A Way to Dismantle Nuclear Weapons Now
Only once before in the history of mankind has there been an opportunity to get rid of all nuclear weapons. We now have another chance. This chance appears to us now primarily for two reasons:
1. Communication Technology and 2. World Travel.
The first opportunity presented itself in the short period following WWII when the United States was the only country with atomic weapons. Truman’s generals realized that we had a window of many months to stop the Soviet Union before they too developed nuclear weapon capabilities. Some generals suggested a preventive war to knock out any potential threats in the Soviet Union but Truman found that idea morally repugnant. This second and new opportunity will not appear like the first confluence of events, but in the long run it may be a more effective method.
First we must look at the tools of language, the metaphors and mental models that we use to construct our thoughts and communicate these thoughts to others. Metaphors help to build stories in the minds of people with shared experiences.
They help create a believable story, a reason for action or changing direction. Metaphors such as “head” of state or the “long arm” of the law help us think about some situation more clearly, but it must have some connection to reality.
Three metaphors have been especially powerful in constructing stories about war and nuclear weapons (NW). “Scorpions in a Bottle” was an early and vivid metaphor used by Robert Oppenheimer to describe the stance each nation must take when dealing with the extremely high explosive energy of nuclear weapons. No one saw an easy way out. The acronym MAD for “Mutually Assured Destruction” became both a description and a justification for their continued existence.
During the Vietnam War, the “Domino Effect” was commonly used by government officials at all levels to warn against the systematic takeover of southeast Asia by communism. It created a certain mental image in the mind of everyone who had been mesmerized by a line of falling dominoes, conveying an unstoppable force.
A third metaphor is that of two gun fighters like the ones seen in western movies. This image is sometimes used to justify and perpetuate the Nuclear Arms race. Gunfighters, of course, cannot lay down their weapons for fear that the other person will lie and take advantage of the situation.
Metaphors can mislead or be incomplete however. In the movies, the camera point of view supports the idea that there are only two fighters. This implies that neither of them can risk laying down their weapon. In real life these two gunfighters would be surrounded by a crowd of onlookers, some of whom would have guns themselves and be in a position to demand that the gunfighters put down their weapons – or they will not make it out.
This enlarged metaphor shows a pathway out of the NW dilemma. Because there are more people in the crowd and in scattered positions, there is no need for the gunfighters to mirror each other’s behavior as the weapons are laid down. It does not require the coordination of endless negotiations. Each can do it alone, now.
We might refer to the people with guns in the crowd as “Escorts” and the gunfighters as “Guests”, those people with their finger on the Nuclear Button. Escorts may invite Guests to DINNER (DIsmantle Nuclear Now because of Existential Risks]. Along with the Invitation to DINNER is a Promissory Note that states “IF – and only IF – any Nuclear Weapon is detonated as a weapon of war, anywhere in the world, we will take you out. We will take out you, your family, and your friends.” The feedback and invitation only needs to be to the people with their finger on the button and those around them. It must be believable to those Guests. So it must be both personal and public. Names of the Guests and some, but not all, of the Escorts can be published in any mainstream or social media.
The goal of The DINNER Plan is to push leaders and those around them to engage in discussions and action to dismantle nuclear weapons. The silence on this issue, one of the most important issues of our time, is not natural, unless they have already pondered it and simply do not see a way out. We need our leaders and those around them to think, talk, and then dismantle all the Nuclear Weapons. If they do not, then we must push them to engage. With the DINNER plan in place there is no need to wait for other countries to dismantle their nuclear weapons.
Escorts and Escort Groups might send an Invitation to any civilian, military, or industry leader in any country who has agency and influence. Escorts will work in self-organized Escort Groups, from a few people up to dozens or even larger. They will be autonomous and may cross national boundaries. It is not a social club however, and they may spend minimal time communicating with each other.
Who are these Escorts? These are the fishermen who rescued Allied soldiers at Dunkirk. These are the people who participated in the French Resistance and modern day freedom fighters in Hong Kong. They are nurses, teachers, active duty soldiers or business people. Escorts can be other politicians too. Leaders will always be surrounded by potential Escorts.
How bad could it be, these nuclear weapons? Modern day nuclear weapons are up to 1,000 times more powerful than the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima. One modern nuclear weapon could kill everyone in a city of 10 million people, either instantly or over a period of weeks. Worldwide there are more than 10, 000 nuclear weapons, enough to destroy all life on earth several times over.
