FACTS againest MYTHS V0L-IV-6-1997
Item
- Title
- FACTS againest MYTHS V0L-IV-6-1997
- extracted text
-
VIKAS ADHYAYAN KENDRA
'97 VOL IV #6
INFORMATION BULLETIN
War or Peace :
The Myths of Nuclear Deterrence - I
"The atom bomb has not stopped violence. People’s hearts are full of it and
preparations for a Third World War may even be said to be going on”.
— M.K. Gandhi, in Harijan, May 9,1946
ith the five nuclear tests in May and the event
euphorically dubbed as "Technology Day"
India's nuclear technology has thus an official
rationality. But has it a clear reason?
W
How could a government in less than three weeks in
office make a total strategic defence review, take a
decision of such significance and give the scientist the
saffron light on April 10?
nuclear weapons for “stability” and domestic “growth”
exposes the mendacity and madness of such a
mindframe.
The nuclear mentality operates on the premise that
people and resources are expendable:
❖ Adivasis and other locals are exploited for
purposes of obtaining uranium;
❖ mounds of uranium tailings are abandoned by
mining companies without accountability and
responsibility for their clean-up;
The Government since then has made many hysterical
claims but failed to produce any
credible proof that the tests were
WE WANT BREAD,
necessary. Instead, it justifies and
NOT BOMBS & WARS
then attempts to rationalize the
tests, concealing it under the cloak
Jof
"national
security"
simultaneously intimidating the
public into believing that a nuclear
bomb is the need of the hour for the
“nation’s* best interest. Those
opposing are dubbed “anti
national”. This is nothing but a
mimicry of the prevailing nuclear
mentality, a prominent mental state
of the military industrial complex
of the US, NATO among others.
This nuclear mentality exhibits a
blatant disregard for human life and
environment. The accumulation of
a nuclear arsenal that is sufficient to
wipe out the entire world many
times over is in itself an indication
of an insatiable hunger for power.
The expansion and promotion of
❖
workers in nuclear energy and
weapons plants lack proper
safety regulations and work
with “permissible” doses of
radiation;
❖
media over-exposure and
propaganda by the Govt, sector
which design, build and operate
nuclear plants promotes more
use of electricity so as to justify
building more such plants;
❖
nuclear weapons are developed
for “national security” and “to
save our people*.
A major fallout over the nuclear
tests is the pressure from the nuclear
powers to persuade India to sign the
CTBT. To abide by the framework
of this Treaty it is necessary for
India to be a part of it along with
other countries. However, it must
be noted that the very framework
of this Treaty has severe limitations.
#6’97
FACTS against MYTHS
Page 1
FOR PRIVATE CIRCULATION ONLY
ft
For one, it has totally failed in addressing the fears and
concerns of a number of nations. Yet, what is of utmost
relevance, prior to any such step, is the need for a total
de-nuclearisation of the mind at especially the global
level in general and that of the. nuclear powers in
particular.
At another level in the name of respecting religious
tradition- communal outfits like the VHP are planning
to construct a Shakti mandir at Pokharan. The question
is: What will be worshipped in the mandir? A nuclear
bomb? The original essense of Shakti is to destroy evil
and injustice? What is to be worshipped at Pokharan is
not the acquisition of destructive powers of the nuclear
bomb. Instead there will be the nuclearisation of the
already highly communalized mind.
to’. What happens after an election, or a coup, when
that samqleader is replaced by a leader who is mentally
unstable and itching to use whatever weapons comes
to hand? There is also the risk of a nuclear war being
started accidentally, (see below) For this reason alone
there should be not only be a ban on any country owing
nuclear weapons but also computer simulation.
Finally, the line that deterrence is a necessary evil —
that is, the prevention of war through the threat of
retaliation—is equally dubious. It means, among other
things, that the capability and the will of the deterrer
must not be doubted, resulting in periodic display of
this ‘credibility’ on such occasions like Republic Day
parades apart from the constant update of its weapon
technology.
To understand this nuclear mentality that has brought
us to this point it is necessary to develop a clarity and
a vision of peace and a non-nuclear future for India.
