A global threat

Nuclear-weapon use imperils all

Analysts are increasingly worried about the possibility of Vladimir Putin, the dictator of Russia, using tactical nuclear weapons, or worse, to stamp out all resistance to his invasion and destruction of Ukraine. What to do?

Early on, Professor Art Hobson sounded the alarm about the possible use of nuclear weapons by Putin. Understandably, he addressed the numerous horrors of mass destruction and deaths should Putin choose to rely on his nuclear arsenal.

What Hobson also fears, as do I, is that should Putin resort to nuclear weapons, another nuclear power (the U.S.?) might retaliate in kind. Ultimately, that could result in “the exchange” of countless nuclear missiles between the two nations. Horrifyingly, it is estimated that a weeklong war along those lines would result in an estimated 360 million people killed directly, and more than five billion dead due to starvation.

Such use of nuclear weapons could, in turn, result in other nations being less likely to avoid their use of such weapons in the face of losing a conventional war or a threat by another nuclear power.

The upshot is that if Russia’s use of nuclear weapons against Ukraine followed by retaliation from another nuclear state does not spell doom of the human species and the planet as we know it, surely willy-nilly use of such weapons down the road could.

Essentially, Hobson suggested that before nuclear weapons are used for only the second time in war in the history of humanity (the first being the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki by the United States during World War II), the government of Ukraine should either announce that it has decided to forgo membership in NATO and/or forgo its demand that Russia return the Ukrainian land it annexed prior to the outbreak of the current war between Ukraine and Russia.

Both are excellent ideas, and could still be undertaken. The question, of course, is whether Ukraine is willing to do so today after having had so much of its nation’s buildings and infrastructure destroyed and so many of its people murdered by Russia as a result of the latest war.

There are scores of reasons Ukraine is desperate to avoid acquiescing to Putin’s demand. Among four of the most significant (and in no particular order) are the following:

(1) No people are willing to be forced to give up the sovereignty of their nation. Not Ukraine, not Russia, not China, not the U.S. No one.

(2) The memory of the Soviet Union’s crushing of Ukrainian nationalism in 1932-1933 by creating a man-made famine all across Ukraine that resulted in more than four million deaths — agonizing deaths due to starvation as their organs shut down.

(3) For the most part, no one willingly lives under a dictatorship that controls virtually every aspect of life.

(4) The loss of their identity as Ukrainians, and all that that entails. Tellingly, Putin firmly sees Ukrainians and Russians “as one people.” Again, how would U.S. citizens feel and respond to being forced to become Russian citizens?

So, should the world allow Ukraine to fall to the Russians, and leave it at that? Should the world simply say, “It’s their [Ukrainians’] problem, not ours?” Should we simply look away, quit supporting Ukraine both diplomatically and with weapons systems, and hope that the Ukrainians will give up sooner or later to avoid suffering a nuclear attack? Should we continue to support Ukraine’s efforts to defend their sovereignty? Or?

Again, what to do? Truth be told, I don’t know. And it’s not because I have failed to give the matter deep and sustained thought, because I have. I’m no Solomon; indeed, few are, including leaders of this or any other nation.

What I do know is: First, my ardent wish is that other nations would come to our assistance should we be threatened, if not attacked, by a group (terrorists, another nation, a group of nations) intent on denying us our freedom and citizenship as Americans. Second, I know I would fight, and be willing to die, to maintain our freedom. Third, I cannot stand the thought of the use of nuclear weapons as tactical (designed for offensive or defensive use at relatively short range with relatively immediate consequences), let alone strategic nuclear weapons (generally much larger firepower and weapons capable of greater, large-scale damage/deaths).

Right now, it’s in every person’s interest across the globe to have the war in Ukraine come to an end sooner than later, without any government resorting to the use of nuclear weapons. But how?

In the end, what do you personally think the disposition of the Ukrainian people should be? And is that one that you, personally, would be comfortable with, if others were asked to weigh in on your fate under similar circumstances? Seemingly, such questions are those that all of humanity ought to be seriously pondering today.

Samuel Totten of Springdale is a scholar of genocide studies. For five years he trucked food into the war-torn Nuba Mountains to those in greatest need. His latest book is “Centuries of Genocide,” Fifth Edition (University of Toronto Press, 2022).