Did Nuclear Weapons Bring the World to the Edge of War or Did They Help Ensure Peace?

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Nuclear weapons are among the weapons of mass destruction, which were first detonated in1945 during the Second World War. Primarily, the United States of America is the only nation that has used nuclear weapons in wars, having detonated two atomic bombs in two Japanese cities, Hiroshima and Nagasaki, on 6^th and 9^th August 1945 respectively.

The destruction of these two acts was immense and the effects of the same can still be felt to date. In the recent past, the possession and production of nuclear weapons has brought much tension in the world. From the time of these two bombings, nuclear weapons are closely monitored and supervised. This paper will discuss whether nuclear weapons brought the world to edge of war, as well as their role in ensuring peace.

The nations that have acknowledged that they possess nuclear weapons are United States of America, China, North Korea, France, Russia, United Kingdom, Pakistan, and India. Israel is suspected to possess this ammunition but has not acknowledged or denied the claim. However, the numbers of nations yearning to have nuclear power for either military or economic are many.

Due to this, nations that already possess these weapons use this as a bargaining point, however, there are restrictions on who can produce or buy these weapons. Moreover, governments believe that nuclear weapons advance their national security, provide insurance against future risks and uncertainties (Paone, 2009).

Other reasons why a country may want to acquire nuclear powers are if one of its aggressors owns these weapons, to advance its international standings, running of economy through nuclear energy.

International relations are soaring since the invention of nuclear weapons. It is clear that with increase of nuclear, there is high risk of a nuclear war (Karp and Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, 1992); indeed, nuclear weapons have brought the world to the verge of war.

The ability of a nation to destroy another population and environment with these weapons launched from far has increased the risk of military conflict. In addition, the risk of nuclear terrorism is real, in the wake of increased terror attacks in the world. Although up until now terrorists have not used nuclear weapons in their attacks, there is a fear that, terrorist could access and use these weapons.

In the event that terror groups cannot access nuclear weapons, they can choose to attack nuclear power plants, leading to catastrophic situations. Nuclear weapons are beyond reach by small terror groups; however, in the era where some states are exporting terror, these states can facilitate terror organization to obtain nuclear weapons.

Even with restrictions and regulation on states intending to acquire nuclear weapon, some states have been able to obtain weapons of mass destruction illegally. With technological advancement, terrorists would not face any hitches in manufacture of nuclear weapons. In addition, some irresponsible states could possibly sell nuclear weapons to terror groups in the black market. The other risk is unstable and poorly governed nations acquiring nuclear weapons and using them irresponsibly against its people or other nations.

Nuclear weapons have not ensured peace since there is fear and uncertainty of what could happen next. It is likely that one nation will use their weapons offensively. In addition, there is also the risk of accidents in the nuclear plants; nations in the nuclear club are able to interfere with lesser nations affairs because of their military strength, a case in example being the invasion of Iraq by United States.

Lesser countries are made to feel like subjects to the larger nations because of their military powers. This has led superpower nations to meddle with smaller nations’ affairs, as they are defenseless.

One of the major reasons why Iraq was invaded and occupied by the foreign forces was suspicion that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction; thus, the more superior nations joined and set to destroy and disarm him. It was largely believed that Saddam had large amounts of chemical and biological weapons; however, it is still not clear whether Saddam possessed or intended to reopen nuclear plants.

This conflict has caused other wars and terrorism acts, given that some nations cannot trust others handling nuclear warheads. A report indicates that Mr. Hussein had ambitions of building a science hub and weapons of mass destruction but his capacity had gone down since 1991 (Holdstock and Barnaby, 2003).

