Worlds together, worlds apart - Nuclear Paradox

in #history6 years ago (edited)

In these series of blog posts titled "Worlds together, worlds apart" I would like to explore ideas and events of geopolitical nature. Matters of international affairs and geopolitical games are the very complex. There are no simple answers to many issues, yet complexity should not stop interest, engagement and discussions of these matters. These series are not intended to be academic works, nor would I claim factual/historical accuracy. Rather my focus is of philosopical nature and discussing complex matters in simplest terms.

Any idea presented should not be interpreted as a representation of peoples but of geopolitical players. Interests of all peoples of the world are similar: tranquility, food, shelter, family, individual liberties, human rights, justice and peaceful societies in general. However, interests of geopolitical players do not always align with these core notions. Geopolitics is often dictated by ambitions for power, influence, and national interests.


TL;DR

While 20th century went into history as the era of massive advancements in science and technology, incredible achievements in many various disciplines, the growth of and in humanity, bringing the worlds together; at the same time 20th century witnessed two World Wars, a Cold War, and several local wars. History is filled with wars: kingdoms, empires, countries fought various wars throughout the history. Often times aggressions started with economic and military advancement. The World Wars were of a massive scale, destructive and devastating for the entire world. It didn't take long for the World War II to start after the end of the World War I. Second World War lead to the invention of a nuclear bomb.

Today, nuclear weapons are thousand times more powerful than the one we had half a century ago. If there is a war at the scale of World Wars, the world as we know it would cease to exist. Hence, nuclear weapons pose a great threat to the existence of all of humanity. Paradoxically, nuclear weapons are what saved us from another World War happening. Instead, we had the Cold War. Do nuclear weapons present danger or safety? or both?


Race to create a nuclear weapon

Nuclear fission was discovered in 1939. Very quickly after the start of WWII, the Allies were thinking, We can harness nuclear fission to do one of two things: create power or make a bomb. Einstein and a group of physicists who’d escaped Germany began research as early as 1940, assembling supplies and trying to figure out whether an atomic bomb was feasible. The exact same thing was happening in Germany. A German physicist named Kurt Diebner was the spearhead of the program. He recruited a number of physicists, among them Nobel Prize-winner Werner Heisenberg, who began doing the basic research, getting heavy water and figuring out, like the Allies, how to create a reactor and a bomb. By 1942, they were all, in essence, in the same place.
source

In 1940 Nazi Germany occupied Norway and got control of a heavy water plant in Vemork, Norway which played a crucial role in Nazi nuclear energy research and atomic bomb program. Nazis were planning to use heavy water as a moderator instead of graphite. One event during the war played a significant role, that was the sabotage and destruction of heavy water plant in Vermork, Norway. If it wasn't for the heroism of Norwegians in passing intelligence to Allies and carrying out the operation Gunnerside in 1943 sabotaging heavy water plant, it was highly possible nazis could have won the nuclear race and the war.

The United States in cooperation with the United Kingdom and Canada had a secret project under the codename Manhattan project for research and development of nuclear weapons. Interestingly, the project was also kept secret from their ally the Soviet Union. Even Allies had trust issues with each other, at the same time all players had strategies in place for after war affairs. Soviets started their own nuclear program during the war, however, their program heavily relied on intelligence gathered by their spies. In the end Manhattan project produced an atomic bomb. Although the project was kept tightly secret, Soviet spies manage to steal enough intelligence to advance their own program.

In August of 1945, the United States drops atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, which goes into history as one of the greatest tragedies caused by the mankind. Some argue, these bombings were necessary to end the Pacific War, as Japan would not surrender. Others say this was to show the Soviets the military might of the United States and completely unnecessary. Exactly 4 years after the bombing the Soviet conduct successful tests of their own nuclear weapon. After the World War II two super powers emerged: the United States and the Soviet Union. Rivalry for geopolitical, ideological, and economic influence around the world spread as the world has never before. Both players being nuclear powers now couldn't risk direct conflict, instead several proxy wars in various regions were launched.

The Cold War lasted from after the end of World War II up until the collapse of Soviet Union. Some would say it has never ended. Nevertheless, during the time of bipolar world influence the threat of emergence of the new world war was very frightening as it would probably be the last world war that world has ever seen. Commonly accepted nuclear doctrine was mutually assured destruction. In the event of direct conflict, both parties would launch full scale nuclear attacks against each other and allies.

Doomsday Clock

doomsday.jpg

source

In 1947 Chicago Atomic Scientists began publishing newsletters which turns into a magazine Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. They come up with a symbolic representation of nuclear danger that is displayed by the clock. It started out with 7 minutes to midnight. Midnight representing imminent nuclear danger. Clock hand is changed based on important geopolitical events. Currently it shows 2 minute to midnight, that is the closest it has been.

There is no more Soviet Union. The world does not have bipolar super powers. Yet, nuclear weapons race has not stopped. It has actually resumed with reemergence of tense relations between the United States and Russia. Nuclear doctrine of mutually assured destruction is taking a new shape. Russia is considering new doctrine of possible isolated preemptive nuclear strikes at military facilities. This may cause a response changes in doctrines of other geopolitical players.

