The Ethics of Nuclear Weapons

The Ethics of Nuclear Weapons

07-11-2024
  1. The 2024 Nobel Peace Prize was awarded to Nihon Hidankyo, a group representing survivors of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki nuclear bombings.
  2. This has sparked new conversations about the ethical issues related to nuclear weapons. The devastating effects of these bombings and the ongoing threat of nuclear conflict raise important ethical questions.
  3. While some argue that having nuclear weapons helps prevent war, others believe that possessing such destructive power is inherently wrong.
  4. This debate is relevant not just for powerful countries but also for nations like India, which faces its own nuclear challenges.

Ethical Concerns About Nuclear Weapons

  1. Unethical Nature of Nuclear Weapons
    Nuclear weapons are often seen as unethical because of their terrible effects, including immediate destruction and long-term harm to people and the environment. The bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki resulted in massive loss of life and ongoing suffering. This shows that nuclear weapons violate ethical standards by causing suffering to innocent people for generations.
  2. Humanitarian Consequences
    The humanitarian cost of nuclear weapons is immense. The immediate impact of these bombs killed tens of thousands of people, and many more suffered long-term health issues. This reality raises serious moral questions about using such weapons.
  3. Violation of Just War Theory
    Critics argue that nuclear weapons go against the principles of Just War Theory, which guides when it is right to go to war and how to conduct it ethically. This theory includes two main parts:
    • Jus ad Bellum (When to Go to War): Conditions for justly declaring war, like having a good reason and being a last resort.
    • Jus in Bello (Conduct in War): Guidelines for how to fight fairly, ensuring that combatants are distinguished from civilians.
      Nuclear weapons fail these tests, as they kill indiscriminately and cause excessive damage.
  4. Preemptive Strikes
    The idea of using nuclear weapons first if a country believes it might be attacked raises serious ethical questions. How can a nation be sure it is under real threat? Striking first out of fear could lead to innocent deaths, making it an unethical choice.

Ethical Aspects of Nuclear Deterrence

  1. Morality of Threats: Using the threat of nuclear weapons to prevent war raises ethical concerns. Is it right to threaten destruction that could kill millions, even if the goal is to maintain peace? The underlying willingness to cause such harm can be seen as morally wrong.
  2. Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD): MAD suggests that any nuclear conflict would lead to total destruction, questioning whether it is ethical to rely on such a system for global security. This raises concerns about basing peace on the potential for mass annihilation.
  3. Accidental Launches: The risk of accidental or unauthorized nuclear launches due to mistakes brings up ethical concerns. Who is responsible for the consequences of these errors? This uncertainty challenges the moral justification for keeping nuclear weapons.
  4. Security and Global Stability: While nuclear deterrence may offer security to some countries, it can create instability for others. This raises ethical questions about the fairness of allowing nuclear-armed states to dictate global security, leaving non-nuclear states vulnerable.
  5. Arms Race and Disarmament: Many believe that countries have an ethical responsibility to work towards disarmament to avoid disaster. The arms race driven by deterrence policies increases the threat of nuclear conflict. There is a moral obligation to promote peace rather than escalate tensions.
  6. Deterrence vs. Peaceful Coexistence: Relying on nuclear deterrence for peace creates ethical dilemmas. Is it sustainable to maintain peace through fear? Many believe that diplomatic efforts and cooperation are better, more ethical approaches to ensuring global stability.

Philosophical Perspectives on Nuclear Governance

  1. Cosmopolitanism: Cosmopolitanism believes that we all belong to one global community, regardless of nationality. From this view, nuclear weapons threaten everyone, not just certain countries. This perspective argues that we have a moral duty to eliminate nuclear weapons to protect all human life.
  2. Liberal Internationalism: This view supports the idea that global security can be achieved through cooperation. It backs treaties like the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), which limits the spread of nuclear weapons.
  3. Constructivism: Constructivism looks at how global norms shape attitudes toward nuclear weapons. In the past, having nuclear weapons was seen as a sign of strength. Now, many view disarmament as a moral goal, showing how changing views can lead to better governance.
  4. Global Justice Theories: These theories argue for fairness in international relations. Nuclear weapons create inequality, as some nations can protect themselves while others remain vulnerable. Global justice calls for disarmament so that no country can dominate others through the threat of nuclear attack.

