IT is extremely sad that at a time when accumulation of thousands of nuclear weapons has created conditions wherein a world war or something similar to it can destroy most life on the globe, the possibility of such a scenario continues to haunt the humanity. Even experts who are not warning more openly about this are not ruling out this possibility. Humanity should have been in a position by now to entirely eliminate the possibility of a devastating war.
Instead, in recent years, say the last five years or so, the probability of this has increased, particularly in the context of some of the worst escalatory or provocative moments of the Ukraine war which appeared to be bringing more than two nuclear weapon countries close to the point of direct confrontation (as distinct from a proxy war).
There have been several speculations about how extensive and destructive the third world war may be. The possibility exists that it may be an all-destructive war, destroying most life on earth and its life nurturing conditions as well to a large extent. The destruction of life nurturing conditions being caused over a period of decades at present by about a dozen serious environmental threats may be accomplished within a few days by ‘history’s most destructive war involving nuclear weapons.’ While the Second World War ended with the widely condemned dropping of two atom bombs, another nuclear catastrophe seems to be on cards. This war may not be a world war in the sense of spreading to the entire world but the destruction caused by this is likely to spread to the entire world through various impacts like the nuclear winter.
If the new war is likely to be so destructive, why hasn’t enough been done to completely eliminate this possibility, at the level of the great powers, at the level of the United Nations? Why have they allowed a situation to develop in which the probability of such an all-destructive war has actually increased?
This brings us to the wider crisis of world leadership not being able at all to respond to emerging big challenges and threats in adequate, responsible and rational ways. The absence of a wider wisdom (beyond trying to be very clever about petty and narrow concerns) is evident every day in several contexts but this will have the most tragic consequences in the context of their failure to prevent the most destructive war ever. A world armed with thousands of nuclear weapons, with the destructive capacity of decimating all life, should have an enlightened leadership and governance systems capable of either eliminating such weapons over a period of time or ensuring that these will never be used in highly destructive ways (the first option is surely the better one). But some of the world’s most powerful leaders have worked instead to increase such threats in recent times, to dismantle whatever fragile protective structures had been created, instead of strengthening them.
There are several serious problems and tendencies which are increasing the possibilities of an all-round nuclear conflict. As one or more of great world powers reject a multipolar world and instead remain obsessed with securing their own dominance, they may seek not just their own advance but also pursue the course of causing harm and obstructions for their closest rivals and competitors. This can also happen at the level of regional powers, but the aggressions involving the great powers of the world can have the most serious implications. Unless they can agree to peaceful co-existence, which is not happening at the moment, their confrontation can move beyond the various proxy wars that have been fought towards direct confrontation and war, and this in turn can involve the use of nuclear weapons, particularly in times of one of the sides facing an existential crisis.
In fact, proxy wars with the ever-increasing hand of the real provocateur or opponent becoming more and more obvious and threatening can at some stage spill into direct confrontation between the bigger powers or the great powers.
The international discourse is largely based on which country can dominate more, can exert more power and influence, can gain more resources and benefits at the cost of others. This often leads to what can be done to harm or adversely affect close rivals and close competitors. Such aims increasingly guide those holding top positions and concentrating a lot of power in their hands. Such tendencies can easily lead to confrontations and crisis situations from time to time which in turn can spiral out of control.
Wars and conflicts have shown a tendency to last longer while the possibilities of the United Nations or others bringing peace at an early stage have been decreasing. The most dangerous recent war could have ended within two months but the negotiations for ending the war involving Ukraine and Russia which had reached a very advanced stage were sabotaged by those interested in prolonging their proxy war.
The extremely powerful military-industrial-politician-think tank complex, with its huge corruptions and grip over decision and policy-makers, has emerged as a constant instigator of forever wars which at certain stage can spiral out of control to become all-destructive.
Weapon systems have been becoming more complex and several experts have drawn attention to the possibility of accidental start of the big war due to misunderstandings relating to the launch of highly destructive weapons by the other side, or other somewhat similar factors. AI weapons have added to the high risks.
In addition, there is the risk of what this writer has been calling the X factor. This refers to the capacity of one of the great powers to acquire some very exceptional weapon systems ahead of others and then having a strong tendency to use these against the closest rival before the latter can acquire somewhat similar weapon systems.
Thus, there are several factors at work today that increase the possibilities of a destructive nuclear conflagration. However, an all-destructive war can still be avoided with the highest priority being given to this most urgent of all tasks. There should be a strong, well-coordinated, continuing world campaign, supported by the UN and world’s leading experts committed to peace, taken forward by peace and social movements, particularly youth and women organisations, that the possibility of an all-destructive war should completely end.
Towards this objective, all forces of peace should work overtime to end the most high-risk wars and conflicts led by the Russia-Ukraine war, as early as possible on a note of durable peace and goodwill.
The efforts for elimination of all nuclear weapons of mass destruction, or at least for eliminating the possibilities of their actual use, should increase very significantly.
The governance systems at world level should change at world level to eliminate the possibility of an all-destructive war and in addition also to check all other serious threats to life-nurturing conditions of our planet. In my book Earth Without Borders, I have examined several such possibilities but the great scholars of the world will no doubt have many better ideas.
Fourthly, value systems both at the level of policy-makers and common people should change significantly in favour of world peace and safety of all people, including future generations, and all forms of life. Such value systems of peace, safety of all and cooperation should be strengthened at the level of families, communities and educational institutions. These should be an integral and very important aspect of education in schools, colleges and universities.
The United Nations should be reformed and strengthened to be able to make an important contribution to all this. The peace movement at all levels should be strengthened to be able to contribute to these efforts in sincere and significant ways, rising above all narrow considerations.
————
Bharat Dogra writes extensively on environment, development and welfare issues. The views expressed here are the writer’s own, and Clarion India does not necessarily subscribe to them. He can be reached at: bharatdogra1956@gmail.com
