War, Peace & Nonresistance Due: February 14, 1997 by Aaron Kreider Nuclear Pacifism Since the invention of the atomic bomb a new terrifying force has been unleashed upon the world. Nuclear war would be unlike any war that has ever occurred, and for this new manner of war a new pacifism has appeared called nuclear pacifism. Definition Nuclear pacifism is the belief that the use or possession of any nuclear weapons by a nation is wrong. A nuclear pacifist works for the abolishment of any such weapons that do exist as well as for the prevention of production of any additional ones in both one's country and throughout the entire world. Some nuclear pacifists believe that conventional war can be justified at times, but feel that a nuclear war is such a different and devastating thing that it does not qualify as "war" in the traditional sense. Other nuclear pacifists are pacifists in the case of both conventional and nuclear wars. The History of the Bomb The world awoke to the potency of the bomb with the dual American bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki near the end of World War II that levelled the two cities. Over history, wars had been becoming increasingly more destructive. Millions of combatants and civilians died in World War I, with thousands of soldiers dying in trench warfare fighting over a small hill or a couple hundred meters of land. World War II introduced the use of bombing cities with no direct military purpose. Instead the point was to terrorize citizens to try to break a nation's will to resist (Mumford 17). Both the Allies and the Axis were responsible in this destruction. With the coming of the nuclear bomb, humans have invented an even more effective means of doing total war then the bombing of civilians used in World War II (Mumford 19). As the first of the superpowers to discover the bomb, the United States was clearly ahead in the arms race until the Sixties. For several years the USSR did not even have a bomb of its own and the United States was freely able to use the bomb as a powerful tool of negotiating to keep the USSR in check. Later in the Fifties, the USSR was still far behind the US and had very few missiles that could strike US territory in comparison to the threat that the U.S. placed against them. The U.S. used military might and its nuclear weapons to achieve its way in foreign policy by threats to China in the Korean war, to the USSR in the Cuban crisis and also in 1961 in the Berlin Wall crisis (Caldicott 76). By the Seventies, and up until the present, both superpowers have had enough nuclear weapons to effectively destroy the other power. A balance of Mutual Assured Destruction has remained on the basis that if one of them were to attack the other, they will both face destruction. The Destruction of the Bomb The effects of nuclear war are so devastating and horrifying that they are truly unimaginable. The following explanation of some of the effects is a summary account based on Dr. Helen Caldicott's book Missile Envy (Caldicott 10-27). The dropping of a nuclear bomb would create a giant hole hundreds of feet in width and depth. The ground would be sucked up to form a big mushroom cloud, spread across the country, and then it would slowly fall to the ground as radioactive fallout over the next days and weeks. The explosion of the bomb would generate huge differences in pressure that would cause glass to shatter, human bodies to explode, and a giant shock would cause everything within several miles to collapse. Farther away, anything that was flammable would catch fire, as the bomb releases a lot of its energy in the form of intense heat. Humans will receive massive burns, and fire storms will likely result as well. Fires will create so much smog that they will block the sun's rays and there will be a "nuclear winter" causing vegetation to die. A study by Ambio determined that of the 1.3 billion people living in cities in the Northern Hemisphere, 750 million will automatically die, and 340 million will be seriously injured in the event of a nuclear war. Those who survive will receive large doses of radiation and face sickness, cancer, and premature death. Sanitation will be nonexistent causing previously controlled diseases to run rampant, as rats and insects will cope better with the radiation than humans. Somewhere around 30% of the Ozone layer will be destroyed and increased UV radiation levels will kill off unicellular creatures that are essential to the life cycle. These are only some of the effects that might happen. We really do not know. The common belief is that survivors will wish that they had died. A Defense of Nuclear Pacifism There are many reasons for being a nuclear pacifist. Some people see nuclear weapons as not useful in anyway for defense, some criticize it as a waste of resources, some see the denial of emotionality as irrational, some see the consequences of a nuclear war as so devastating that anything else would be better, and others call Christians to follow Jesus's example of peace rather than war. Nuclear Weapons do not Defend Gruber argues that a nuclear war cannot be justified because rather then defending our lifestyle, it destroys it and therefore is not a defense. "Life might be distinguished from death, but victory would be indistinguishable from defeat." (Gruber 82) There can be no comparison between what exists after the war to what has existed beforehand, therefore it is not worth dying because nothing will be preserved as the same for the survivors (Gruber 85). The Logic of Nuclear War "From the beginning, the nuclear arms race in America has been fueled by a mad lust for power, first in the Air Force and later in the Navy; by a fascination with scientific, esoteric, and intellectual pursuits; by clinical paranoia about the Soviets; and by rapacious greed by our military industries." (Caldicott 74) "The logical consequence of the preparation for nuclear war is nuclear war." (Caldicott 7) If one examines it closely there is nothing logical about nuclear war. It is merely a welfare program for the military-industrial complex that will allow them to continue earn