The threat of nuclear war has never gone away
“At the end of the Cold War, the world powers agreed that the world would be better off with fewer nuclear weapons. That era is now over.”
That’s the catchy opening line of Kathryn Bigelow’s new movie, “A House of Dynamite.” This sets the stage for what follows, and spoiler alert – there is no Hollywood ending. The cold, hard truth makes it clear that after half a century of work to reduce the threat of nuclear disaster, we are moving in the wrong direction.
Unsettling and intense, this film imagines just one of the ways that millions of people could be wiped off the face of the earth in one morning. Military experts and nuclear insiders will no doubt balk at some of the details and dialogue, but this movie isn’t for them, it’s for everyone. And we hope it serves as a warning that we are fast approaching the brink.
Despite these risks, the vast majority of political leaders, foreign policy and defense experts, and for-profit news organizations withdrew from the nuclear talks decades ago. In addition to Christopher Nolan’s 2023 biopic “Oppenheimer,” so did Hollywood. Nevertheless, the lack of attention has done nothing to reduce the nuclear threat, which is, in many ways, worse than it already is.
Bigelow and author Noah Oppenheim have done the world an incredible service by exposing the true and horrific nature of nuclear weapons, while raising key questions about presidential authority, the chain of command, disaster planning, changes in technology, and even the concept of deterrence itself.
A treatment of missile defense film is also timely, although estimates for the accuracy of our current system may be overly optimistic. As the Trump administration moves forward with the prospect “Golden Dome” missile defense systemwe need a scientifically sound review of what technology can and cannot do. Trying to “hit the bullet with the bullet” is a gamble, and the risk cannot be overestimated. The public must also understand that even if the homeland’s missile defenses are reliable, which is unlikely, our adversaries can develop more offensive missiles or missiles that evade the defenses. Something the Russians have already invested in.
The only real way to protect this country – and the world – from nuclear war is through fearless diplomacy. “House of Dynamite” shows that even after billions theorizing, planning and spending on more precise nuclear weapons, the fate of the planet ultimately rests on the adversaries and mutual recognition that nuclear war is suicidal.
Building trust between the leaders of nuclear-armed states may seem simple today, but continued dialogue and political will, backed by strong monitoring, is the only way forward. This is what has reduced the number of nuclear weapons around the world From around 70,000 during the Cold War to an estimated 13,000 remaining today.
We also need an honest and genuine debate about the concept of nuclear deterrence and what constitutes sustainable international security. Forever threatening a nuclear attack with increasingly accurate and capable weapons and assuming that it will never go wrong.
China is expanding its nuclear powerGiven the already turbulent relationship between the United States and Russia, the two countries are actively investing in modernizing their reserves. With that in mind, some countries that don’t have nuclear weapons are actually wondering if they should get them now. Change is needed; Happiness is not an option.
But nuclear experts and political leaders alone cannot resolve this confusion. The general public should be involved.
People may see Bigelow’s new film and think they can’t help it, which is understandable given the challenging scope. But like most things, everyday citizens have more power than they think. Every serious reduction in nuclear threats to date has been motivated by public involvement—from Mothers opposed to atmospheric nuclear testing you Millions of people took to the streets to demand a freeze Production of nuclear weapons during the last arms race.
Today, people need to get into the conversation and start asking questions from leaders that they have been avoiding for a long time.
Former Defense Secretary William Perry has warned that leaders are “sleepwalking” into a new nuclear arms race. This movie is our wake up call. If the world doesn’t change course, the dream that appears in “House of Dynamite” will become a reality.
Governor Jerry Brown was 34 and 39 gCalifornia Superintendent and Executive Director of the Bulletin of Nuclear Scientists.
Alexandra Bell is the President and CEO of the Bulletin of the Nuclear Scientists and most recently served as Assistant Secretary for Nuclear Affairs at the US Department of State.
insight
Insights from the LA Times Provides AI-powered analysis of audio content to provide a holistic view. Insights do not appear in any news articles.
ideas
The AI-generated content below is powered by Wonder. Los Angeles Times editorial staff does not create or edit content.
Ideas expressed in the piece
- The post-Cold War consensus on nuclear arms reduction has ended, marking decades of progress toward disarmament and a shift in the wrong direction.
- Despite half a century of work to reduce the risk of nuclear disaster, the nuclear threat today is worse than ever.
- Political leaders, foreign policy experts, and media organizations have largely abandoned serious engagement with nuclear policy, allowing the threat to escalate unchecked.
- A proposed missile defense system such as the “Golden Dome” represents a credible technological gamble that cannot truly protect the country from a nuclear attack.
- Diplomacy and building trust between adversaries is the only effective means of protecting the world from nuclear war
- Current deterrence strategies that rely on increasingly accurate and capable weapons are fundamentally indifferent to apocalyptic consequences.
- China’s rapid nuclear development is destabilizing the already delicate balance between the United States and Russia
- Public pressure and involvement has historically been the driving force behind any serious reduction in nuclear threats
- Continued dialogue and political will, under strong supervision among nuclear-armed states, are essential to avoid catastrophic conflict.
Different opinions on the subject
- Nuclear modernization and expanded deployment by Russia and the United States provide necessary responses to contemporary security challenges and significant imbalances, which advocates say are justified responses to China’s rapid nuclear development.[1]
- The probability of a nuclear war in 2024 remains relatively low despite acknowledged geopolitical pressures and the existence of nuclear weapons.[3]
- There is considerable disagreement among nuclear security experts about the likelihood of an escalation of nuclear conflict, with some assessing the risks of nuclear war as significantly lower than others.[2]
- Both Russia and the United States are implementing extensive modernization programs that they consider necessary to maintain reliable deterrence capabilities for national security purposes.[1]
- Missile defense systems represent an important part of comprehensive national defense strategies designed to deter potential threats.
- The stability of the nuclear deterrent depends on maintaining a credible capability and demonstrating resolve to potential adversaries



Post Comment