Skip to main content

No such thing as a safe number of nukes

By Ira Helfand and Alan Robock, Special to CNN
updated 6:55 AM EDT, Thu June 20, 2013
STORY HIGHLIGHTS
  • President Obama will seek cuts with Russia of up to one-third of nuclear weapons
  • Writers: No such thing as "acceptable" level; even lesser amount could obliterate humanity
  • Writers: 300 warheads would kill 100 million; the rest would die from starvation, poisoning
  • We cannot maintain nuclear arsenals indefinitely and still avoid a nuclear war, they say

Editor's note: Ira Helfand is a past president of Physicians for Social Responsibility and co-president of the International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War. Alan Robock is a distinguished professor of climate science at Rutgers University and a fellow of the American Meteorological Society, American Geophysical Union and American Association for the Advancement of Science. He is editor of the Reviews of Geophysics, a geosciences journal.

(CNN) -- On Wednesday, President Obama took a meaningful step toward reshaping our nuclear arsenal in line with the reality of 21st-century security priorities. Standing at the Brandenburg Gate in Berlin, he announced that he would seek negotiated cuts with Russia of up to one-third of strategic nuclear weapons as well as address the issue of nuclear weapons stationed in Europe.

But we must understand that these proposed reductions are significant only if they are part of an ongoing effort to eliminate nuclear weapons altogether. If they serve to legitimize the indefinite retention of nuclear weapons at an "acceptable" level, the specter of nuclear catastrophe will continue to haunt humanity, for arsenals of this reduced size would still inflict unimaginable destruction across the planet.

A study by Physicians for Social Responsibility (PDF) showed that if only 300 warheads in the Russian arsenal got through to targets in American cities, 75 million to 100 million people would be killed in the first 30 minutes by the explosions and firestorms that would destroy all of our major metropolitan areas, and vast areas would be blanketed with radioactive fallout.

Ira Helfand
Ira Helfand
Alan Robock
Alan Robock

In addition, the entire economic infrastructure, on which we depend to sustain our population, would be destroyed. The transportation system, the communications network, the public health and banking systems, the food distribution network -- all would be gone. In the months after this war, it is probable that the vast majority of the American population who were not killed in the initial attack would die of starvation, exposure, epidemic disease and radiation poisoning.

Even with Obama's proposed reductions in nuclear weapons, the United States and Russia would each continue to possess more than triple the nuclear weapons required to cause that devastating scenario

But as unimaginable as these direct consequences would be, the effects throughout the world would be even worse.

A recent study by Robock, Oman and Stenchikov (PDF) showed that a nuclear war, even with the reduced numbers Obama has proposed, would cause catastrophic global climate disruption (PDF). The firestorms started by these nuclear explosions would loft 50 million to 100 million tons of soot into the upper atmosphere, blocking out the sun. In a matter of days, temperatures around the world would plummet by as much as 20 degrees centigrade -- 36 degrees Fahrenheit -- in the agricultural regions in the interior of continents. The result would be a catastrophic failure of crops throughout the world and a global famine that could claim a majority of the human population.

Obama goes informal during Berlin speech

The existential threat to human civilization that nuclear weapons would still pose does not mean these proposed reductions are not useful. On the contrary, they are a critically important step to reduce the nuclear danger, and it is essential that we implement them as rapidly as possible.

But we can't stop there. This effort must lead to multilateral negotiations involving all nuclear weapons states, negotiations that will produce a nuclear weapons convention banning these weapons once and for all. These negotiations will not be easy, and the treaty they produce will have to be a hard-nosed agreement that establishes mechanisms to verify and enforce compliance. But we don't have an alternative.

Some say it is unrealistic to think we can eliminate nuclear weapons. But in truth, it is unrealistic to think we can maintain nuclear arsenals indefinitely and still avoid a nuclear conflict.

The Cuban Missile Crisis 51 years ago brought us to the brink of nuclear catastrophe. Further, we know of at least five occasions since 1979 when either Washington or Moscow prepared to launch a nuclear war in the mistaken belief that they were themselves under attack. The most recent near miss that we know about was in January 1995, a full five years after the fall of the Berlin Wall. On each of these occasions we were incredibly luck and a national security strategy based on luck is not a wise course of action.

As long as there are arsenals of nuclear weapons, we are living on borrowed time. We owe it to our children to eliminate them from the world, and we should start by implementing the modest proposals made by Obama in Berlin this week.

Follow us on Twitter @CNNOpinion.

Join us on Facebook/CNNOpinion.