The first line of the Pre-amble to UNESCO’s
Constitution states: “Since wars begin in the minds of
men, it is in the minds of men that the defences of peace
must be built”. Krishnamurthi also states, “peace will
come only when you yourself are peaceful, when you
yourself are at peace with your neighbour”. Side-byside it is also essential to examine the havoc the dubious
theory “nuclear deterrence” has generated and the
myths it spreads.
MYTH: Nuclear weapons serve only as deterrents at
best. So, no country will start a nuclear war because
no country really wants a nuclear war!.
MYTH : Nuclear Deterrence though a necessary evil
is still an imperative need. It prevents other countries
from attacking us.
5 October 1960 Radar malfunction in ballistic missile
early-warning system at Thule, Greenland, falsely
warns North American Air Defence (NORAD) head
quarters of ‘massive* Soviet missile approaching USA.
FACT : Not so! The reality is the other way around.
Having nuclear weapons in our country actually makes
us a target for nuclear attack from any enemy because
we pose a threat. Without nuclear weapons we would
not be so. Certainly, no nation would want to conquer
us using nuclear weapons because after a nuclear attack
our country would be largely uninhabitable as a result
of radiation. It is also worth recalling that despite
having nuclear deterrence these countries failed to win
the wars with non-nuclear countries (see pg.5). Because
nuclear weapons are exorbitantly expensive it becomes
necessary to cut down conventional armed forces (the
army, navy and air force). This means that we are less
well able to defend ourselves against attack from
another country.
Nuclearats argue that the weapons would never be used
as first-strike weapons, but only as deterrents, to warn
off a potential enemy. The problem with this stand is
that it assumes that all countries that have nuclear
weapons are governed by sane leaders. History has
shown that many leaders have been insane (e.g. Hitler,
Mussolini, Pol Pot, among others), and an insane leader
certainly would not hesitate to use nuclear weapons as'
a first-strike weapon. It is moreover meaningless to
maintain that a particular country has a ‘sane leader
who would never use nuclear weapons unless forced
FACTS against MYTHS
FACT: Even if this claim is accepted (most sane people.
do not. After all, someone is always starting a wArJ
somewhere or the other) what if a nuclear war should
start by accident? Most weapons and radar systems are
now computer-controlled. It would take just one error.
And what about the age-old enemy; ‘human error’?
The following were times when a nuclear war almost
started ‘by accident’1.
20 February 1971 Operator at NORAD headquarters
accidentally transmits emergency message ordering all
US broadcasting stations off the air by order of the
President. For forty minutes the operator cannot find
the code with which to cancel the message.
9 November 1978 False warning of limited missilj^
attack sent from NORAD headquarters to nationwide'
defence command centres. Interceptor planes scrambled
and missile bases put on alert.
3 & 6 June 1980 False alarm indicating Soviet missile
attack registered by NORAD computers at Colorado
Springs. One hundred nuclear-armed B-52s alerted for
take-off.
In addition to these there were also accidents involving
nuclear weapons that could have been interpreted as a
first strike by the other side:
2 February 1958 B-47 bomber in mid-air collision near
Hunter Air Force Base, Georgia, accidentally jettisons
part of a nuclear weapon.
4 June 1962 Thor ICBM (Inter-continental Ballistic
Missile) fails in high-altitude thermo-nuclear weapons
tests. One-megaton warhead destroyed over Johnson
Island Pacific Test Range;
#6*97
Page 2
20June 1962 Second Thor failure. Missile and warhead
destroyed at altitude of 320 km.
17 January 1966 B-52 carrying four H-bombs collides
in mid-air with aKC-135 tanker near Palomares, Spain,
and crashes.
21 January 1968 B-52 crashes near Thule, Greenland.
Foru H-bombs lost.
nuclear weapons prevented a war that would otherwise
have taken place. The absence of war between the US
and the Soviet Union may simply have been due to
neither side wanting a war. The experience of total war
in World War II was so tragic that this may have been
sufficient to prevent a major war2. Lest we forget: 20
million Soviets were killed in that war.
