The Nobel Peace Prize is undoubtedly a prestigious accolade, and this year it will be awarded to a group of Japanese atomic bomb survivors who have dedicated themselves to the pursuit of a world free from nuclear weapons.
Interestingly, the Norwegian Nobel Committee has consistently recognized efforts towards nuclear non-proliferation, at least once every decade since the time of JFK.
However, despite these commendable efforts, countries like the United States and Russia continue to amass an alarming number of nuclear weapons, totaling around 13,000. Nevertheless, the committee’s commitment to preventing nuclear warfare remains significant.
The decision to employ nuclear weapons is one that no leader should ever have to face. Unfortunately, in the United States, this decision lies in the hands of the President.
The potential consequences of electing a president who leans towards using nuclear options could be catastrophic, not only for the US but for the entire world.
This fact is something voters must bear in mind as they head to the ballot box on November 5, especially considering the heightening geopolitical tensions. It is crucial not to be exclusively focused on a single issue during this critical time.
As extreme as it may sound, it is imperative to remember that the avoidance of nuclear war is likely at stake in this election. Nuclear weapons are not only morally and ethically indefensible, but their utilization also brings about unimaginable humanitarian, environmental, and geopolitical consequences.
The repercussions include mass death, nuclear winter, and international catastrophe. While the devastation caused by the Hiroshima bombing was horrific, it pales in comparison to the destructive power of today’s nuclear warheads.
The Union of Concerned Scientists explains that the warheads on a single US nuclear-armed submarine possess seven times the destructive capability of all the bombs dropped during World War Two, including the two atomic bombs used in Japan. Typically, each submarine at sea carries tens of these warheads.
It is clear that Donald Trump should not be entrusted with such immense power. His track record demonstrates a lack of responsibility and a disregard for the seriousness of nuclear weapons. For instance, in 2018, he withdrew from the US deal with Iran concerning nuclear weapons.
One cannot forget his remarks in August 2017 amid escalating tensions with North Korea. Trump referred to Kim Jong-un as “Little Rocket Man” and tweeted about the size of his own nuclear button, insinuating that the US could obliterate North Korea if necessary.
Considering that North Korea possesses nuclear weapons, it is evident that the US needs a leader who will actively strive to prevent nuclear war, rather than one who threatens to use such weapons to address petty grievances or make social media statements.
Even without these specific remarks, it is abundantly clear that Trump is unfit to possess the nuclear codes. In a world where multiple nations possess nuclear arsenals and geopolitical instability is rampant, the risk of misunderstandings, accidents, or miscalculations leading to a full-blown nuclear war is significant.
It is crucial that we elect a leader who possesses wisdom, tact, and a genuine desire to de-escalate conflicts. We need someone who invests in diplomacy, seeks arms control agreements, and employs other conflict resolution mechanisms, instead of resorting to the push of a button that could catapult us back into the Stone Age.
There is no doubt that nations can work together to create a more stable and secure world that does not depend on the constant threat of nuclear annihilation.
However, to achieve this goal, we, the people, must elect a leader who genuinely believes in this vision. As voters head to the ballot box, they must make a decision that profoundly shapes not only the future of our country but also the stability and security of the world.
One of the most significant responsibilities of a president is their command over the US nuclear arsenal, a power that carries the potential for immense destruction and global catastrophe.
Given the current volatile geopolitical climate, it is essential for voters to prioritize electing someone who is committed to resolving international conflicts through diplomacy and collaboration, rather than seeking to solve problems through military might.
I can confidently assert that Kamala Harris is that leader. She values the importance of humanity, and we can ill afford to let Trump’s ego dictate our fate, especially when it comes to matters of utmost consequence.
