The National Friday, November 6, 2009 www.thenational.ae 07 review Number of nuclear weapons in the world today th 23,574 according to the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists The sum of all fears

Stuart A Reid considers a new book’s attempts to calm our every nuclear anxiety

Just weeks after September 11, 2001, for teams of PhDs) but also, in many the then-CIA director George Tenet cases, possess the codes necessary came to President George W Bush to unlock it. The hurdles to making with bad news. Al Qa’eda operatives, a bomb from scratch – procuring fis- he said, may have penetrated the sile material, recruiting top scien- again, this time armed tists, setting up a machine shop, all with a 10-kiloton atom bomb. The the while keeping everything under device, thought to have been stolen wraps for years – are daunting. As from Russia, was allegedly hidden an intercepted al Qa’eda memo on in . If detonated there, bomb-making advised: “Make use a weapon of that size could turn of that which is available... rather hundreds of thousands of the city’s than waste valuable time becoming residents into radioactive ash. Soon, despondent over that which is not nuclear specialists from the Depart- within your reach.” ment of Energy were racing to Man- Not all of the book’s claims are hattan, and Dick Cheney was head- so relieving. One contention – that ed to his undisclosed location with even if terrorists did obtain a nu- hundreds of government staffers in clear weapon, the effects of a deto- tow. Fearing widespread panic, the nation would be less horrible than administration said nothing to the we think – does little to inspire con- public, the FBI, or even New York’s fidence. Although a one-kiloton mayor, Rudy Giuliani. bomb (puny, in terms of nuclear There was, in fact, little reason to be yield) would kill many if detonated scared. The source of the tip – who in Times Square, in New York, “that claimed to have overheard the plot same bomb exploded a few blocks in a Las Vegas casino – had already away in the middle of Central Park,” been deemed “non-credible” by in- Mueller reassures us, “would not telligence analysts. Besides, as John be able to destroy any buildings on Mueller points out in his wide-rang- the park’s periphery”. It is similarly ing new book, Atomic Obsession, an cold comfort to hear that higher act of nuclear terrorism involves so background radiation levels “may many highly technical and conspic- be beneficial by activating natural uous steps that it is almost impos- coping mechanisms in the body”. sible to pull off. Mueller, a political Still, Mueller is right that the ef- According to John Mueller, nuclear proliferation should be met with apathy. ‘Sleep well,’ he counsels. Corbis scientist who last allayed paranoia fects of a nuclear explosion have about terrorism in Overblown, now been overstated by everyone from J hopes to deflate the hype surround- Robert Oppenheimer, the man re- reading of the . To him, the break down entirely, overwhelmed hurt their populations. Other anti- ing nuclear weapons. This involves sponsible for the first one, who said reams of literature on deterrence by images of instantaneous, fiery proliferation measures have slowed several interrelated arguments: nu- that just a few atom bombs could theory, the widespread public fear of death from above – inspired, per- economic growth by making the de- clear terrorism is unlikely, atomic “blow up New York”, to the many nuclear war, multiple arms-reduc- haps, by the nuclear nightmare sce- velopment of civilian nuclear energy explosions are less powerful than academics and policymakers who tions treaties, and each superpow- narios found in thrillers more difficult. And minor countries commonly believed, and the bomb have called nuclear terrorism an er’s massive and expensive arsenals and movies such as Dr Strangelove. have been able to extort concessions has been irrelevant to postwar his- “existential threat”. Though Atomic are proof only that the bomb was When subjects in one study were from major ones merely by threaten- tory – thus nuclear proliferation Obsession sometimes seems to be undeservedly hyped – not that it was asked to rank the relative riskiness ing to enrich uranium. The clearest should be met with apathy. “Sleep dredging for good news where there influential. In an especially tortured of 30 activities and technologies, example of the “proliferation fixa- well,” he counsels. is little, its clinical discussion of the section of the book, Mueller con- they put nuclear