For deterrence to succeed between two adversaries,
both must pursue identical strategic policies (of relying
15 October 1969 B-52 carrying two nuclear weapons
on threats to protect
collides with KC-135
their
security).
near Glen Bean,
Nuclear Accidents
Moreover, they must
Kentucky.
According to Greenpeace as many as 51 nuclear warheads^;.. agree on levels of
23 October 1975
armed preparedness
Canister containing 20 ^44^Qyietand7tUS) were lost at sea.;7,'huclear:react6rs,(5?jj that can effectively
kiloton bomb falls WSpyiet/2US)jfrqmnucleaf poweredsubmarinesjare:under>; deter. Deterrence must
down test shaft at ' water. Referring,to.a book,(“The;Hidden:,-C^st::of
work 100 per cent of
Nevada Nuclear Test ; Deterrence: Nuclear'WeaponsAccidenTs’l.Pfaful'Bidwai "
the time. Otherwise, it
;
shows
how
its
author
documented
224
accidents
involving
Site.
is meaningless. Any
> nuclear weapons. This includebreakdown means
?8 September 1980
^Jbcket fuel explosion fJ^B^’kaccidehtal.pr un^nhorized.detdnatipnpfppssiEle2?’? disaster. In reality,
detonation of a nuclear weapon, which could lead
there is no such
due to ‘human error’
congruence and no
. to war;
blows a Titan I
shared understanding
warhead from its silo
❖ accidental detonation without a war risk to radio
on
policy
of
near
Damascus,
active contamination;
preparedness. For
Arkansas.
instance, one side
•> accidents to vehicles transporting nuclear
There are all examples
might seriously believe
- weapons;
from the Western side.
that in a situation
The Soviets are even j There have been 10 accidents of the first type, 59 in the : where war seemed
more secretive about h (second, 137. in the third and 4 in the last. In jhe second^ inevitable, the best
type, as many as 17 involved radio-active contamination, Jal course would be to
their nuclear activities
5 involved accidental detonation of a weapon and 112 ; strike pre-emptively.
than the West, but
their nuclear weapon '.(seizures, theft or loss of, a nuclear weapon pr,»yeapdnjj The other side may
■ component.
accidents include:
not. To illustrate3:
1968 A
G-class
ballistic-missile submarine sinks after an on-board
explosion in the Pacific.
4S&70 An N-class nuclear submarine sinks in the Eastern
'"Atlantic.
September 1974 A Kashin-class guided-missile
destroyer carrying nuclear weapons explodes and sinks
in the Black Sea.
August 1976 A Soviet nuclear-powered cruise-missile
submarine collides with the American frigate Vago in
the Ionian Sea.
October 1986 A Soviet submarine carrying nuclear
missiles caught fire and then sunk off the coast of U.S.A.
MYTH: Nuclear deterrence works. Look! Right since
World War II it helped prevent wars e.g. the Cold
War between NATO and the Warsaw Pact ended
because ofdeterrence.
FACT: The claim cannot be proved in the first place.
At best, the absence of war coincided with both sides
having nuclear weapons. It is illogical to deduce that
FACTS against MYTHS
❖
In 1965, Ayub
Khan felt that the Kashmiris would rise in
revolt against New Delhi if Pakistani troops
infiltrated into the Valley, and hence .it was
strategically to start a pre-emptive war with
India. The result is history;
❖ In 1987 General Sunderji's infamous
“Operation Brasstacks” almost provoked a
war with Pakistan;
❖ The Bangladesh War and the operation of the
Indian Peace Keeping Force in Sri Lanka was
also a strategic miscalculation;
❖ Again, countries that have run clandestine or
semi-clandestine weapons and technology
acquisition programmes — both Pakistan and
India fall in this category — there are serious
gaps in information on each others capabilities,
weapons stocks and potentials. Therefore,
there may be no shared understanding on the
levels of arming adequately for deterrence.
#6*97
Page 3
Further, deterrence is also characterized with a
runaway arms race, and is inherently unstable and
degenerative in character.
