When the United States dropped two atomic bombs over the two Japanese towns of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, World War II gradually came to an end. But shortly afterwards, the world entered into a cold war, a period of great tensions as two sides (NATO and Warsaw Pact) engaged in an arms race. The situation was so tense that analysts came with a term Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD), to refer to a situation whereby the two protagonists (Soviet Union led by Russia and the United States) will simultaneous strike each other with nuclear weapons and wipe themselves out of the planet (Gaddis, 1982). Eventually the two sides had to step away from the brink of a major catastrophe.

As to whether the presence of more nuclear weapons can guaranteed continued world peace and stability is a matter of conjecture. On one side it has been argued that more nuclear weapons has a deterrent effect on nations (Oupblog, 2009), so that in case of a conflict, countries will always pull back from the brink by the mere thought that war will escalate to nuclear war. The consequences of nuclear war are too grave that anybody will not dare use them.

It can also be argued that, nuclear weapons cannot sustain the peace we have all along known. Countries such as Iran look at such weapons as leveling the ground against states that are out to bully them, casting doubts as to whether sobriety can prevail when it faced with obvious threat of an attack. It should also not be forgotten that terrorist elements such as Al Qaeda, have proved that they derived great delight from mass killings of innocent civilians (Oupblog, 2009, and Greenpeace, n.d.). The September 11 attacks in the United States are clear example of their thinking. One wonders what the world will look like should they access either the technology or the nuclear war heads.

In the current dispensations, and with the reality of terrorism, more nuclear weapons simply mean less control and easy access to terrorists, turning them into killing devices.

References

Gaddis, J. L.(1982). Strategies of Containment: A Critical Appraisal of Post-war American

National Security. New York: Oxford University Press.

Greenpeace,(n. d). Moving to a nuclear weapons-free world. Retrieved October 4, 2013, from

http://www.greenpeace.org.uk/peace/moving-nuclear-weapons-free-world

Oupblog, (2009, March, 26). Do nuclear weapons make the world a safer place?

Message posted to http://blog.oup.com/2009/03/nuclear-weapons/.