There are different perspectives to apply to nuclear weapons and we can see on nuclear weapons in different ways, from different angles. With a broader perspective, we can invalidate nuclear weapons in several ways, and it also allows us to see that which we might otherwise miss.
”Industrialisation without a heart means a catastrophe to humanity”. So writes sociologist Zygmund Baumann in his book Modernity and the Holocaust. Many of us feel that the mere existence of nuclear weapons is just that kind of a catastrophe. Researchers and scientists mastered technology with help of their intellect – but did they really consider the consequences in their hearts before it was too late?“
Equality of all those who are subject to a legal system is central to its integrity and legitimacy. So it is with the body of principles constitutes the corpus of international law. Least of all can there be one law for the powerful and another law for the rest. No domestic system would accept such a principle, nor can any international system, which is premised on a concept of equality” said Christopher Weeramantry, former Judge in the International Court of Justice in The Hague.
He speaks about the lack of ethics in the laws regulating nuclear weapons and disarmament.
Many have pointed at the hypocrisy of a handful of states who claim the right to possess nuclear weapons for their security, while at the same time denying to other states a similar “right” to acquire their own weapons.
Many others reiterate the absurdity of any state at all being allowed to possess nuclear weapons – of giving human beings the responsibility to rule over the continued existence of our planet.
The nuclear weapon states often claim that nuclear weapons principal function is deterrence. To intimidate other states with its ability to eradicate these in order to prevent attacks against their own state. But the argument is missing the people who live in the state. We talk about nuclear weapons at such level that we often miss that it’s us humans, nature and animals who are the ones who are the ones who will suffer from a nuclear explosion.
So it is possible to morally and ethically defend the possession of nuclear weapons?
Last update: January 22, 2015