Throughout the world, there are a handful of countries that possess nuclear weapons, and the countries that don't own them could easily receive them in a matter of days. The reason for their creation stems from a desire to protect one's state and its people. The article "A World Without Nuclear Weapons" by Thomas C. Schelling proposes the idea of a world with less nuclear weapons. A decrease of nuclear weapons sounds practical in theory but would not solve the underlying issues of nuclear weapons. It is a lack of empathy from political leaders that has allowed the creation of nuclear weapons and their current existence. The only way to eradicate the anxiety and possibility mass destruction caused by nuclear weapons is to rid of them all together.
Much of my knowledge of empathy derives from my education and experiences. Empathy, by definition, (dictionary.com) is "The ability to understand and share the feelings of another." Empathy is fully developed once a person reaches adulthood. Although empathy can be learned in a way by parents, teachers and one's environment, it is mostly an internal characteristic that links back to one's core values.
Political leaders across the globe are intelligent, hard workers but they often fail to serve the needs of their citizens. Their position of power is supposed to ensure the safety and well being of citizens. It is a lack of empathy that distances a political leaders concern for citizens. The fact that politicians must make compromising decisions every day does not excuse empath should be a value that is rooted in all decisions made in a state.
Serious problems arise when people of a state are not prioritized. When the idea of war takes precedence over people's lives, it's clear levels of empathy in leadership need to be readjusted. The foreignpolicy.com "The 2015 Fragile States Index" includes disturbing photos of the political protest in Ukraine. These intense protests against Ukraine's corrupt government led the Eastern part of the country into a civil war. Within the photos, anarchy and destruction are shown. In between the photos of the fire, blood, guns, gas masks, militia, and the remnants of a plane destroyed by air missiles are the faces of pained citizens. One photo illustrates a girl anguished, distressed and crying as she stands in a field with her belongings. The death and suffering of these citizens is caused directly by the problem-solving approach of war. This approach lacks empathy because does not consider the individual lives that will be changed from war.
Since the concept of war is long established and people are inherently violent, a world without war is not possible. And while it is obvious banning the production and use of weapons would establish peace, it is unfortunately not that simple. But, since nuclear weapons are fairly new in the overall timeline of the human world, there is a chance to reverse their existence. Thomas Schelling's "A world without nuclear weapons?" elaborates on the idea. The article illustrates the need "to examine the first steps toward a world free of nuclear weapons" (Schelling 124). It starts out stating "Participants were in general agreement that complete and eventual disarmament, or global zero, is the objective" which is a great mindset. (Schelling 124) The idea becomes more feasible when it is taken into account that nuclear weapons have not been used since their original creation in 1945. To achieve absolute progress, all nuclear weapons would need to go. Reducing the number of nuclear weapons would not work. The reduction of weapons may put states more on edge. Change in numbers could stir up unrest about the subject because countries could feel incompetent in comparison. This feeling could then lead to the use of a weapon. So, to start the process a treaty to ban the use of weapons would be necessary.
Action taken to rid of nuclear weapons is possible but must come from a place of empathy. Leaders must truly believe each citizen’s life matters. If a leader believes this, then the leader would consider human life to be more important than any subject that could cause war. Therefore empathy is the key to ridding the world of nuclear weapons.
Sources
Schelling, Thomas C. “A World without Nuclear Weapons?” Daedalus, vol. 138, no. 4, 2009, pp. 124–129., doi:10.1162/daed.2009.138.4.124.
http://foreignpolicy.com/2015/06/17/fragile-states-2015-islamic-state-ebola-ukraine-russia-ferguson/
Liz, I really enjoy reading your post. “The only way to eradicate the anxiety and possibility mass destruction caused by nuclear weapons is to rid of them all together.” Exactly! Different countries of the world pursue to develop their nuclear program because the other countries have it too. If you have it, why not me? A nuclear weapon is a curse to human life. If there are no nuclear weapons, the world would be safer and peaceful. I agree with your point that leaders should consider more about the lives of the people. However, the greedy for money and power won their hearts. Imagine if there is a war between the US and North Korea, the countless lives to be lost from both countries. It looks like the fury between Donald Trump and Kim Jung Un is heated day after day, is there a way to stop this unpredictable war?
ReplyDelete