The US underestimates the power of nuclear weapons

On Jan. 13, Hawaii experienced 38 minutes of fear from a supposed incoming ballistic missile attack when a state employee clicked the wrong item from a drop-down menu. One would think the U.S. government would handle nuclear prevention programs with the same degree of sophistication that makes these weapons possible. Instead, the warning for the inescapable likelihood of thousands of deaths and the beginning of nuclear war was determined by the same interface that students use to save their homework.

Since the end of the Cold War, the idea of mutually-assured destruction has allowed people to develop the ill-conceived notion that the possible use of nuclear weapons can be overlooked. America’s leaders fall into the trap of using an empty threat of nuclear weapons as a magical tool to achieve foreign policy goals. Today, in a time when the U.S. should be a paragon for diplomacy, it has become an origin for rising international tension.

Just this past Tuesday at a Vancouver conference composed of 20 nations, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson warned if North Korea does not give up on their nuclear program, “they themselves will trigger an option.” The American public must understand the danger of nuclear weapons to pressure government officials to handle nuclear policy as cautiously as possible as the weapons are dangerous.

Although today it may seem absurd that people in the 1950s hid under desks to protect themselves from nuclear attacks, contemporary views on nuclear power are just as clouded about current technology. The average American probably thinks of the mushroom cloud from the attack on Hiroshima or Nagasaki to represent the power of nuclear weapons, but technology has dramatically developed since then. A modern-day hydrogen bomb can be at least 1,000 times more powerful than the type of atomic bomb dropped in Japan. In 1945, scientists at the Los Alamos National Laboratory estimated it could take as few as 10 hydrogen bombs to end the human race.

Conventional thermonuclear weapons are not the only nuclear weapons to threaten civilization. It took about 120,000 people to build the first atomic bomb, but it no longer takes such scientific genius and manpower to harness the power of nuclear weapons. Small extremist groups have the potential to turn conventional explosives into a nuclear weapon in the form of a radiological dispersion device, or “dirty bomb,” to release radiation. According to the Institute for Science and International Security, a nonprofit organization that monitors global nuclear threats, groups like the Islamic State have long discussed the possibility of using easily obtainable radioactive material, such as cobalt-60, in a dirty bomb. Cobalt-60 is a highly radioactive isotope used in medical technology that can be dangerous in relatively small amounts. Leo Szilard, a scientist who worked on the Manhattan Project, calculated that just one-tenth of an ounce of cobalt-60 present on every square mile of earth would make the planet uninhabitable. Science has developed over time to create scarier and deadlier weapons; nuclear policy has yet to match today’s technology.

Like all aspects of government, it is important for experts to be part of the discussion to make the best decisions. However, nuclear policy is different. Unlike topics like education or health care, if someone says uninformed decisions on nuclear policy could destroy millions of lives, it is not an exaggeration. Scientists and policy experts who focus on nuclear power can provide insight even the brightest politicians could not understand on their own. Secondly, Congress must reform the procedure for a U.S. nuclear strike. While there are checks and balances within the federal government for other political actions, the president currently has the ability to order a nuclear strike without the influence of another branch of government. In an era where a president holds such a polarizing view on a choice with grave consequences, Congress should be required to approve a nuclear strike to better represent the views of the American people.

Due to dramatic shifts in political culture, words and actions that would have been considered extreme in the past are now commonplace. When President Donald Trump threatens to use his “much bigger and more powerful” nuclear button, he threatens to kill hundreds of thousands of people. As a part of the world’s community, Americans cannot stand for such threats to innocent human life.

Joshua Udvary is a UF environmental engineering junior. His column appears on Fridays.