Thirdly, nuclear weapons are incredibly expensive,
accounting for one-half of or more of the costs of
nuclear programmes — over $2,500 b. in the US alone.
It is typically associated with fear and nervousness, and
proneness to panic.
Fourth, there is a real, serious risk of accidental,
unauthorized or unintended use of nuclear weapons,
and that very special measures are essential to reduce
that danger. Such measures involve close surveillance
through expensive satellites, radars and early-warning
systems; PALs (permissive action links) or computer
chip based safety devices to prevent assembled weapons
from being armed unless all necessary procedural
requirement are fulfilled), etc.
The point is simple. No amount of technological
sophistication could eliminate the risk of a nuclear
attack/war even among the most advance NWSs.
However, a closer examination will reveal that in the
ultimate analysis, deterrence fails in its real objective.
General George Lee Butler former commandant of
the US strategic Nuclear Weapons states that deterrence
was not the reason for the world surviving the Cuban
missile crisis. The only purpose that it served in this
case was that the fear it had unleased only ended up as
an obstacle to peace. Even though the Cold War is no
more and there is no Soviet Union, nuclear weapons
continue to proliferate. The US still has 10,000 and
Russia about as many. The fear today is no longer the
other state, but the other’s nuclear stockpiles. As long
as there are nuclear weapons there cannot be real peace3.
Wisdom of the ages and
history teaches that
nuclear fears cannot be
calmed with nuclear
weapons. The plain truth
therefore, is that there has
never been a weapon that
can offer a defence against
fear against which the
only defence is courage
and courage needs no
weapons to make its
presence felt.
The reference to the socalled proven deterrence
theory of the Cold War
over which a nuclear war
has not occurred may be
a long period in the
context of the lifetime of
an individual, but it is
insignificant
when
considering an act that
could destroy humankind. And even if it supposedly
worked in the Cold War years, that experience does
not foreclose the possibility of deterrence failing either
by accident or by design. In the bipolar world, the
world’s major nuclear arsenals had been controlled by
just two powers. Now that there could be a large
number of independent nuclear arsenals, the chances
of a nuclear mishap increases.However, this line of
thinking has no relevance to the Indo-Pak situation.
In the Cold War, there was never any dispute between
the two superpowers, except for largely their
propaganda purposes. In South Asia,however, there are
many outstanding problems that need to be resolved
including the delicate issue of Jammu & Kashmir.
Clearly, nothing but a political understanding will
really resolve these issues and not nuclear deterrence.
MYTH : India’s 5 nuclear tests have finally provided
the necessary nuclear deterrent and thus improved
national security.
FACT : Not so!
These five nuclear tests displayed merely India’s ability
rather than capability to carry out such tests albeit
these tests were at a much higher technological level
than in 1974. India has still a long way to go before
acquiring a credible deterrence. For instance, Agni will
have to be further tested and produced; weapons will
have to be coupled with warheads, a strategy for the
application of the weapons will have to be defined, and
a command control and intelligence system will have
to be put in place. Finally, will come deployment if it
is at all considered “Urgent”. Above all, acquisition of
nuclear deterrence will necessarily have to be combined
with an all-round development inspite of the sanctions.
Underground Nuclear Testing
Underground nuclear testing has triggered .
earthquakes in a number of places. In April 1968
underground testing of a series of 1,200 tonnes bombs
at the Nevada Test Site in the USA set off over 30
minor earthquakes in the area in the following three
days. Since 1966 the Polynesian island of Moruroa
(Meaning literally ‘place of a great secret’) has been
the site of over 80 underground nuclear explosion
.tests by France. More than 120,000 people live on
the island. On 11, September, 1966 a 120,000 tonnes
nuclear device was triggered there, producing
radioactive fallout which was measured over 3,000
km downwind, and seriously rocking the whole area.
More recently (in 1995) underground nuclear testing
in the western Pacific was resumed by France, despite
a massive show of public opposition and concern at
the health and environmental risks of the operation.
Source : Chris Park, The Environment,
Routledge, London 97.