The “nuclear club”, those nations who have acquired or planning on building nuclear weapons, is growing. This increases the risk of nuclear war by accident, by misjudgment, by miscommunication, or ignorance of the power of these weapons.
Daniel Ellsberg studied risk associated with nuclear weapons for the RAND Corporation before he became famous for release of the Pentagon Papers. In his recent book “The Doomsday Machine”, he discusses his conversations with commanders in the field and others who had their finger on the button. What he found was a “chain of command” more loosely defined by these people than the rest of us on the outside could ever imagine.
Ellsberg also cites studies done that projected a “nuclear winter” should there be an all-out nuclear war. Exact numbers are an estimate of course, but it is thought that the ash and smoke thrown into the upper atmosphere would block 70% of sunlight for years, causing starvation of most humans and animals.
How does one know whether or not this is true? How does anyone know? Politicians themselves may not know, and it is unlikely that anyone from the nuclear arms industry would be honest on this question. If you really want to know, you must find people who have the same concerns and form a small group to find out. Only after a series of questions with further searching for answers can a better picture emerge.
Though expanding metaphors can sometimes be helpful, language that does not reflect the real situation can lead us astray. The use of the term “tactical” nuclear weapons now circulates among leaders in the military. But there is no such thing as a “tactical” nuclear weapon. The first nuclear weapon, whether or not it is called “tactical”, will be responded by 10 more nuclear weapons, and those 10 will be again responded with 10 each to make 100 and it will quickly be out of control. That is the logic of deterrence.
Then there will be no morning prayers. Then there will be no goodnight kisses or children playing. There will be no national anthem in any language, no starships exploring the galaxy, and there will be no more music. It will all be over.
Kissinger has said that everything beyond the first nuclear weapon becomes unpredictable. One can predict however, that democracy will disappear with the first nuclear weapon, without argument.
Clergy and leaders of any religion, those humble people who spend a lot of time pondering how to get others to look and think beyond themselves, play an important role here, depending on whether they give a thumbs up or down. This may test their own belief about whether a God, or spirit of God, exists in humanity. For unbelievers and atheists, any day is as good as any other for the world to end. For believers who view themselves as the caretakers of God’s Creation however, the thought of it all ending is unbearable, an unforgiveable sin.
Nuclear weapons have put us on a steep mountain and we are all tied together. The only way down may be to go back the way we came. That might mean an increase in the use of conventional warfare until we can get to a safer place.
Looking back on the first opportunity after WWII, Truman did have at least one other option. He could have made a public announcement to invite – to coerce – the Soviet Union to agree to an International Inspection Group, or IIG, that would have the power to go anywhere, to see any building or lab, and take cameras for all to see. This would be backed up by sanctions and conventional warfare if needed, though that part would be carried out by other independent organizations. There will be nations and dictators who try to take advantage of this. They will try to bully others, but they cannot succeed. Look around. You will not escape.
This first opportunity to get rid of NW was highly asymmetrical because of a nuclear monopoly on the part of the US. Even with the much more symmetrical situation today however, it would still be possible to start an IIG and do it completely separate from the United Nations. Without an IIG and a DINNER Plan, nations will back off at the very suggestion of nuclear weapons as seen recently in the threat of their use by Russia in the invasion of Ukraine. China too could threaten nuclear weapon use as a cover for invasion of Taiwan. A DINNER plan gives an advantage to those nations who prepare ahead and are willing to use conventional weapons. In the end, it may benefit all parties by giving more time.
Peacemakers, the people who refuse to fight under any circumstances, should not view themselves as being closer to God than people who choose to fight for survival. Fighters, on the other hand, should not view themselves as more patriotic. Each has a role. The billions of dollars spent on NW could be much better spent on dealing with climate change, the other existential threat of modern life that, although slower, will be relentless if we continue on our present course. Both of these existential issues must be addressed. We can struggle for decades and consume many resources to deal with the climate issue, but if the NW issue is not addressed, it will all be lost, gone in an afternoon.
To paraphrase Old Testament writers, there is a time to build, and a time to tear down. This is the time to dismantle nuclear weapons.
JOS
March 2022
josuterdotcom 