A World without Nukes

A World without Nukes

By Jacob Walls

A world without the threat of nuclear war sounds ideal and something that we should all strive for. North Korea of all people have been in conversations with South Korea about possibly giving up their nuclear weapons. North Korea would like to further these type of talks with the U.S. This should be a good thing for the world especially with the tension between President Trump and Kim Jong Un over nuclear weapons. However, I don’t think it is. I do not think that the world is ready to not have nuclear weapons anymore. I truly hope that one day, there are no nukes in the world, but that just isn’t realistic. It isn’t realistic for North Korea to give up their nukes in today’s day and age. North Korea has to be self-interested actors and keep their nukes. This is because 8 other nations have thousands of nuclear war heads ready at any moment to strike. North Korea just fairly recently (2006) started testing nuclear weapons. And even thought the amount of nuclear weapons North Korea has is unclear, it is nothing compared to the United States number of nukes. The practical solution for North Korea would be to retire/dismantle some of their nuclear missiles like other countries have done. But to totally give up nuclear weapons is irrational.

We live in a world of self-interested actors. No country or nation does something for the greater good of society. They do something in order to get some type of return back on it. The United States for example has an abundance of foreign aid to give out to countries but, we still see countries in turmoil across the globe. The Rwanda Genocide is a perfect example of countries like the U.S not stepping in at a time of need. Through the span of about 100 days, roughly 800,000 people were killed due to the cruelty of the Hutu's people. No country came in to help stop this bloodshed. The U.S didn’t even declare this genocide. White House staff members used terms like “acts of genocide” to try and cover up the fact that they haven’t done anything to stop it. The sad truth is that the U.S had no real interest in helping stop this genocide. Rwanda is a small country in central Africa. They have no minerals or “real” value to other countries. The U.S didn’t want to have a repeat of “Black Hawk Down” which occurred in Somalia where U.S troops were killed in the process. Rwanda was too much of a liability for the United States. There was nothing tangible for the U.S to gain by intervening in Rwanda. So, they simply didn’t. This is exactly why North Korea shouldn’t give up their nukes. North Korea will gain nothing by giving up their nuclear power and will be in threat of losing things.

The other 8 nations will still have their nukes the day after North Korea ever decides to give up theirs.   The strong take what they can, and the weak accept what they must. North Korea has to do everything in their power to not end up like the weak. We see how countries like the U.S has treated weak countries like Rwanda. If North Korea agrees to give up their nukes and stop developing their nuclear and ballistic missile programs, then they will be vulnerable. North Korea will be irrational if they give up their fire-power in the hopes for a “utopia of no nukes”. This just isn’t practical in the world. When the United States first tested their nuclear weapon in 1945, the world changed. Pandora’s Box was opened and what followed was decades of nuclear destruction.

Yes, countries have made strides to limit the amount of nuclear weapons they have by disarming and burying them but no nation has completely gave up their nukes or stopped their developmental programs for them. This would be irrational for states’ leaders to leave their country completely powerless when other countries still have weapons of mass destruction. I know the old saying, “someone’s got to start it first” could apply here but, that is easier said than done. No one wants to look like a fool and give up their nukes in the name of unattainable and unrealistic peace.