“Through the release of atomic energy, our generation has brought into the world the most revolutionary force since prehistoric man’s discovery of fire. This basic power of the universe cannot be fitted into the outdated concept of narrow nationalism.”
— Statement by the Emergency Committee of Atomic Scientists, led by Albert Einstein, January 22, 1947
“I do not know with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones.”
— Albert Einstein (1879-1955), German theoretical physicist (interview in ‘Liberal Judaism,’ April-May 1949)
“As nuclear powers safeguard their vital interests, they must prevent those conflicts that present an opponent with the choice between a humiliating retreat or a nuclear war. Taking such a course in the nuclear era would only be proof of the bankruptcy of our policies—or a collective desire for world suicide.”
— John F. Kennedy (1917-1963), 35th President of the United States, 1961-1963, (speech titled “Strategy of Peace” at American University, Washington, D.C., June 10, 1963)
Introduction
The world of 2024 was marked by escalating geopolitical tensions and the looming specter of global conflict. The first focal point was the ongoing and expanding war between the United States, NATO, and Russia—a proxy war planned long before 2014, as acknowledged by U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, who openly stated its goal was to “weaken Russia.” This war was fueled by the United States’ long-term strategy, dating back to the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991.
Secondly, the war in Gaza, which erupted following Hamas’s October 2023 attack, led to Israel’s relentless military retaliation. By mid-2024, more than 40,000 Palestinian lives had been lost under Netanyahu’s leadership. The extent of destruction and civilian casualties left historians of genocide in shock and brought shame upon the global conscience. Yet, the massacre continued without an end in sight.
Meanwhile, the world also witnessed grand spectacles such as the Paris Summer Olympics, a celebration of unity overshadowed by political upheaval in the United States. As President Joe Biden faced mounting pressure to withdraw from his re-election bid, Vice President Kamala Harris emerged as the Democratic Party’s potential successor.
However, behind the scenes, even more disturbing developments unfolded. On August 20, 2024, The New York Times revealed that President Biden had secretly authorized a new U.S. nuclear warfare strategy—a coordinated plan for simultaneous nuclear conflicts against Russia, China, and North Korea. The very existence of such a strategy is alarming, given that the United States remains the only country to have used nuclear weapons in warfare, annihilating Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August 1945.
As the world inches closer to the brink of nuclear catastrophe, John F. Kennedy’s words ring truer than ever: “Taking such a course in the nuclear era would only be proof of the bankruptcy of our policies—or a collective desire for world suicide.”
The consequences of nuclear arms race preparations
The nuclear arms budgets of the three major nuclear powers—China, Russia, and the United States—threaten to trigger a tripartite arms race. Global arms control frameworks are crumbling as both Russia and China expand their nuclear capabilities. In Washington, pressure mounts within the military-industrial complex to counter these developments with aggressive nuclear expansion of its own.
The absence of trust and a refusal to impose limits on nuclear proliferation may usher in a new era of strategic weapon deployment. The global security architecture is destabilizing as the great powers march toward an unchecked nuclear arms buildup.
The doomsday clock nears midnight
According to the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, the symbolic Doomsday Clock was set to 90 seconds to midnight in January 2023—the closest it has ever been to global catastrophe. By January 2024, this ominous setting remained unchanged, reflecting the unprecedented dangers humanity faces: nuclear escalation, worsening climate disasters, and the rise of artificial intelligence as a destabilizing force.
In July 1991, following the Cold War, the United States (under President George H.W. Bush) and the Soviet Union (under President Mikhail Gorbachev) signed the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START I), designed to advance nuclear disarmament. This agreement led to an 80% reduction in strategic nuclear arsenals by the time its implementation was completed in 2001.
However, with the onset of a new Cold War between NATO and the Russia-China alliance, the risk of nuclear war is at an all-time high.
Arms control treaties: A history of failure
Following START I, the U.S. and Russia signed two additional arms reduction agreements, both of which collapsed.
- START II (1993) – Signed by U.S. President George H.W. Bush and Russian President Boris Yeltsin, this treaty never took effect. The U.S. withdrew from the Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty in 2002, rendering START II defunct.
- New START (2010) – Signed by U.S. President Barack Obama and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, this treaty faced resistance from Washington’s political elite. In 2017, President Donald Trump dismissed it as a “bad deal,” effectively dismantling arms control efforts. In 2021, President Biden extended New START for five years, marking the last serious attempt at U.S.-Russia nuclear cooperation.
Historical parallels and dangerous precedents
Tensions between the United States and Russia reached their highest point since the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962. In February 2022, Russia launched its military operation in Ukraine, citing NATO’s eastward expansion and Kyiv’s persecution of Russian-speaking minorities. The conflict has led to immense devastation, suffering, and casualties—one that could have been avoided through diplomacy and mutual compromise.
This echoes the events of 1962, when the Soviet Union placed nuclear missiles in Cuba in response to U.S. missile deployments in Turkey and Italy. A nuclear standoff ensued, narrowly averted by a last-minute agreement between President Kennedy and Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev. The U.S. secretly agreed to withdraw its missiles from Turkey, while the USSR removed its nuclear warheads from Cuba.
Conclusion
The world is hurtling toward chaos and destruction, largely due to the collapse of nuclear deterrence agreements among the major powers. In the absence of arms control frameworks, a single nuclear provocation could spiral into global catastrophe.
A nuclear war would not only bring unimaginable human suffering but also economic devastation. Resources would be squandered on military escalation, while a nuclear winter could decimate global agriculture, leading to famine and mass displacement. Such a war would enrich military-industrial complexes but wreak havoc on global markets, triggering inflation and economic stagnation.
If world leaders continue to trivialize nuclear threats and delude themselves into believing that nuclear war is winnable, they will push humanity toward irreversible disaster.
It is up to both leaders and ordinary citizens to resist the march toward war. War has never been the path to progress—it has only ever led to regression, destruction, and suffering.
