Sunday marked the 25th anniversary of what could have been a major step toward a world free of nuclear weapons.
The Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) was signed by U.S. president George H.W. Bush and Soviet president Mikhail Gorbachev, and it limited the number of nuclear warheads held by either side to 6,000.
At the time of signing, about 60,000 nuclear weapons were held by the nuclear-weapon states. The Bulletin of Atomic Scientists recognized this historic event by moving the minute hand of the Doomsday Clock to 17 minutes to midnight, the furthest it has ever stood from nuclear catastrophe. Unfortunately, the political momentum of that time has been lost, and the opportunity to eliminate the existential nuclear threat has been squandered.
The Doomsday Clock now stands at three minutes to midnight, the closest it has been to midnight since the height of the Cold War.
Currently, there are about 1,500 U.S. warheads on “high alert” status, meaning they can be launched within 15 minutes of the U.S. president’s command. One trillion dollars has been budgeted by the U.S. for modernization of its nuclear arsenal.
Included in this figure is the cost of a new nuclear air-launched cruise missile, which would be indistinguishable from a non-nuclear missile. This cruise missile would be a war-fighting weapon, not just a deterrent, and has significant destabilizing potential.
Other countries are engaged in similar modernization programs.
North Korea has announced that it tested a hydrogen bomb in January 2016, and it has every intention of continuing to develop its nuclear arsenal. A 2013 report from the International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War indicates that a limited, regional war between India and Pakistan involving 100 Hiroshima-size (15-kiloton) bombs would threaten the lives of more than two billion people through a nuclear-war-induced famine.
Conflicts in Ukraine and Syria have generated dangerous potential for inadvertent nuclear-weapon use. For example Turkey, a NATO member, shot down a Russian warplane that, luckily, did not contain nuclear weapons. This event was followed by a state-run Russian news agency stating that the U.S. would be reduced to radioactive ash.
Within NATO itself, the Incirlik Air Base in Turkey holds the largest nuclear-weapons storage facility, about 50 B-61 hydrogen bombs. Given the current instability in that region, there is growing concern that these weapons may be vulnerable to unauthorized or terrorist action.
Complete nuclear disarmament is considered to be the only certain way to avoid a nuclear catastrophe. However, little is happening at the political level that will lead to nuclear abolition in the foreseeable future. Canada could change things for the better, as it has a significant role to play as an international leader on nuclear disarmament.
• For a start, Canada could advocate within NATO for alternative security arrangements that do not rely on the possession of nuclear weapons and the NATO doctrine of nuclear deterrence. Indeed, the Cold War doctrine of nuclear deterrence as a prevention strategy no longer holds true in today’s complex geopolitical climate.
• Canada could push for the removal of U.S. nuclear weapons from Germany, Belgium, Italy and Turkey, as these weapons are perceived by Russia as a direct threat.
• Canada could urge the U.S. to stop and reverse the steady expansion of its ballistic-missile defence system.
• Canada could strongly propose an end to launch-on-warning policies, so that the immediate threat of nuclear weapons on high-alert is removed.
• Canada could emphasize the catastrophic consequences of any nuclear weapons use, and the global health imperative to abolish these weapons of mass destruction.
• Canada could oppose the modernization of nuclear arsenals by nuclear-weapons states as inconsistent with their legal obligation to disarm under the Non-Proliferation Treaty.
These are but six doable actions of many that are consistent with Canada’s historical role in the world.
Nuclear weapons have been eliminated in the past, for example, through START. Canada could establish its leadership role in the irreversible elimination of existing nuclear arsenals, and a timeline for verified implementation.
Talk about a legacy.
Jonathan Down, a developmental pediatrician in Victoria and a faculty of medicine member at the University of British Columbia and the University of Victoria, is a board member of Physicians for Global Survival and a member of the Canadian Network Against Nuclear Weapons.
