The debate over nuclear weapons is hugely complex when viewed in terms of international politics and the weapons involved, but viewed in terms of logic, it becomes perfectly comprehensible.

We can use this simple logical statement as the reference point:

We may reasonably use a system whose failure would mean the end of human civilisation if (and only if) that system is absolutely incapable of failing. 

From this point of view, the discussion now depends on two clear questions.

First, would a global nuclear war destroy our civilisation?

Second, is it possible that the nuclear deterrence system could fail? 

1. Would a global nuclear war bring our civilisation to an end?

The answer to the first question, after any serious examination of the consequences of a nuclear war, is a confident “Yes”.

Medical services would be totally overwhelmed by the needs created by even a single nuclear weapon, let alone a global nuclear war, when about 13,000 weapons could be exploded.

In a global nuclear war, health services would be inundated by a tsunami of crush injuries, trauma, radiation sickness, and infections at a time when the supply of health workers, dressings, fluids, hospitals, transport, communications, and pharmaceuticals would have been reduced to nothing.

Worst of all, even the uninjured would be existing in a world darkened by Nuclear Winter caused by tonnes of soot and smoke sent into the atmosphere by the nuclear detonations. The darkness and cold caused by this layer would cause crop failures for many years. Along with dwindling supplies of food and clean water, and with armed, desperate gangs ready to take any food they could find, the idea of surviving a nuclear war is nothing but a delusion.

2. Is nuclear deterrence infallible?

No human system is infallible, and the deterrence system has always been a delicate network of electronic sensors, digital transmission, human operators, bureaucratic hierarchies, war cabinets and presidents. This is clearly a recipe for confusion, misunderstanding and disaster. Developments are making that network yet more delicate, with hypersonic missiles, detection of previously undetectable nuclear armed submarines, artificial intelligence, space weapons, autonomous nuclear armed torpedoes and defensive systems adding additional complexity and instability into the system.

On top of this, authoritarians are rising to power in many countries, including nuclear-armed United States and North Korea. 

The world has come very close to nuclear war on at least eleven occasions. The incidents are listed in this page.

Given that nuclear deterrence is not infallible and that nuclear war is not survivable, it follows logically that humanity must rid itself of these nuclear weapons of mass destruction. The reasoning is simple, unassailable and clear.

How can we rid the world of nuclear weapons?

There are three components to the answer to this question:
– Replace mutual paranoia with mutual trust
-Bring the military industrial complex under control
– Create and follow the pathway to Global Zero