The Nuclear Tensions of This Cold War
Director Chris Nolan’s film “Oppenheimer” continues to do big business at the box office this summer.
In addition, the film has spurred debate about nuclear weapons and our future.
Much has been written about the theoretical physicist who developed the first atomic weapon and passed away in the late-1960’s. The first atomic bomb, dropped on Hiroshima, killed over 100,000 people and the second atomic bomb, dropped on Nagasaki, killed nearly 80,000. The scale of destruction was so vast that no country has used this form of weaponry since then. Oppenheimer, and many others, including national security professionals, have realized the destruction of a nuclear war might mean annihilation.
The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty was signed in 1968 as a commitment by all state parties to disarm, at least on nuclear weapons, not share nuclear technologies in the military domain, and encourage peaceful uses of nuclear energy. The five countries that signed the NPT, the US, UK, France, former Soviet Union, and China were recognized as nuclear weapons states. All other countries that signed the NPT agreed not to develop nuclear weapons on the assurance that the nuclear weapons states would pursue disarmament and help in sharing nuclear technologies for civilian purposes.
No NWS worked towards complete disarmament of its nuclear arsenal, but there was some good news. The US and Soviet Russia reduced nuclear weapons through treaties such as SALT, START, and INF. In time, the gains were offset by the development of new and advanced, more potent, and precise nuclear weapons on the part of NWS. According to the 2023 yearbook launched by the Stockholm-based research institute Sipri, the number of operational nuclear weapons has now “started to rise” because of the NWS’ modernization and expansion plans. The total global inventory was estimated at 12,512 warheads, of which 3,844 were deployed with missiles and aircraft. Much of this is tied to the geopolitical competition between the Russia/China orbit and the US orbit.
A major reason for the failure of NPT’s was the nature of the nuclear regime it offered. The world was divided into nuclear powers and non-nuclear powers. The frustrations over the lack of progress towards nuclear disarmament, 90 per cent of which are in the possession of the US and Russia, led many states to adopt the Treaty on Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons in 2017. All five recognized NWS have opposed this treaty citing security concerns.
The current nuclear buildup brings two dangers — one is a planned nuclear war and the other is an unplanned nuclear war via accident. We saw the accident scenario about come true in the first Cold War. Now we’re in a second Cold War.
When will the nuclear buildup stop? I wish I could make a prediction. Strong nation-states must be strong internally, and the US is struggling internally with the American people in need of an expanded social insurance sector – more generous Social Security, expanded Medicare (to younger ages), more generous unemployment insurance, paid family leave, and paid sick leave.
We must work hard to find a diplomatic path to move the tensions of the current Cold War out of the nuclear sphere and into other spheres. In the first Cold War, key arms control deals weren’t cut until the US pulled ahead in the Cold War during the era of Soviet stagnation – the 1970’s. Let’s hope there’s a way we can put a simmer on the current Cold War and at least cooperate with our adversaries on the issue of nuclear arms. Otherwise, the buildup and tensions could go on for decades and might put a damper on a needed expansion of social insurance.
Jason Sibert is the Lead Writer of the Peace Economy Project
