Thoughts on the International Day for the Total Elimination of Nuclear Weapons

What does this mean?

"The consequences of any further use of nuclear weapons, whether intentional or by mistake, would be horrific. When it comes to our common objective of nuclear disarmament, we must not delay -- we must act now." 

- Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon

Tell me, what don’t we understand about the three letters N-O-W? Now? Which now? Now today, or now tomorrow or now never? In any case – with all due respects to the SG, who is a man of good heart I’m sure – it’s all just words. And here are some more recent words from President Barak Obama's speeach at the UN, on 20 September 2016:

“We cannot escape the prospect of nuclear war unless we all commit to stopping the spread of nuclear weapons and pursuing a world without them.” (Emphasis mine.)

Well, who are “we” to understand this or “commit” anyway? In my neighbourhood, no one has made a nuclear weapon – as yet. In Spain, there are supposed to be no nuclear weapons on Spanish soil, although the country is part of a nuclear alliance along with Albania, Australia, Bulgaria, Canada, Croatia, Czech, Denmark, Estonia, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Japan, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia and South Korea.

The European hosting countries of nuclear warheads are Belgium, Germany, Italy, Netherlands and Turkey.

The nations with nuclear warheads are United States (6970), Russia (7300), Britain (215), France (300), China (260), India (100-120), Pakistan (110-130), Israel (80), North Korea (<10)… All in all, the numbers ensure a good dose of overkill. Now is that logical, or is it just a reflection of human madness?

Lots of people have talked about this since 1946, as documented by the UN itself, listen: “Achieving global nuclear disarmament is one of the oldest goals of the United Nations.  It was the subject of the General Assembly’s first resolution in 1946. It has been on the General Assembly’s agenda along with general and complete disarmament ever since 1959.”

Yet nothing “has been done”. I guess it’s not “we” who have to do anything. It’s “them”. But “they” never do it. So “we’re all” in a double bind. There seems to be no solution. 70 years have passed since the UN started talking. And Mr Obama has just proven that it’s all still talk. As a very wise man once said about the problem of the “hobby horse”: Pull at the mane and the tail gets stuck; pull at the tail and the mane gets stuck!

So what do we do?

1) Sign petitions? Democracy won’t work, because, like Brexit, we may get a split vote or slight win at 49-51% and that solves nothing. And it’s like being on a boat with suicidals: if half plus one of the passengers want it sunk, and half minus one don’t, how can we get anywhere like that? Who’s going to win?

2) Write letters? To whom? And even if we find someone “important” to write to, they’ll never get it personally, or if they do, they’ll just laugh.

3) Use social media? Well, at least this is being written, and maybe one or two people will read it, but what’s that going to do? Those who understand already understand. Nevertheless, since this blog was started, it is part of my duty to mention these things and willy-nilly I shall do so. And never before in history have there been such totally-globalised communications media available as there are today, so that's a hope.

4) Meditate or pray? Just like the UN speeches and broadcasts, these are just words, but addressed to our own heads, which are too full of other things anyway, and nothing will come of it. And “pray”? To whom? Who is supposed to be listening? God? He already accepted mankind making the bomb, so it’s not His deal, is it? The government? Sorry, they ain’t listening to you or to me. The Pope? He’s already praying and we don’t know if it’s doing any good yet. And in any case, he’s just one religion – a true one for sure! – but just one of many. What’s nuclear science and psychological pathology got to do with religion? Why should a Saviour save us from our own folly?

One good thing that the American president did say in his farewell speech is this: “I do not believe progress is possible if our desire to preserve our identities gives way to an impulse to dehumanize or dominate another group. …The world is too small, we are too packed together, for us to be able to resort to those old ways of thinking.” (My emphasis.)

Here, Mr Obama hits the nail on the head. And that's hopeful too. It is “thinking” that is the problem. Nuclear weapons are human productions, from human brains. Human brains caused the problem out of fear and aggressiveness. Are we saying that the human mind with its thinking cannot now solve the problem? It looks like it. For some, there is “no problem”, because they believe in nuclear dissuation. For others, there is “no problem” because it is far above our heads. For some silent souls, there is a “problem”, but we don’t know what to do about it. And so we talk and write about it for 71 years.

Well, someone has to do something (or say something), so here are a few suggestions:

Everyone back to kindergarten. We all agree that a red light means "stop". It’s a simple lesson. Some drivers or cyclists jump lights. But we all know that red means STOP. So – to totally eliminate nuclear weapons – we set up a panel of wise people and gurus in each country where warheads are on the ground or sea and convene a meeting with everyone in that country having a say in nuclear weapons or warheads, anyone with any power of decision, from president or prime minister, to top generals, and the rank and file, anyone in command of any kind of firing device. We find these people and we send them back to kindergarten and teach them the meaning of a red light, a stop, a ban, a “total elimination of nuclear arsenals and weapons”. This means re-educating them entirely, so it’s no easy job. But as results come from each country, finally there can be international meetings of responsible heads of state and the ban can be put in place, acted on and nuclear weapons eliminated (whatever that may mean). Simple.

Come to me. If that doesn’t work, I can provide my own solution. Here’s the offer: Round up just the heads of the governments of the United States, Russia, Britain, France, China, India, Pakistan, Israel and North Korea and tell them to come to me. Or I’ll go wherever they want to meet. I’m just a normal guy, a man in the street, a student of the mind, but I will sit down with them and re-educate them until they see that UN concerns are world concerns, our concerns as human beings, for our own generation, our children's generation and many more generations to come, and we will draw up a working plan for the total elimination of nuclear weapons in 3 years. Not five, not 10, not 20 and not just sitting around talking for another 70 years. In 3 years we want the job done. All I need is someone to help organise this for me. Anyone there?

Sit still. OK, maybe we should just sit still and remain peaceful inside. But for those of us who already do (if it’s true that we do), we will have to increase our efforts to get others to do the same. If we think it over, we should be able to influence at least another 10 people. But if, because of our inner silence and understanding, we can get just one more human being to do the same, we will be helping the world to become less barbaric, less uncivilised, less warlike, less liable to become extinct from a nuclear holocaust.

Those are my three. Anyone else have any suggestions?