With the kind of weapons that are used commonly in modern warfare, all wars have become extremely destructive. Thus, sincere efforts must be made to avoid all conflicts. The destructive possibilities increase manifold and the risks for humanity become intolerably high when the possibilities of any confrontation between the biggest military powers arise. These powers have arsenals of nuclear weapons as well as other destructive weapons. Any possibility of a clash between the USA and Russia, or between NATO and Russia, is fearsome as the two sides together have close to 11,000 nuclear weapons in their arsenal.
If even 5 to 10 per cent of these weapons get used, the world comes very close to annihilation. Ninety nine per cent of humanity and 100 per cent of other forms of life have no role in the creation of this extremely high risk, but they are threatened by this. Is this risk real or imaginary, based on facts or highly exaggerated? The most disturbing news of recent times is that the risk has increased. This risk for humanity and all forms of life can be broken down to two factors. Firstly, what is the possibility that there will be a direct confrontation between the biggest military powers in the near future? Secondly, what is the possibility of nuclear weapons being used in such a confrontation? While there are several potential flashpoints, the risk is the highest in the context of the escalation of the Ukraine conflict. Recent developments have increased the risks.
Ukraine has faced several serious reverses in the battlefield. This can either lead to a higher desire for seeking early peace to avoid further harm, or it could lead to mobilizing for a bigger war. The response of Ukraine will depend on its powerful supporters in NATO. Several important NATO members have already responded that they are willing to increase their military support for Ukraine in two important ways. Firstly, they are willing to send their own soldiers to Ukraine. This was first stated by President Macron of France without attracting much support from other NATO members. But subsequently there has been more support from some other NATO members.
One statement that has attracted much attention recently was reported by the New York Times on May 16 (news report titled ‘NATO considers sending trainers to Ukraine’). This report quoted General Charles Brown, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, as stating that NATO trainers will eventually be sent to Ukraine and that deployment of NATO trainers seemed inevitable. The newspaper said that such a move could draw the US and Europe more directly into a war with Russia. Another barrier that is being crossed in terms of military support for Ukraine by NATO member countries is that increasingly not only are longer-range weapon systems being supplied, but it is being much more openly stated that there is no condition that these cannot be used for attacking mainland Russia.
Clearly this is dangerous escalation and the possibility of direct confrontation between Russia and NATO increases very significantly with this. The second important question that needs to be considered is that if the possibility of a direct confrontation between Russia and NATO has increased, has the possibility of the use of nuclear weapons in such a confrontation also increased? At present, Ukraine side has been weakened very considerably in military terms. But we can visualize a different situation with NATO member countries sending soldiers and trainers and supplying deadly long-range attack weapons.
Russia will increasingly feel that it faces an existential threat and in such a situation, the Russian nuclear doctrine provides for the use of nuclear weapons. However there is an equal possibility that when NATO senses this possibility, it may choose to establish its advantage by making the first nuclear weapon strike/strikes. Hence the possibility of both sides starting a nuclear weapon war exists, and once it starts no one knows where it will end. While Europe is likely to suffer the most devastation, the entire world can suffer very adverse impacts of radiation.
If a large number of nuclear weapons are used, this can herald a ‘nuclear winter’ threatening all life on the planet. Precisely because the dangers are so extreme, most people believe that the situation will never be allowed to escalate to such an extent by top leaders. But the fact remains that the situation has already been allowed to deteriorate and the world’s confidence is badly shaken. Besides, one should also consider the possibility that dangerous situations can spin out of control unintentionally. Of course, Ukraine is not the only flashpoint.
There are other flashpoints like the Middle-east and the possibility of a USA led conflict with China. Hence the situation is a very dangerous one and the best possible efforts should be made to minimize the possibilities of a nuclear war and World War 3. The world’s statesmen, individuals who command respect, should come together to counsel deescalation of tensions. They should set up an international non-partisan team for closely and carefully monitoring the changing situation, issuing timely warnings and suggesting remedial actions. In the slightly longer-term, the non-partisan peace and disarmament movement should be strengthened worldwide as only this can give us true hope for a safer and more peaceful world.
(The writer is Honorary Convener, Campaign to Save Earth Now. His recent books include Protecting Earth for Children, Planet in Peril and a Day in 2071.)