gross profits on contracts awarded on a cost plus basis. Cost overruns are endemic and fraud is rampant in a very noncompetitive business (Caldicott, 68-69). The money spent on military and nuclear weapons would create far more jobs if spent on something else. One billion dollars of spending creates 28000 jobs if spent by the Pentagon, 32000 if spent on public transport, 57000 if given to the public for increased consumption expenditures, and 71000 if spent on education (Caldicott 33). Bombs have no purpose unless they are used: "People can't eat bombs, wear them on their heads, or use them for pleasure". (Caldicott 34). Denying Responsibility One major problem with nuclear war is that there is no national moral debate over it, and with only half an hour or less warning there will be no time to have one in the event of an attack. Machines and specialist are in charge of the nuclear arsenal, while the public is told that it is ignorant (Merton 105). Also politicians are not aware that there are real people whose lives are at stake, for they have successfully numbed themselves to war's reality (Caldicott 243). Some of these politicians and rationalizers who ignore suffering are endangering the world by trying to persuade people that a nuclear war can be won by using a first strike (Merton 13). Finally, people whose responsibility it is to press the button can justify their role by separating themselves from the consequences and the actual horror that will occur, as well as by claiming that they are only following orders (Kraybill 65). Just War on Nuclear Weapons It is difficult to integrate nuclear weapons due to their indiscriminate destructive power into Just War theory. Thomas Merton argues that Protestants and Catholics have been trying to integrate nuclear weapons into just war theory, but instead he believes that: A Christian ought to consider whether nuclear war is not in itself a moral evil so great that it cannot be justified even for the best of ends, even to defend the highest and most sacrosanct of values. (Merton 88) The Christian duty is to oppose nuclear war because it would likely lead to the destruction of civilization as it will not be a limited war (Merton 109). Millions of innocent noncombatants in other countries will be affected as well: "It is not up to us to choose that they should be dead rather than red." (Merton 109) Finally Pope John Paul II, integrating the Catholic position of Just War with a position on nuclear weapons, called in 1981 for an "immediate reduction and ultimate elimination of all nuclear weapons undertaken simultaneously by all parties through specific agreements." (qtd. in Kraybill 225) These Just War theorists chose to be nuclear pacifists. Love and the Bomb Christians who are nuclear pacifists must reject nationalism, and let love overcome demands for power and hate (Merton 94). We must follow Jesus's example in dying on the cross (Merton 95). We must be wary of other definitions of love that attempt to justify destruction: It is not enough to press the button that will incinerate a city of five million people, saying in one's heart "this hurts me more than it hurts you," or declaring that it is all for love. (Merton 95) Christians need to put God before the state and follow the example of Jesus and use nonviolent tactics and spiritual weapons rather than material ones (Merton 95,98,99). Kraybill argues that Christians need to put peace at the center, instead of it just being optional as it currently is and then often ignored (Kraybill 175). Abolition of all nuclear weapons is founded in the Christian principles of love and nonresistance, it would mean a nation would not threaten to use a bomb, and would not even in the first case make one (Kraybill 203). The threat of nuclear warfare, even if it is not planned to carry it out, is not compatible with Christian values (Kraybill 204). Finally Christians ought to realize that each act we do to someone, we also do to God. In that sense, nuclear missiles kill God (Kraybill 64). The Bomb is an Idol Kraybill argues that nuclear bombs are evidence of sin and our separation from God. We should remember what happened to the Israelites in the Old Testament when they put their trust in chariots rather than in God (Kraybill 41). Nuclear weapons are symbolic of our trying to separate ourselves from God, and of the sin that exists within us (Kraybill 42). The bomb is our idol that we worship and makes our nation powerful (Kraybill 63). It is comparable to the tower of Babylon, for by it we are trying to achieve the same destructive power as God (Kraybill 69). Instead of worshipping the bomb, we should refuse the idol and take the World Peace Pledge: "In the light of my faith in Christ I am prepared to live without nuclear weapons in my country." (qtd. in Kraybill 64). Christians need to choose between the kingdom of the bomb or that of the cross (Kraybill 105). Conclusion The threat of nuclear war has faded from the forefront of national debate. However the United States and Russia still have enough warheads to destroy the world several times over and until these weapons are abolished there is a need for a nuclear pacifist witness. We need to decide what our government's policy will be before they ever have the chance to use them. Christians should follow Jesus's example of peace, recognize the devastating effects of the bomb, and persuade governments everywhere to abolish all nuclear weapons. "It is the ultimate parenting issue. It is the ultimate Republican and the ultimate Democratic issue. It is the ultimate patriotic issue. Above all, it is the ultimate religious issue." (Caldicott 313) Works Cited Caldicott, Helen. Missile Envy: the Arms Race and Nuclear War. New York: Bantam Books, 1986. Kraybill, Donald B. Facing Nuclear War. Scottdale: Herald Press, 1982. Merton, Thomas. "Peace: A Religious Responsibility." Breakthrough to Peace. Norfolk: New Directions, 1962. 88-116. Merton, Thomas. Introduction. Breakthrough to Peace. Norfolk: New Directions, 1962. 7-14. Mumford, Lewis. "The Morals of Extermination." Breakthrough to Peace. Norfolk: New Directions, 1962. 15-29.