FACTS against MYTHS
Deterrence is dependent
on certain fundamental
factors. A proven and
visible infrastructure of
weapons, delivery systeiA^
and command and contror
structures is the first
factor. The national
determination to accept
the costs of a nuclear
weapons strike is another.
The related myth on the
so-called national security,
the critical issues which
affected security since
1947 are however still
intact. Their resolution
has received a major
setback. Mutual distrust
and fears continue tp
prevail. No one is likely to
believe that the othersids
will honour a non-first-use
#6’97
Page 4
Interview: Anish Trivedi, host of F.M.’s Radio
Star programme, interviewed Cap. B.K. Subha
Rao, former Indian Navy Captain, Ph.D. in
Nuclear Technology, IIT, Mumbai, for his
views on the 5 Nuclear Tests. Excerpths :
Q. Has there been or will there be an effect
on the environment?
gS
A. Well in real science and technology sense
there is going to be an effect on the environment
but there is difference between an underground
and the test conducted in the air. The radiation
that is released by conducting the test over the
surface is much more. But the underground test
is going to contain a lot of this radiation. But to
say there is no radiation released to the
environment, there is no affect on the
environment is not true... When the test is
underground, When the earth is blown up
alongwith that all'the earth and the radiation
which contaminated, the earth particles travel
through the air to great distances. It is those
particles which contain the radiation. So that is
why we have seen in the news papers that the
Americans have deployed their aircraft to go
around the sub-continent to monitor radiation
levels in the air.
Q. Do you think there is likely to be
significant radiation increase?
A. Radiation increase is bound to be there; the
increase compared to the background radiation
that we have. But how much it is, that is going
to be monitored. I am sure our people also must
be monitoring that.
Q. Is it going to be harmful?
A. Well; it depends on the concentration of the
^9, radiation at those levels. In all probability I
. should say that this 45 kilo ton explosion and
the amount of earth that is thrown out, I don’t
■think that the levels will be dangerous level.
agreement even if we were to sign it. Given the kind of
emotional leadership in both India and Pakistan the
risks of accidental or adventurist use to preempt the
other cannot be over-ruled. To illustrate India’s
Minister for Parliamentary affairs in a true Rambo-like
manner taunted Pakistan to name the place, the date
and the time for the next war. In response, the Pakistan
Foreign Minister bragged that Pakistan will win the
war in 90 minutes. They were national leaders! Imagine
such an ‘option’ falling in the charge of a tiny coterie
of disinformed or zealot officers from either side who
could precipitate a full-scale nuclear war by pressing
the nuclear trigger!
FACTS against MYTHS
Furthermore, if a country is economically
underdeveloped it can lead to its collapse as in the case
of the Soviet Union. It cannot buy greater security with
the help of nuclear bombs. Much of the vital resources
needed it for meeting the most essential needs of the
people get diverted to making bombs. Thus, such
weapons of mass destruction have no legitimate role
in our national security. Internal security is as
important as external security. The country has gone
through the worst days of both communal and ethnic
conflicts. These have weakened the country internally.
The priority should instead be in strengthening internal
unity by resolving these conflicts by overcoming
pressing economic problems4.
Thus, rather than providing the nuclear umbrella the
nuclear tests have launched the country on to the path
on which nuclear dilemmas will be the millstones of
the future.
MYTH: Nuclear deterrence succeeded in preventing
wars from breaking out since 1945.
FACT : The figures do no not support this. Nuclear
weapon states have fought a number of wars, on a
number of occasions and have lost many of them. For
instance,
❖
Britain fought and lost at Suez, in the Middle
East; despite being in possession of nuclear
weapons;
❖
The US suffered severe defeats during the
Korean War (1950-53);
❖
The French with nuclear weapons lost the
war with Algeria
❖
China with nuclear weapons failed to defeat
Vietnam
❖ Above all, the US was defeated in the Vietnam
War (1965-73)
❖ The Soviet Union with all its nuclear weapons
lost the war in Afghanistan (1969)
In all these cases, a non-nuclear state fought and won
against a nuclear armed state.