Due to this invasion, some people became radicalized and continued to wage wars against other people and nations. One case study is the bombing of the twin tower in the United States of America. These acts of terror can directly be traced and linked to nuclear weapons; indeed, “the acts of terror have come in to being neither by accidents nor by deliberate international arrangement; it has resulted from a combination of both political tension and technological advancement of weaponry” (Edwards, 1986, p. 14)

India and Pakistan conflicts could escalate to nuclear war. These two neighboring states have had conflicts since decolonization, as they both claim a disputed territory among other issues. India acquired nuclear warheads and hence Pakistan with the aid China. The acquisition of nuclear weapons by both countries continues to raise fear that their conflict could escalate to nuclear conflict. Indeed, since India and Pakistan acquired nuclear weapons, the level of conflict has considerately risen.

There is animosity among nations in the nuclear club and the rest, whereby the nations in the nuclear club use their authority to cartel the hopes of other nations of acquiring nuclear energy. The hostility has grown to a level that these nations can wedge or sponsor terror attacks to nuclear states. In addition, religious states as Islamic could use force in their crusades in attempt to convert people into their religion.

The errant nations who defile orders and continue to produce their own weapons are dealt with militarily as was the case with Iraq and its leader Saddam Hussein. Other nations like North Korea and Iran receive a lot of condemnation and the United States of America has been requesting these nations to stop the proliferation of nuclear weapons in their territories (Holdstock and Barnaby, 2003).

The nuclear club wants to reserve all the rights to them; however, members of the club can go an extra mile to protect their ‘privileges’ even if it means warfare. Moreover, the reasons that they give why some nations should not have weapons of mass destruction are instability and poor governance.

There have been treaties signed by nations with nuclear arsenals to either reduce, or stop the production. However, there are nations who are not complying, hence leading to tensions among members of the nuclear club. The result of this is the likelihood of eruption of war due to some disgruntled nations (Holdstock and Barnaby, 2003, p. 54).

Another conflict being fueled by nuclear weapons is Israel and Middle East conflict. Israel does not confirm or denies its possession of nuclear weapons; it has been difficult to settle its conflict with nations in the Middle East. Since Israel owns weapons of mass destruction and hence more superior to its enemies, it has always been provoking and defying fire agreements. In the past, Israel has used un-proportional fire in short war encounters.

Moreover, Israel may in the future use its chemical or biological weapons of mass destruction. Protesting against this, Iran has been condemning and requesting the UN to warn Israel against its proliferation of nuclear weapons. Indeed, Israel’s nuclear arsenals have just led to an increase of conflicts with its enemies, who are also likely to seek for nuclear weapons for offensive purposes (Karsh, 2000).

In the quest for knowing what nations in the nuclear club are developing, nations have resulted in spying, leaving the world on the edge of a war. For instance, the US is suspected to have spies in Iran, Iraq and china, while the Russians are also engaged in this vice. In an effort of deterring nations from obtaining nuclear weapons, nations are arresting scientists believed or linked to aiding in the proliferation of nuclear arsenals; for instance, in a recent case, the US abducted a nuclear scientist from Iran causing tension between the two nations.

According to Anon (1982), “the existence of nuclear weapons, nuclear deterrence has been the most important mechanism in keeping the world in peace for the last 40 years.” Peace is described as absence of war; and in this case, since the fall of the Soviet Union, the world has not gone into a large war except local conflicts after 1945 especially in Africa and Asia though none of these has escalated to the use of nuclear weapons.

Nuclear weapons have led to sustainable peace in the world since 1945. There is control and monitoring of nations with these weapons hence avoiding a state of war. Nuclear weapons have also deterred aggressor nation from provoking others in fear of attack.

There is a notion that nuclear weapons prevent armed conflicts due to undesired risks that pose to both parties. On the other hand, the existence of nuclear deterrence has promoted peace in the world. Nuclear deterrence is the refraining of an enemy from using nuclear weapons since he could be destroyed as a consequence.

For instance, if two nations choose to engage in nuclear conflict the consequences could be mutual destruction. Governments and leaders are less likely to engage or provoke nations with nuclear weapons, while nations who have strong friends in the nuclear club are respected. Thus, peace has prevailed in the world due to fear. Nevertheless, the bottom line of peace is that nations in the nuclear club could support and defend their weaker allies if need be.