India’s Nuclear Doctrine Policy

  1. Nuclear Doctrine Policy: India's Nuclear Doctrine focuses on maintaining a credible minimum deterrent while emphasizing restraint. This was first officially outlined in 1999 and adopted in 2003, aiming to balance security with ethical responsibility.
  2. No First Use Policy: India’s No First Use policy states that nuclear weapons will only be used in retaliation, positioning the country as a responsible nuclear power. However, critics argue that this stance still carries moral risks.
  3. Credible Minimum Deterrence: This doctrine ensures India maintains a minimal yet effective nuclear arsenal, balancing deterrence with the commitment to prevent conflict.
  4. Commitment to Global Disarmament: India supports global nuclear disarmament through international forums and advocates for a phased reduction of arsenals, emphasizing that disarmament is the ultimate ethical solution.
  5. Perspectives on India’s Nuclear Policy
    1. Mahatma Gandhi: Gandhi opposed nuclear weapons, viewing them as incompatible with non-violence and human dignity.
    2. K. Subrahmanyam: He advocated for nuclear deterrence as a necessary evil for national security while supporting the No First Use policy.
    3. Homi Bhabha: He justified nuclear development by emphasizing the need for India to protect itself in a world with other nuclear powers.

Way ahead:

  1. Strengthen International Legal Frameworks: Create legally binding agreements for reducing nuclear arsenals, with clear timelines and accountability measures.
  2. Establish a Global Nuclear Restraint Regime: Countries should work together to prioritize transparency and trust-building to reduce nuclear tensions.
  3. Promote Ethical Leadership: Nuclear-armed nations should lead by encouraging diplomacy over deterrence, promoting global discussions on the humanitarian effects of nuclear weapons.
  4. Invest in Risk Reduction Technologies: Develop safeguards to minimize accidental nuclear war, including better communication systems and regular risk assessments.
  5. Engage Civil Society: Involve the public in discussions about nuclear disarmament, encouraging grassroots movements and NGO participation in treaty negotiations.
  6. Conduct Humanitarian Impact Assessments: Study the long-term effects of nuclear weapons use to build a stronger ethical case for disarmament.
  7. Create Nuclear-Free Zones: Advocate for more regions free of nuclear weapons, especially in areas with high tensions.
  8. Increase Accountability and Transparency: Establish verification mechanisms to monitor compliance with disarmament agreements.

Conclusion
From an ethical standpoint, nuclear weapons violate principles of human dignity and justice. While they may serve as deterrents, the risk of mass destruction and potential loss of innocent lives make their existence morally indefensible. A secure future must prioritize disarmament based on cooperation and respect for life rather than fear and destruction. Achieving a world free from nuclear threats is not just a strategic need but an ethical obligation for humanity.

Must Check: Best IAS Coaching In Delhi

UPSC Prelims Result 2024 Out: Expected Cut Off & Other DetailsUPSC Prelims 2024 Answer with ExplanationDaily Prelims QuizDaily Current AffairsMONTHLY CURRENT AFFAIRS TOTAL (CAT) MAGAZINEBest IAS Coaching Institute in Karol BaghBest IAS Coaching Institute in DelhiDaily Mains Question Answer PracticeENSURE IAS UPSC ToppersUPSC Toppers MarksheetPrevious Year Interview QuestionsUPSC Syllabus

What Should Civil Services Aspirants Know About Constitutional Values in Contemporary Times?

A Civil Servant’s Dilemma in Tackling Air Pollution in the National Capital Region — Caselet Analysis

The Multifaceted Dimensions of Peace: A Global Commitment to Harmony and Justice