MYTH : The underground nuclear tests at Pokharan
do not pose any danger by way of adverse impact on
health, environment and ecology, etc., through
radiation discharges.
FACT : India and Pakistan have together conducted
11 underground nuclear tests. These tests have been
termed as “light earthquakes” by seismologists, capable
of destroying the entire planet “if taken to their logical
conclusion”. Though the exact details will not be
known till the two Governments allow inspection of
the sites, it is estimated that roughly a third of all
underground nuclear tests release radio-active gases into
the atmosphere. Underground radioactivity may
#6’97
Page 5
surface through groundwater later. The effects may be
seen in the short term or thousand years later. In the
meanwhile, according to Asian Age (21-5-98) and other
press reports, villagers at Pokhran village have since
complained of health problems. Complaints about
parched throats, nose bleeds, itching and eye irritation
among many residents have been reported.
Neighboring villages have also complained about
similar symptoms. Apart from this, 40 percent of the
houses of Khetolai village in Pokhran tehsil developed
cracks allegedly due to the impact of tremour caused
by the tests according to a report in the Hindu (14-51998). Most of the residents belong to the Bishnoi
community and a few belong to the Scheduled Caste
community. Lest we forget: In the aftermath of the
1974 nuclear test at Pokharan villagers then had also
complained of skin irritation and similar ailments that
the Pokharan villagers are complaining today.
Moreover, according to the Statesman (17-5-1998) there
had been deaths following the 1974 blast. Six died of
cancer, one of heart complication and another five were
under treatment for heart valve dysfunctioning. Apart
from these deaths, the locals had earlier been promised
that there would be no radiation leaks. Three to four
years later calves were born deformed and died
immediately. One of the victims is still alive today,
Indira w/o Mange Ram of Kheotolai, but dying from
dysfunctioning of her heart valve. (See also boxes on
pgs. 4 & 5).
the other Soviet leaders, which led to purges which
caused many deaths, and economic hardships for the
Soviets. What the Soviet Union wanted was to sort
out its own problems. However, it viewed the US
Government’s build-up of weapons as a threat, and so
it also began to build up its own nuclear weapons. The
situation worsened in 1960 when Cuba became a
communist country. As Cuba was not far from the US,
the US viewed this as the first real step towards an
invasion of the US by communist forces. In 1961, it
sent anti-Castro Cubans to sabotage the Revoltion but
the attempt was foiled.
MYTH: The arms race orginated with the Soviet
Union hellbent on spreading its ideology of socialism
and communism worldwide making the US to prepare
to defend the Free World (which was not communist)
against this threat.
Ever since man first began fighting with each
other over territory,etc., he has worked to
get Bigger and better weapons than his
enemies (these include anyone who might
turn put to be an enemy at some distant time
in the future). If a Stone Age man of one tribe.
had invented a spear that could travel for 50
meters and kill a person, as soon as a rival
tribe got to hear about it they would get
their weapons expert to produce a spear that
could travel for 75 meters. The first.tribe
would then try and come up with a spear
that could travel 120 metres, and so on. This
what is known as ‘Weapons Proliferation’
or ‘Weapons Escalation’
FACT: The “Red Threat” was a delusion1. The Soviets
had enough problems internally following the
Revolution apart from its gains. They were not in a
position, either economically or militarily, to invade
the US. After all, they had just recently been part of
the war in which they had lost 20 million people. They
were still struggling to put together a country that the
Revolution of 1917 had dragged from the Middle Ages
into the 20th century almost overnight. There were
severe differences between the Soviet leader, Stalin, and
In 1962 came the most razor-edge confrontation
between the Soviet Union and the US. President
Kennedy demanded that the Soviet missile base,
installed in Cuba, be dismantled. Prime Miniser
Kruschev claimed that the missiles were only there to
counter-balance the American nuclear missiles on the
Russian borders in Western Europe. The Americans
insisted that the missiles be removed, and sent warships
to surround Cuba. For a few days, it looked as if tM
world was about to suffer its first full-scale nuclear war
as other western countries waited for the US
government to attack the Cuban missile base,and the
Russians to counter-attack.
