyers, very uneasy. Doctors at the IPPNW (the organization was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1985) emphasize that only a fraction of the current nuclear weapons arsenal is enough to cause a nuclear winter:the blockage of sunlight by soot in the atmosphere, with disastrous consequences for the global economy. ecosystems and food supply. Due to radioactive contamination of large areas, aid workers are powerless to prevent human suffering.
Small steps
Is a ban on nuclear weapons a solution? Van der Meer remains sober. “It will only be the non-nuclear-weapon states that sign any future treaty and NATO is not in favor of it now either. The political tide is not going well at the moment.” US presidential candidate Trump would not object to Japan and South Korea also becoming nuclear powers and threatened to bomb ISIS with nuclear bombs. Current US President Obama is unable to create support in his own country for signing a ban on nuclear tests. Russian President Putin spoke up about the use of nuclear weapons during the Crimean crisis and now we are in the middle of a Syria crisis, with tensions between the US and Russia nuclear powers running high.
Van der Meer therefore expects little change in the short term. In the best case scenario, disarmament will take place in small steps, starting with, for example, the withdrawal of nuclear weapon states from 'host countries', including the Netherlands. “A ban may be a good signal, but a nuclear-weapon-free world is still a long way off.”