As we watch the atrocities being committed in Ukraine, it’s understandable to be frustrated. I’m frustrated. We want to intervene. We want to stop Russia in its tracks and help the Ukrainians defend their home. Conventionally speaking, the Russian military couldn’t hold a candle to the U.S. military. Even the credible threat of U.S. intervention would likely deter Putin from invading his neighbors.
But nuclear weapons mean that we don’t have the luxury of thinking conventionally. In humanity’s awesome capacity to create, we created the nearly limitless power to destroy. Now, multiple world leaders possess the ability to start a nuclear war that could end life on Earth as we know it. And one of those world leaders is Vladimir Putin.
“But Hank,” people tell me, “we can’t put the genie back in the bottle.”
They’re referring to the fact that the doctrine of mutually assured destruction is what prevents either side from launching their nuclear weapons in a military standoff. If we disarm, then what’s to stop Russia or China from attacking us?
There’s a certain sense to this argument, sure. But consider the possibility that people in Russia and China are saying the exact same thing: “If we disarm, what’s to stop the United States from attacking us?”
Everyone has an interest in eliminating nuclear weapons, and that interest is strongest if we all do it together. Some people say that sounds too optimistic or fantastical. I say it sounds like hard work – very hard work – but doable work. And it’s work that I am committed to doing.
Not only would humanity be free from the threat of nuclear annihilation in a future without nuclear weapons, but people around the world would be safer from the whims of madmen like Vladimir Putin, dictators whose power is amplified by the weapons of mass destruction they control.