power first, ahead tion” gone awry, of course, is the dis- There is no doubt that all things actual effects of nuclear explosions tends that even the Cuban missile of cars, guns, cigarettes, alcohol, astrous war in Iraq. “Even if Saddam atomic weigh heavily on practition- – a useful primer on megatons, blast crisis was less about the prospect and motorcycles – which all kill did acquire nuclear arms,” Mueller ers of foreign policy. With a twitch of radii, and radioactive fallout – helps of nuclear war than the memory of many more people per year. writes, “it seems most likely that he the nuclear sabre, North Korea has dismantle much of the mythology recent “prenuclear” wars. This is a For decades, analysts and amateurs would have used them as all others extracted massive amounts of aid surrounding the weapons’ suppos- curious interpretation of an inci- have forecast epidemics of nucleari- have since 1945: to deter an invasion from the international community. edly apocalyptic power. dent that began with the discovery sation: the atomic virus was bound rather than to trigger one.” The Bush administration created a Mueller’s enthusiasm for punctur- of Soviet nuclear missiles 90 miles to spread quickly from country to This is the argument nuclear op- specific category for nuclear rogues ing conventional wisdom, though from Florida, was made public by country. Kennedy, during his 1960 timists make about the actions of – the “Axis of Evil”– and invaded one refreshingly provocative, becomes the US President, John Kennedy, in presidential campaign, predicted would-be nuclear states. Mueller’s member, Iraq, that it could not bear problematic when he turns his eye a speech that explicitly invoked the that in four years, “10, 15, 20 nations intense nuclear apathy, however, to see get the bomb. Barack Obama to international politics, both past threat of “worldwide nuclear war”, Atomic Obsession: Nuclear will have a nuclear capacity.” When puts him in an awkward spot. It is has called for “a world without nu- and present. Many international and ended with the United States Alarmism from Hiroshima he said this, four countries – the difficult to simultaneously observe, clear weapons”; ’s pursuit of relations theorists have attributed agreeing to remove its own nuclear to Al Qaeda United States, the , the as he does, that nuclear weapons do them is, in his words, “unaccept- the post-Second World War great- missiles from Turkey. John Mueller United Kingdom and France – had not matter and that states regularly able”, and nuclear terrorism is “the power peace to nuclear deterrence. Mueller does briefly admit that nu- Oxford University Press tested a nuclear weapon. By 1964, turn to them for reasons of security. most immediate and extreme threat Since the leaders of both the Soviet clear weapons have “substantially Dh102 only China had joined them. There The case is weakened by his knee- to global security”. Union and the United States knew influenced political rhetoric, public did, in fact, end up being something jerk dismissal of nuclear aspirants When it comes to nuclear terror- that either country’s nuclear ar- discourse, and defence budgets and of a traceable chain reaction (from as undertaking a fool’s errand. ism, Mueller’s scepticism is par- senal could destroy the other, the planning”. But then he goes on to Russia to China to India to Pakistan) When, for instance, Mueller men- ticularly well placed. To begin with, logic goes, they had every incentive inexplicably downplay the impor- but it came drip by drip, and the tions that devotes 10 per cent the evidence that terrorists have any not to initiate war; doing so would tance of all this in matters of war and club’s roster now stands at nine. of its military budget to its nuclear real interest in going nuclear is thin have amounted to national suicide. peace, concluding that the weapons Yet “cascadiological hysteria”, as programme, he breezily criticises – a boastful rant here, an alleged Mueller contends that other fac- “have been of little historic conse- Throw in the Mueller calls it, is still alive and well the programme as wasteful rather meeting there, but not much in the tors – namely, the spectre of a plain quence”. Mueller is trying to have in foreign policy circles. The former than considering why the country way of concerted efforts, let alone old-fashioned large-scale conflict it both ways: he sees the weapons adjective ‘nuclear’ US National Security Adviser Brent might have wanted it. This is the actual progress. Osama bin Laden – were more than enough to deter as irrelevant, except for when deci- and our ability to Scowcroft (who helped form Presi- same logical tic that leads him take may never have uttered the remark another world war. As he sees it, sion makers mistakenly treat them dent Obama’s national security 60 years of nuclear non-use not as frequently attributed to him about nuclear weapons are best viewed as relevant – at which point they still accurately calculate team) recently asserted that if Iran evidence of the power of deterrence, wanting to carry out a “Hiroshima”, not as a special class of weaponry somehow remain irrelevant. In do- probabilities were to join the nuclear club, “you but as proof of the weapons’ futility. and an oft-repeated allegation that with distinct strategic implications ing so, he overlooks something cru- appears to break could have 20 or 30 countries close As frustrating as it might be to an al Qa’eda tried to purchase uranium but as merely an additional type of cial about international relations: to nuclear”. Pessimists like these impassioned rationalist like Muel- in the early 1990s is probably bogus. weapon – especially powerful, yes; perceptions matter. down entirely, worry that a fully nuclear Iran or ler, nuclear weapons have become The group’s interest in nukes, Mu- fundamentally different, no. This oversight precludes any ex- overwhelmed by North Korea, in addition to magi- desirable, important and useful eller relates, “never went beyond It is true that nuclear weapons hold amination of what might be the cally gifting nuclear technology to because people think they are, and searching the internet”. no monopoly over mass destruction. most important question about our images of fiery death dozens of countries, could use its act accordingly. But he is too busy Part of the reason terrorists are not As the game theorist Thomas Schell- nuclear fears: Why do they exist? new-found powers to dominate or trying to pierce our atomic fixa- interested in nuclear weapons is ing observed: “There is not much One answer is psychology. Studies destabilise its neighbourhood. Mu- tions to ask what motivates them. that they are extraordinarily difficult that nuclear weapons can do that of risk perception show that hu- eller convincingly shows that such a The specific reasons, of course, vary to buy, steal or build. No country has cannot be done with an ice pick.” mans routinely underestimate the move would be unlikely: even Kim from situation to situation. They can ever given a nuclear weapon to an- But, as he added, what makes nucle- risk of events that are voluntary, un- Jong Il and Mahmoud Ahmadine- help weak countries get noticed, or other, and it is hard to imagine any ar weapons unique is their mutually derstandable and pedestrian while jad, he suggests, would act with frighten away aggressive neigh- government handing one over to ter- destructive nature. Wars fought with overestimating that of those that restraint, knowing that if they did bours. For politicians seeking to tap rorists, especially since they would machetes, bullets or cruise missiles are uncontrollable, complicated not, their immediate neighbours into intertwined feelings of national likely be discovered. “Loose nukes” can be immensely destructive, but and unfamiliar. We also tend to be would band together in the face of pride and humiliation, they provide are, to date, only hypothetical – those they can also be won. Nuclear wars more afraid of catastrophic risks (a a common threat. Yet fears about just the right status symbol. Yes, the “suitcase bombs” allegedly missing are by their very nature unwinnable. city going up in smoke) than chronic proliferation disrupting world or- atomic obsession is a costly one to from the Soviet Union’s old arsenal, The weapons are a game-changer. ones (going out for a smoke). Throw der persist. pursue. But, measured by the goals experts agree, would no longer work. As a nuclear apathist, however, Mu- in the adjective nuclear (whether it The consequences have been of the obsessed, it has paid off. Anyway, a terrorist who obtained eller is committed to believing oth- modifies energy, weapons or terror- substantial. Economic sanctions one would not only have to main- erwise. As a result, he goes out of his ism), and our ability to accurately intended to punish governments Stuart A Reid is an associate editor at tain it (an activity usually reserved way to construct a rather convoluted calculate probabilities appears to that flirt with acquiring nukes have Foreign Affairs.