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Ira Helfand and Alan Robock.

ADVERTISEMENT
Part of complete coverage on
updated 6:03 PM EDT, Tue August 19, 2014
It used to be billy clubs, fire hoses and snarling German shepherds. Now it's armored personnel carriers and flash-bang grenades, writes Kara Dansky.
updated 10:24 AM EDT, Tue August 19, 2014
Maria Haberfeld: People who are unfamiliar with police work can reasonably ask, why was an unarmed man shot so many times, and why was deadly force used at all?
updated 5:52 PM EDT, Mon August 18, 2014
Ruben Navarrette notes that this fall, minority students will outnumber white students at America's public schools.
updated 5:21 PM EDT, Tue August 19, 2014
Humans have driven to extinction four marine mammal species in modern times. As you read this, we are on the brink of losing the fifth, write three experts.
updated 7:58 AM EDT, Tue August 19, 2014
It's been ten days since Michael Brown was killed, and his family is still waiting for information from investigators about what happened to their young man, writes Mel Robbins
updated 9:54 AM EDT, Wed August 20, 2014
Sally Kohn says the Ferguson protests reflect broader patterns of racial injustice across the country, from chronic police violence and abuse against black men to the persistent economic and social exclusion of communities of color.
updated 8:42 AM EDT, Mon August 18, 2014
The former U.K. prime minister and current U.N. envoy says there are 500 days left to fulfill the Millennium Goals' promise to children.
updated 9:10 AM EDT, Mon August 18, 2014
Julian Zelizer says the left mistrusts Clinton but there are ways she can win support from liberals in 2016
updated 9:59 AM EDT, Wed August 20, 2014
Peter Bergen says the terror group is a huge threat in Iraq but only a potential one in the U.S.
updated 1:34 PM EDT, Sat August 16, 2014
Mark O'Mara says the way cops, media, politicians and protesters have behaved since Michael Brown's shooting shows not all the right people have learned the right lessons
updated 11:23 AM EDT, Sun August 17, 2014
Retired Lt. Gen. Mark Hertling says the American military advisers in Iraq are sizing up what needs to be done and recommending accordingly
updated 3:41 PM EDT, Fri August 15, 2014
Marc Lamont Hill says the President's comments on the Michael Brown shooting ignored its racial implications
updated 5:46 PM EDT, Fri August 15, 2014
Joe Stork says the catastrophe in northern Iraq continues, even though many religious minorities have fled to safety: ISIS forces -- intent on purging them -- still control the area where they lived
updated 6:26 PM EDT, Thu August 14, 2014
Tim Lynch says Pentagon's policy of doling out military weapons to police forces is misguided and dangerous.
updated 9:15 AM EDT, Fri August 15, 2014
S.E. Cupp says millennials want big ideas and rapid change; she talks to one of their number who serves in Congress
updated 7:57 PM EDT, Thu August 14, 2014
Dorothy Brown says the power structure is dominated by whites in a town that is 68% black. Elected officials who sat by silently as chaos erupted after Michael Brown shooting should be voted out of office
updated 7:49 AM EDT, Thu August 14, 2014
Bill Schmitz says the media and other adults should never explain suicide as a means of escaping pain. Robin Williams' tragic death offers a chance to educate about prevention
updated 11:05 AM EDT, Fri August 15, 2014
Nafees Syed says President Obama should renew the quest to eliminate bias in the criminal justice system
updated 4:24 PM EDT, Thu August 14, 2014
Eric Liu says what's unfolded in the Missouri town is a shocking violation of American constitutional rights and should be a wake-up call to all
updated 3:22 PM EDT, Wed August 13, 2014
Neal Gabler says Lauren Bacall, a talent in her own right, will be defined by her marriage with the great actor Humphrey Bogart
updated 6:56 AM EDT, Fri August 15, 2014
Bob Butler says the arrest of two journalists covering the Ferguson story is alarming
updated 4:35 PM EDT, Wed August 13, 2014
Mark O'Mara says we all need to work together to make sure the tension between police and African-Americans doesn't result in more tragedies
updated 4:06 PM EDT, Mon August 18, 2014
Pepper Schwartz asks why young women are so entranced with Kardashian, who's putting together a 352-page book of selfies
updated 7:08 PM EDT, Wed August 13, 2014
Michael Friedman says depression does not discriminate, cannot be bargained with and shows no mercy.
updated 11:25 AM EDT, Tue August 12, 2014
LZ Granderson says we must not surrender to apathy about the injustice faced by African Americans
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT