The nuclear peril

The nuclear peril - my Manila Times column for Sunday, October 13, 2024.

This topic isn't discussed enough, in my opinion. I think the reason for that is there are more people alive today who did not live through the Cold War, and therefore, the pervasive fear of nuclear destruction is gone. Somehow, it was that fear -- the same fear for everyone -- that kept us from destroying civilization. 

The four "flashpoints" I talk about in this column are all relatively low risks at the moment, fortunately. They are frightening because their risk is not zero, but the probabilities of them happening are still pretty low. Perhaps a 20 percent chance for the most likely one (Russia), and 5 percent for the least (North Korea). 20 percent, however, is alarming enough for the US and its NATO allies to take precautions; reviewing operational plans, speeding up maintenance work on weapon systems, and attending to force readiness. 

The risks will stay that way, and perhaps (but not necessarily) diminish gradually if Kamala Harris is elected president in the US. If Donald J. Selfish Dicksprain is elected, however, the riskiest scenario, Russia using a bomb in its fight with Ukraine, becomes almost certain. Maybe the Israel-Iran war flashpoint explodes, too, or some new flashpoint(s) develop. 

Unfortunately, I don't believe that simply relating the consequences of nuclear war, even doing so as graphically as possible, or describing the first-hand experience of living through the Cold War will make much of an impression and get the world back on track toward nuclear disarmament. Until something happens to give the world's current population that visceral fear of nuclear annihilation, the needle won't move. That's a worrisome thought.