Fortunately, sanity prevailed and the Soviet Union
withdrew its missiles, and the US its warships. But what
j
"
Page 6
would the position have been if both countries had
different leaders? According ot many historians, both
Kruschev and Kennedy were ‘sane liberals’. What if
one of them, or both, had not been as sane, or as libaral?
This, in part, is one important factor — the fear part of
the equation — that precipitated the build-up of nuclear
weapons in the world. The other ‘Power’ part of the
answer was well advanced, with the influence of the
Soviet Union spreading beyond the borders of Eastern
Europe to the newly-emerging countries in Africa.
Equally, the USA was doing its best to make its
influence felt by establishing military and financial
footholds in Western Europe, Central and South
America and Asia. And everywhere the two powers
set up a base, strategic weapons were nearly always put
in place to protect it.
In other words, both the Soviet Union and the US have
been empire building since 1945. It is this empire
building, based on fear of the other side, that has led to
Northern half of the world becoming a huge missile
Base.The whole nuclear arms build-up is based on a
policy of Mutually Assured Destruction, or MAD for
short, the appropriate way to describe it.
MYTH : The lessons ofHiroshima and Nagasaki led
to the realisation of promoting nuclear power for
peaceful purposes rather than for war and violence,
giving birth of a new vision, the Atoms for Peace
Programme.
FACT : First and foremost, nuclear power is
inextricably linked to nuclear weapons. Both are two
sides of the same coin. One cannot exist without the
other.
Following the Second World War the 600,000 people
whose jobs, the laboratories and defense contracts had
depended on the Manhattan Project (the secretive US
race to quickly invent the first unclear weapons —
efore the demented A. Hitler would get the bomb
st...”) found themselves with a bleak future. They,
therefore, had to perforce reinvent their roles for
peacetime. But the Manhattab Project and the various
nuclear tests subsequently, led to panic among the
American public and as a major dilemma to the nuclear
industry and the establishment; how to circumvent this
panic!
In the wake of the Bikini nuclear test, the US military
decided to change the whole arsenal to thermo-nuclear
devices i.e., hydrogen bombs, plans were launched for
a bomb, a bomb that combined fission with fusion. The
former could destroy cities, the H-Bomb could destroy
whole regions whereas the latter could slam together
hydrogen nuclei to form helium and create a thermo
nuclear chain reaction. The US military establishment
however needed public sanction for this game-plan as
well as cooperation from various institutions, etc. All
this would be impossible during peacetime because
their only motive was in producing weapons of mass
FACTS against MYTHS
ft (ft wild g>T
R°t»wl,
fctft
t
T?g> g? ftf «IT ribitol
H fftft tftsi «TT I
ggrr nft w W ftt
ftlPitM e5“’l ft»
ggrsft w’n^nft ’ftfft’n grgtav i
fftspft
ftI (ftitqi K gp? gift ft>
ft 3!W 3^ dIMH fcvgi I
■bcnftft fttgr’ftftgrt?
grgr w
tht ’fit <ftc,
gnftgrwi^t?
TJTcT nft TW bft
ht g=ft gist
agg
3nRT ft>
sffttat gft
«rcT Tift tut ^«g)
(ft<n ftgr
Hiiatit i
HHNI Stat
vngg gftr gftgg fftft
fgggg, gRuft
tfeftb
3TRJ <£W| ft,
tScftfr ftft gigift ft» ftft ftr,
star nidH rjuft ft
qm «ti<
3g grtar ftr nnr
taring gftggft i
- ftftrftsft
destruction. Fortunately, for them, they were well
placed to claim resources from a host of military top
brass, scientific institutions, government bureaucrats
and MNCs like DuPont, Westinghouse, and General
Electric. Educational institutions like the University
of California were also deeply involved5.