Today, there are more nuclear powers. Danger of new conflict that can escalate to nuclear one is more real than ever. Existence of nuclear weapons saved the world from the next World War. At the same time it remains to be one of the greatest threats to our existence. I am optimistic that one day world leaders will come to their senses and choose cooperation instead of conflict/rivalry and utilize brilliant minds once again to come up with a better solutions for mutually beneficial coexistence. In twenty first century, there are other instruments that can be developed and utilized to prevent future wars. There is not need to rely on nuclear weapons for safety.

Sort:  

Great article @geekgirl!

Do nuclear weapons present danger or safety? or both?

I believe both. They can act as a way to stop the enemies from attacking you, avoiding a war like you said.

which goes into history as one of the greatest tragedies caused by the mankind

I know America receives a lot of criticism for dropping those 2 atomic bombs. But it I think it is necessary to also take into the account the opinions of those who justify the attack, like this video from prager university.

In twenty first century, there are other instruments that can be developed and utilized to prevent future wars

There might be, but I don't know if they can be as effective as a nuclear weapon. Assuring your enemy of the fact he is gonna be destroyed if he attacks you is a very strong reason to not start any in the first place attack.

The dropping of atomic bombs is a controversial subject indeed. There are good arguments on both sides of it. But nobody really denies it was a great tragedy. In modern warfare, somehow having casualties of innocent people has become a normal and acceptable thing. In the past armies would work out their differences in the battlefields.

Maybe we are not there yet, but one day all geopolitical players will have to come to terms with an idea that they don't really have to be enemies/adversaries of each other. Strategies based on us vs them kind of concepts will not viable anymore.

I was just curious about this

Russia is considering new doctrine of possible isolated preemptive nuclear strikes at military facilities.

Is this the opinion of an analysist because I could not find any official russian statements about it.

Btw the doomsday clock is a bit more general: it represents how far we are away of a man-made global doom scenario

Regarding Russia's doctrine shift:

Russia’s Interest in and Plans for Decisive Limited Nuclear Use

Less well understood but possibly of greater relevance, however, is Russia’s interest in and development of capabilities for more limited nuclear use. Moscow is aware of its only partial success in fielding a modern conventional military and of that force’s imperfect ability to challenge the forces of the United States and NATO in a broader conflict as well as of the relatively narrow relevance of its strategic nuclear forces in situations short of the apocalyptic.

https://www.frstrategie.org/publications/notes/russia-s-evolving-nuclear-doctrine-and-its-implications-2016-01

Yes, you are right, doomsday clock nowadays also considers other scenarios such as climate change. However, 2018 change to 2 minutes still was mainly about US vs Russia conflict.

Thanks for the source. That is an analyst's report not a kremlin source. As far as I gather from the news the kremlin's official stance has always been to use them defensively and not preemtively.

Yes you are right again (sort of). Preemptively, I meant as a first nuclear striker, however as a response to conventional military attack. Escalate-to-deescalate is a significant shift nevertheless.

The main reason why there are still nuclear weapons is that it is impossible to un-invent them. If one side has them, then, by definition, the other must have them as well. The more countries that posses nuclear weapons, the more difficult it because to disarm; nuclear weapons are the great equalizer: they allow a smaller nation to stand up to a more powerful one.

Furthermore there are certain high-value targets that in case of a general war can only be destroyed with nuclear weapons, there simply isn't any alternative.

Finally, the military from various countries have been studying the possibility of destroying or deflecting asteroids and comets in case they should be a collision course with Earth. NASA has fielded some alternatives but none of these can actually be implemented in the short time we would have to deal with this kind of threat.

Can you remove #steemSTEM tag since this article is not about any STEM topic?

Mentor_3.png


[Update : Maybe I should have been more careful here. For future reference: I made a comment suggesting removing steemstem tag in @geekgirl ' s article. But it was unnecessary. ]

Actually, history is a science and thus belongs to STEM...

These series are not intended to be academic works, nor would I claim factual/historical accuracy.

@lemouth : What about this statement? I would like to get your opinion.

There may be inaccuracies in the post here and there, but at the end of the day it is pretty good (nothing is wrong with respect to what I know). Since this is not a scientific journal but a blogging platform, it is really fine.

Sure, if that bothers you.

I would prefer you keep it. Someone needs to support history and the steemSTEM project has the bandwidth to do so.

Your post is well written but I hate nuclear and they will never bring peace, If there is no nuclear weapon from first , then no body would fight about it now, and last but not the least, I do not think that the past wars are worse than what the world's living now.

To listen to the audio version of this article click on the play image.

Brought to you by @tts. If you find it useful please consider upvote this reply.

@geekgirl, according to me A nation in maintaining its life follows the law of nature, meaning that strong or superior will survive. Geopolitics as the scientific basis for political action in maintaining survival to gain a living space.

Coin Marketplace

STEEM 0.26
TRX 0.11
JST 0.033
BTC 64383.21
ETH 3098.60
USDT 1.00
SBD 3.89