Nuclear Deterrence is not Infallible
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 simple:
We may reasonably use a system whose failure would mean the end of human civilisation if that system is absolutely incapable of failing.
From this logical 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?
The answer to the first question, after a reasonable 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. In brief, health workers would be inundated by a tsunami of crush injuries, trauma, radiation sickness, and infections at a time when the supply of dressings, fluids, hospitals, transport, communications, and pharmaceuticals would have 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.
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 must follow logically that humanity must divest itself of these nuclear weapons of mass destruction. The reasoning is simple, unassailable and clear, but the way forward is shrouded in mist. How can we divest ourselves of nuclear weapons? Is it possible to get rid of these nightmare inventions totally? How could it be done?
A More Peaceful World 