In the meantime US President Eisenhower addressed
the UN shortly after the H-Bomb explosion with a
speech* “The Peaceful Atom”, informing the audience
of how this awesome nuclear energy was now tamed
and could produce vast amount of electricity so cheap
that it would make metering unnecessary*. It would
immediately usher in prosperity to all and third world
countries could benefit from a modern and high
standard of living. Above all, there would be no wars.
His message stuck a positive chord all around and the
world over to. the point of exhilaration. Academics,
who were rightly sick of the bomb now began to study
#6’97
Page 7
nuclear physics, etc. It became popular in schools and
people even began to tolerate nuclear effluents and
waste. Nuclear engineers and physicists became heroes,
admired for their high intelligence and charisma.
Thanks to the expression, “Atoms For Peace’, invented
to encourage social and public acceptance of the
continued massive supply of tax-payers’ funds to keep
the nuclear industry alive. It also successfully helped
in assuaging any guilt for these deadly acts inflicted on
Japan. An important, but little published benefit of the
programme was the continuous export of nuclear
weapons material following from the power plant. It
proceeded in a semi-covert manner, generally using as
a cover the world trade in “peaceful” nuclear
technology. The facilities required for nuclear energy
programmes were largely the same as those required
for construction of nuclear weapons. Under the cover
of an interest in nuclear energy, or simply in basic
nuclear research, several countries have since acquired
nuclear capability7. Any purchaser of a nuclear reactor
has the essential first component of nuclear weapons
capability. But serious military ambitions imply the
acquisition not only of a reactor, but also the more
'sensitive’ facilities. This so-called peaceful nuclear
technology is being bought and sold in the full
knowledge that it will be applied to military ends.
Within a couple of decades a number of nuclear bombs
and missiles were built in the West, the former Soviet
Union, China and France. As more nuclear reactors
came up in different countries, a number of them
scrambled for nuclear weapons capability as well.
France followed one of the most ambitious nuclear
power programmes, and built an entrenched nuclear
hierarchy which is driving the quest for more weapons
development today.
Other ideas of ‘Atoms For Peace’ were schemes for a
nuclear-powered artificial human heart, nuclear
powered rocket engines, weather stations and light
buoys, nuclear power agro-industrial complex nuclear
bomb-excavated harbour and canals. All these had to
be abandoned because of the obvious hazards.
Nevertheless, numerous secret experiments involving
radiation have been carried out on unsuspecting human
subjects, and food irradiation is one crazy idea.
References :
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Eldridge, J. Save Our Planet, Magnet Book,
London,1987.
Multan i, Zia, The Deterrence Myth, CommunaNBF
Combat, Mumbai June 1998.
Bidwai, P., The Myth of Deterrence, Frontline, July
17, 1998.
Engineer A.A. Nuclear Tests and Indian Values,
Secular Perspectives, #12, July 1, Mumbai 1998.
Sinton, Eve. Is Your Money Paying for the Nuclear
Industry?, PIJ Newsletter, # 57, NSW.
Bertell, R., 'Why was the Peaceful Atom Invented',
Anumukti, #2, Ahmedabad 1995.
Spence, M., Exporting the Peaceful Atom, Radical
Science, #14, Free Asociation Books, London, 1984.
The Buddha Refuses to Smile Over Pokharan, INSAF,
Mumbai 1998.
Koen, S., et al., Handbook for Women on the Nuclear
Mentality, Wand, Norwich, V.T., 1982.
FOOD not BOMBS
3145 Geary, #12, San Francisco, CA 94118 USA
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Facts Against Myths is a monthly bulletin offactual
information on a number ofdevelopment myths and
fallacies, etc, including information against
disinformation campaigns, propaganda and canards
spread by communal andfundamentalist forces.
Produced and Published by :
Vikas Adhyayan Kendra
D-l Shivdham, 62 Link Road,
Malad West, Mumbai 400 064, INDIA
S : 882 2850 & 889 8662
Fax: 889 8941
Email: vak@bom3.vsnl.net.in
Design & Layout: Kartiki Desai
Printed by : Omega Offset, 2/3, Emerald Comer,
Maratha Colony, Tilakwadi, Belgaum 590 006.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Position: 3646 (3 views)