DAR AL HARB/ISLAM: TO NUKE OR NOT TO NUKE

Nuclear terrorism is a catastrophe that is waiting to happen
By Michael Contarino

Sir, Gideon Rachman ("Good news: you are unlikely to be nuked any time soon", July 24) is correct that nuclear deterrence works against nation states. It is unlikely, though not impossible, that even an unstable or fanatical leader would launch a nuclear attack on another state. But Mr Rachman is terribly wrong to minimise the risk of nuclear terrorism.

We know that al-Qaeda has tried to get nukes, and that Pakistan's A. Q. Khan traded nuclear expertise and technology. And while Mr Rachman is correct that Russia and the US have taken serious steps to secure former Soviet nuclear materials, he is wrong to imply that enough has been done. Many tons of ex-Soviet plutonium have yet to be disposed of, and nuclear fuel and spent fuel are being produced and stored in far too many places in dozens of countries. Some facilities are no more secure than a grocery store. Commando raids on nuclear sites by al-Qaeda in Pakistan, or of the sort we have seen in Russia in recent years, are not inconceivable. In short, there is plenty of fissionable material, scattered around the world in hundreds of locations, and there are people trying to buy it, sell it or steal it.

Since producing bomb-grade uranium or plutonium is well beyond the capacity of any terrorist group, consolidating and securing all weapons and fissionable material worldwide is the key to preventing nukes from falling into the wrong hands. Non-proliferation is essential - because the more states that have nukes, the greater the opportunities for diversion or theft. Disarming North Korea and stopping Iran's enrichment programme are key to preventing nuclear arms races among their neighbours.

...


The above was written in response to the following article:

Good news: you are unlikely to be nuked any time soon

"Nagasaki became a city of death where not even the sound of insects could be heard. After a while, countless men, women and children began to gather for a drink of water at the banks of the Urakami river, their hair and clothing scorched and their burnt skin hanging off in sheets like rags. Begging for help they died one after another in the water or in heaps on the banks . . . Four months after the atomic bombing, 74,000 people were dead and 75,000 had suffered injuries."

The testimony of the mayor of Nagasaki still horrifies. But the end of the cold war took much of the passion out of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament. Now, however, fears of nuclear conflict are rising again. But there is a difference with the 1980s. Then, nuclear anxiety was widespread among the general public. These days it is politicians and policymakers who seem most worried.

...



Pertinent Links:

1) Nuclear terrorism is a catastrophe that is waiting to happen

2) Good news: you are unlikely to be nuked any time soon