Nuclear weapons paradoxically prevent wars

SIR – Professor David Mccoy and other doctors (Letters, July 25) appear to feel their views on nuclear weapons have particular salience.

Yet the rest of us already know that nuclear war would be catastrophic and none of us wish to experience one. Unfortunately, many things in the world that we don’t want, we are obliged to tolerate.

It is impossible to un-invent nuclear weapons, and some nations of dubious intention and limited veracity, notably North Korea, have now obtained them. It is unthinkable to risk a situation in which the only nuclear weapons in the world are in the hands of such nations. Furthermore, the relatively peaceful period since the Second World War can be attributed largely to nuclear mutually assured destruction.

The prohibition of nuclear weapons sounds wonderful, but would have highly dangerous unintended consequences. Gregory Shenkman

London W8

SIR – In their letter, the academics praise the UN’S adoption of a legally binding “instrument” to prohibit nuclear weapons.

They say that these neither protect us against “new forms of aggression such as cyber-warfare, nor keep us safe from terrorism. They cannot be used to fight rising sea levels, extreme weather, ocean acidification, biodiversity loss, antimicrobial resistance or social inequality.”

But nuclear weapons have prevented authoritarian regimes from attacking Europe for almost 70 years. Why did they not put that on the list?

The health professionals who signed the letter know that prevention is better than cure. Hiroshima showed that a single nuclear bomb could cause more death and destruction than thousands of conventional bombs. That was enough to hold back bloodthirsty tyrants like Stalin or Mao.

Ukraine disarmed its nuclear weapons in 1994. Twenty years later, Russia seized Crimea. Would Putin even have thought of it if Ukraine had been able to fire a nuclear missile on Moscow?

Multilateral nuclear disarmament will lead to increased conventional forces, and a dictator will have no qualms about using those to start a world war.

At the same time, wars between democracies are rare. If authoritarian regimes such as Russia, China, Iran or North Korea embrace a democratic system for 50 years, then we might be able to trust them enough to start nuclear disarmament. Mark Treuthardt

London SE7