Nuclear Weapons Creating Peace

 Blake Burchill

International Politics Blog

3/1/22

A world without nuclear weapons? 

Thomas C. Schelling

Nuclear Weapons Create Peace

In 1945, the US used its newly developed atomic bombs to destroy Hiroshima and Nagasaki in Japan which helped end World War II. This event changed global warfare forever. Since then, it has been the goal of major world powers to develop nuclear weapons of their own so they are not susceptible to attacks on their state. States like China, Russia, the US, and others felt that to keep their status as major military powers, they needed to produce nuclear weapons. This has led to conflicts like the Cold War where the US and the USSR were constantly threatening to use nuclear weapons on each other which luckily never ended up happening. In today's era, there are thousands of nuclear weapons hidden all over the world and even though there are no immediate threats of global destruction, there is still a fear of some state leaders using the weapons for their gain. It is pretty much common knowledge that if nuclear war were to break out between two states, they would both be destroyed by each other's weapons which is one of the reasons why nuclear war has not occurred yet. In the Shelling article, he proposes a world where states disarm all of their nuclear weapons. This proposed the question of, is this even realistic and if it is, would it benefit or be detrimental to world peace. The idea that the disarmament of nuclear weapons would create peace seems justifiable but it is not a reality. Major military powers possessing nuclear weapons is the best way to create world peace and it will prevent any major wars in the future due to mutual deterrence. 

Nuclear weapons in the hands of multiple military powers seem like it would be the last thing we need to achieve peace but it is one of the only things stopping states from starting major wars. Before nuclear weapons were introduced, the motivation for war was to stop a certain state from invading another country or threatening the world. These wars were fought with mostly soldiers and without many militaristic advancements that would allow for mass destruction. There was no immediate threat to global destruction which made it easier to send military aid to a country in need. Now, If a war broke out and nuclear weapons were used, there would be the risk of global destruction which would not be beneficial to any state involved. This idea of global destruction makes states extremely hesitant to escalate a conflict to that level and creates mutual deterrence. In recent news, Russia invaded Ukraine and is trying to take over the state. While many countries want to intervene and push Russia out, they are very hesitant because Russia possesses nuclear weapons. If the US decided to send in its military to aid Ukraine, there would be worry that Russia would attack the US with nuclear weapons. This invasion could easily escalate to a large-scale war if it were not for the threat of Nuclear Weapon use. The Russian leader Vladimir Putin has even put its Nuclear defense on high alert to try and scare states from intervening which has seemed to work so far. Even if all nuclear weapons were disarmed, what is there to say that they would not be produced again right as conflict arises. As Schelling argues, “Every crisis would be a nuclear crisis, any war could become a nuclear war. The urge to pre-empt would dominate”. What is being said is that nuclear weapons will always be present and even though they introduce world destruction, they are one of the only things stopping another global war.