Before the invention of nuclear arsenals, warfare was used by governments as a means of achieving political mileage but not any longer. The nation in the nuclear club relationship is based on mistrust; there are always speculations that other nations are advancing technologically more than the other is, reducing the tendency of aggravation of each other.

Having witnessed the massive destruction that nuclear weapons caused during the 1945 bombing, fewer nations are willing to engage in wars that could lead to nuclear war. After the use of these weapons, a body was formed that controls the affairs of the world, with the United Nations being a peace organization. It was formed during the Second World War, came into being officially in October 1945, with the main duties being to maintain international peace, security, and to develop friendly relations among nations

Since many sovereign nations are signatories to the UN, they are limited or governed and deterred from engaging in wars. The UN has promoted the peace to some level as it creates a platform for dialogue for countries with disputes.

In extreme cases, the UN also intervenes in areas where there is conflict through it peacekeeping programmes to stop the conflict from escalating. Since the UN is a neutral party, it has helped in solving and stopping many wars as well as advocating for non-proliferation of nuclear warheads. Moreover, the UN has its special forces that work alongside other military to maintain peace.

In conclusion, nuclear weapons have helped to ensure peace in the world given that the world has not suffered a major war since the first use of nuclear weapons. Nuclear deterrence is one of the ways nuclear weapons have aided to guarantee peace.

Many leaders and governments are not quick to engage in warfare; indeed, the possession of these weapons by government provides national security of their nations and those of their allies. The understanding of the destruction caused by nuclear weapons has promoted peace. These weapons usually cause immense destruction and can affect the mutual parties. However, it is still not clear whether the balance of terror can continue to sustain the peace prevailing presently.

Due to the events leading to first use of nuclear weapon, a peace organization was formed, the UN, a body that has been instrumental in ensuring peace in the world. In addition, the body has played a major role in deterring the use of nuclear weapons. Nevertheless, this body has some limitation, since it is funded by the super powers, who are also permanent members of the Security Council, hence the UN sometimes cannot have a great influence over them. A case in mind is the invasion of Iraq.

On the other hand, weapons of mass destruction have brought the world to the edge of war. The nations with these weapons boast of superior military strength, and due to this, they can meddle and provoke other smaller nations. In the attempt of controlling of perforation of weapons of mass destruction, smaller nations have been invaded.

There is always spying of other nations to check what they are doing. Acts of terror in the world are largely linked to nuclear weapons and the way members of the nuclear weapon club treat their nations. Even in the nuclear club, there is mistrust among members, as they are trying to outdo one another with development of new weapons.

However, due to the catastrophic consequence of chemical and biological weapons, the world should consider unilateral nuclear weapons disarments programmes. Moreover, the reduction of amount of weapons in the world could certainly reduce risks and tensions in the world.

Reference List

Anon.1982. The Economist, Volume 284, Issues 7244-7256. London: Charles Reynell Publisher.

Edwards, J. C., 1986. Nuclear weapons, the balance of terror, the quest for peace. Surrey: Sunny press.

Holdstock, D and Barnaby, F., 2003. The British nuclear weapons programme, 1952-2002. London: Routledge.

Karp, R. C. and Stockholm International Peace Research Institute. 1992. Security without nuclear weapons? Different perspectives on non-nuclear security. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Karsh, E., 2000. Israel: From war to peace? London: Routledge.

Paone, R. M., 2001. Evolving New World order/disorder: China-Russia-United States-NATO. Oxford: University Press of America.

Segell, G., 2005. Axis of evil and rogue states: the Bush administration. London: Glenn Segell publishers.

Click Here To Order Now!

Did Nuclear Weapons Bring the World to the Edge of War or Did They Help Ensure Peace?

Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?

We have qualified writers to help you.

We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.

You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)