The risk of deploying the most destructive weapons ever made – nuclear weapons – is increasing. This sword of Damocles has been hanging like a threatening shadow over the war in Ukraine for years. In the autumn of 2022, American intelligence services estimated the probability of deployment in this theatre of war at no less than 50 per cent.
At the end of 2023, an Israeli minister mentioned the use of such a bomb in Gaza as an option. In May last year, Pakistan and India, both in possession of nuclear weapons, came into direct conflict with each other. And a few months ago, NATO – including the Netherlands – practised the use of nuclear weapons. As if it were the most normal thing in the world.
In addition, international treaties to control nuclear weapons have been terminated in recent years by the US and Russia. Next month, the last treaty (New Start), which still imposes restrictions on the number of intercontinental missiles and nuclear warheads, is also in danger of quietly expiring. The once extensive nuclear diplomacy, which offered us some protection at the height of the Cold War, is crumbling before our very eyes.
At the same time, all nuclear-weapon states (the US, Russia, China, France, the UK, India, Pakistan, Israel and North Korea) are investing colossal sums in nuclear weapons and in ways to actually deploy them, including the use of AI. Last year alone, more than 100 billion dollars was wasted on this – money that is so much more urgently needed elsewhere.
Meanwhile, there is increasing talk in Europe about a European nuclear weapon, with French or possibly British nuclear weapons potentially being deployed across the continent. The fact that such proliferation is at odds with international obligations to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons is generally ignored. This will, of course, only further fuel the current arms race.
All this against the backdrop of humanity having regularly crawled through the eye of the nuclear needle in the past and escaped nuclear war, for example during the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962. Often more by luck than judgement.
Because of these and other worrying developments, the so-called Doomsday Clock, which indicates how close humanity is to total destruction, is now just seconds away from midnight. Not minutes, but only 85 seconds remain, according to the scientists who study this dark matter.
Nuclear disarmament is therefore more important than ever for the safety of us all. Because there is no protection against these weapons, which cannot distinguish between civilians and military personnel and are (also) illegal for that reason. That is why the almost unanimously signed non-proliferation treaty demands disarmament and why this is also central to the treaty banning nuclear weapons, which has now been endorsed by a majority of countries worldwide.
Given the urgency of the matter, it is regrettable that the Schoof government (PVV, VVD, NSC and BBB) made no mention of nuclear disarmament in its 2024 government programme. Two previous cabinets, both involving D66, CDA and VVD, did speak out on the issue. Within the framework of its alliance obligations, the cabinet is actively committed to a nuclear-free world, as stated in the 2017 agreement. And in 2022, these parties also committed themselves to this, although there is room for debate about their actual commitment to this cause.
Under pressure from Russian aggression against Ukraine and the unreliability of the US under President Trump, attention to nuclear disarmament threatens to disappear further. That must not happen. It is precisely in times of high tension that disarmament and nuclear diplomacy are urgently needed, as was recognised in the past during the Cold War. After threats and escalation, the world was ultimately rid of tens of thousands of nuclear warheads through diplomacy between enemies.
D66, CDA and VVD must once again include a nuclear-free world in their coalition agreement and now really get to work on it. Nuclear disarmament, and active diplomacy to achieve this, must be a top priority in the new Dutch foreign policy.
A Dutch version of this article was previously published in AD.
