Are we helpless against the nuclear threat?

This is a time of commemoration of a double terror that happened 77 years ago. In Japan's Hiroshima, and then Nagasaki, America dropped atomic bombs on August 6 and 9. In Hiroshima alone, 70,000 people had instant death in the conflagration. Between the two cities, 2.25 lakh human beings lost their lives in five months. It was followed by genetic diseases that continues through generations. That was the worst example of terrorism of all time - although not known by that name. In a pattern that American administrations evolved in later years, those massacres were also carried out by arraying two major lies. One was that there was no other way to defeat Japan. But, as was revealed later, the bombing attack was conducted after knowing that Japan had decided to surrender. And this was acknowledged in the US Strategic Bombing Survey. The decision to bomb Nagasaki on August 11 was changed by President Truman and the bombing was advanced by two days, which was reportedly to pre-empt Japan declaring surrender in the meantime thus depriving America of the 'opportunity' to bomb. Even after these two atomic terrorist acts, the Soviet and US forces dropped bombs across Japanese cities. And the reasons cited for this constitute the second lie. Most wars are justified by the claim that they are to put an end to all wars and to establish peace. That mantra during World War I that it was a war to end all wars was heard again during the Second World War - and even later. But the fact is that even after 77 years of US terrorism from then, the world is in the shadow of a nuclear war. A symbol of the threat of nuclear catastrophe is the 'Doomsday clock' that is set in January every year. Over the last three years, this has been giving the indication that the earth is standing very close to total annihilation, i.e. just 100 seconds. It was after the team of scientists confirmed this in January this year that another two serious incidents took place - Russia's Ukraine invasion and the US House of Representatives Speaker's visit to Taiwan. Both of these are proving to be proxy conflicts through subsequent events.

If in Ukraine, it is the US and Russia that confront each other, in Taiwan it is between the US and China. And all these three big power nations have nuclear arms. In none of the arguments and counter-arguments do the three nations even give a hint of an anti-nuclear arms stand which were expressed earlier. Not only that, Russia has taken care to even hint that it will not hesitate to use nuclear bomb if necessary. A similar wicked indication is visible also in the Chinese threat that it will go to any extent to avenge the provocation American has created. Most of the countries possessing nuclear arms are in a state of conflict. Figures tell that Russia has 6255 nuclear weapons and America has 5550. Other countries also have nuclear arms ready for the triggering finger, such as China (350), France (290) Britain (225), India (150), Pakistan (165) South Korea (50) and Israel (90). And at the helm in many of these countries are rulers incapable of taking wise decisions. The world is in such a state of affairs that no one can guarantee Hiroshima and Nagasaki will not be repeated. On August 6, UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres arrived in the Peace Memorial at Hiroshima and warned about the nuclear threat. It was a day prior to it that Russiam shells hit Ukraine's nuclear energy plant.

There are more than one international accords to prevent the absolute terror of nuclear war, but that has not served any purpose so far. Although the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) was ready in 1968, three nuclear powers - India, Pakistan and Israel - have not signed it. North Korea, which had signed it, later announced its withdrawal. The Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) was ready in 1996; but it will come into force only if 44 more countries sign it. Among those yet to sign are India, Pakistan, US and China. In short, even while standing on the brink of catastrophe, different nation states are in the prison of short-sighted and narrow interests. It is a stark misfortune that the present-day world is bereft of the wisdom, ideology or leadership that can offer effective resistance against the immediate threats of a nuclear war, pandemics or climate crisis.