Sanjay Verma
The accounts of human civilization so far show that every major conflict changes not only history, but also many socio-political equations including destruction and creation. Especially when it comes to weapons, along with their testing in wars, it also decides how weapons will be used in future wars. This threat has only increased in the midst of the Russo-Ukraine war. In this too, the most important question at the moment is the need for nuclear weapons. While Russia is repeatedly threatening nuclear war, Ukraine has been regretting its decision to hand over its nuclear weapons to Russia in one round. That is why there has been a strong discussion in a country like Japan that if a country attacks it, should Japan not think about the policy of possessing and using nuclear weapons?
Japan is the only country in the world that has suffered an atomic bomb attack twice. Japan knows very well how nuclear weapons inflict terrible wounds on humans and the earth. There are still no fewer people in Japan who keep the dreadful memories of the atomic bombings away from even thinking about a nuclear option. But the misfortune that Zelensky’s country has suffered in the war between Russia-Ukraine has led him to a remorse.
Thirty-one years ago, with the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991, Ukraine surrendered all its nuclear weapons to Russia. He did not have the slightest apprehension that this mistake of not keeping some nuclear weapons even as a security guarantee would cost him so much and one day Russia would launch such a big attack on him.
With no protection from NATO at the start of the war, Ukraine has also expressed that if it had nuclear bombs today, as a deterrent force today, it could stop a Russian attack by warning of their use. These changed circumstances created a discussion in Japan that from now on nuclear weapons should be seriously considered.
Of course, the major reason behind the discussion on the need for nuclear weapons is Russia’s attack on a nuclear-armed country and then the threat of nuclear weapons on it. It is not just a threat, but in the meantime Russia has also activated its nuclear attack unit. Russia also fired hypersonic missiles at Ukraine capable of carrying nuclear warheads. Signs of a nuclear attack on a non-nuclear state have been able to generate concern among policymakers and leaders around the world about how best to counter an attack from an aggressive and nuclear-armed neighbour.
Japan, in which this discussion has arisen, still has that shield from the US under a security-guarantee agreement, in which the US is obliged to respond equally to both conventional and nuclear attacks on Japan from anywhere. But what should those countries which do not have such security-guarantees from NATO or from any other nuclear power country including America, what should they do?
If we look at the South Asian region, then not only is a small country like Pakistan nuclear-rich in India’s neighborhood, but it keeps threatening to use atomic bombs every now and then. In contrast, there is a neighbor like China, which is now giving competition to America in terms of military power. Not only this, it also has an old border dispute with India. In such a situation, it is not redundant to assess that if China has been avoiding attacking India under its imperialist plans, then one of the major reasons for this is India’s nuclear power.
However, India’s two positions on nuclear power have been very clear. As such, India is committed to the peaceful use of nuclear power (for example, to generate electricity). And the second is that he will use these weapons only as a counter-attack, that is, he will not attack first. However, the policy of not hitting first has been considered in India as well.
But the issue is beyond India-Pakistan-China. A small country like North Korea has been conducting long-range missile and nuclear tests for more than a decade. The confrontation between North Korean dictator King Jong Un and former US President Donald Trump has left the whole world in doubt whether these countries should actually start a nuclear war.
By the way, today America and Russia have the most nuclear weapons in the whole world. By numerical ratio, Russia and the US have ninety-nine percent of the world’s total nuclear weapons. Due to this ratio, India has been calling the CTBT (Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty) which prohibits nuclear tests as discriminatory. India has always argued that developed countries developed this agreement to maintain their nuclear monopoly. This is the reason why India did not sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) apart from the CTBT.
In facts, America is only behind Russia in terms of nuclear weapons stockpile. Yet today its arsenal of nuclear weapons is thirty-one times that of Britain and twenty-six times that of China. These nuclear weapons have been with him for decades. In such a situation, America can destroy the earth many times whenever it wants. According to the report of the Washington-based organization Arms Control Association, Russia has five thousand nine hundred seventy seven and America has five thousand two hundred and forty eight nuclear weapons.
France comes third in this list. However, America-Russia can no longer increase the number of these weapons. The two countries are bound by the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty in Prague in 2010, which requires both of them to equalize their nuclear weapons arsenals. But the attack on Ukraine suggests that these countries can increase their nuclear arsenals and use them at any time.
There is also a side of nuclear weapons that after the end of the Cold War era, the greater purpose of these weapons has become to ruffle each other. India tries to keep its neighbors calm by showing its nuclear arsenal, while Pakistan shows its arrogance that India should not forget that it is now also a nuclear-armed country. But these weapons also hide a sinister truth within themselves.
That is, if such a situation ever comes that some country has used them somewhere, then today’s weapons are so destructive that not only can a single atomic bomb kill millions of lives in a few moments, but also a huge environmental impact. There will be destruction. Even if not used in such a situation, nuclear weapons are more destructive than before and the danger of their use is also many times greater than before.