“The Atomic

Bomb made the

prospect of future
war
unendurable…” –
what did he mean
in the light of
America’s cold
war nuclear
ATOMIC WAR! Volume I, Number 2. 32
pages. Color illustrated comic book. 4to,
pictorial wrappers. Canton, Ohio: Junior
Books, December 1952.Note: With four
policy?
∞§∞
atomic battle stories: "Operation
Vengeance," "The Ice-Box Invasion,"
"The Spy from Coney Island," and
By Jack Oughton
"Mission Demolition."
 My interpretation of the
quote’s metaphor
• It has led us up those last few steps to the mountain
pass: human technology: mountain pass, ascending:
increasing power of weaponry as technology advances
• and beyond there is a different country: in a world
with nuclear weapons the rules of the game change
completely. Exiting the mountain pass takes us to a
different country: different geopolitical landscape.
Conflict now very possibly equals extinction. Nuclear
weapons: trump card.
• “I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought,
but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones.” -
Einstein
 I am become
death - the
destroyer of
worlds

the 'Father of
the Atomic
Bomb'. 1904-1967

Who was Robert J Oppenheimer? – context of the original quote

Quote comes from a 1965 interview when he was asked about his initial reaction to
seeing the Trinity test

After The Manhattan Project he counseled against the development of more power
nuclear weapons.

His work as an administrator on the Manhattan project gave him an understanding

of both the physics behind nuclear weapons, but also the organizational logistics
and how the US military would organize it’s nukes

So Oppenheimer knew more than most about the bomb, as both administrator and
scientist.

Was publically accused of anti American activities stripped of his security clearance
during the McCarthy trials; ‘defect of character’. The US wanted the H Bomb and
wouldn’t have him get in the way.
 WWII: Atom
Bomb:
Checkmate
T h e u sa g e o f th e a b o m b b y th e U S A o n Ja p a n
in 1 9 4 5 w a s im p o rta n t fo r tw o re a so n s
1. It d e m o n stra te d th e h o rrific e ffe cts o f th e
w eapon
i. Massive humanitarian and environmental
devastation
ii. Lingering painful death and radioactive
contamination
2. It demonstrated how unbalanced a conflict
became when one combatant had the bomb

What was at first extremely drawn out became a one way war
– just 2 usages of the bomb where enough to ensure the
capitulation of Japan - a martial culture with soldiers famous
for suicidal banzai charges, kamikaze pilots and a culture
which disdained the fear of death. Emperor Hirohito was their
god and was forced to address the nation and ask that they
surrender. This brought shame to a country which despised
dishonor.
The power of the bomb – 2 B29 bombers, 2 bombs: 150-
200,000 Japanese dead, American victory
WWIII: Hydrogen Bomb:
Apocalypse?
• Advancements in
nuclear technology
lead to an even more
powerful nuclear
superweapon
developed by Tellar
and Ulan
• Oppenheimer was
responsible for
shunting Teller and
under into the ‘super’
program which
initially was of
secondary
importance
compared to
Manhattan.
• The Bomb, MK.II
 “A Different Country”
Why level the playing field when you can nuke the ball park?

• Challenges to warfare –
• Larger nations have to interact differently with smaller
nations and ‘rogue states’ . They can’t simply roll
over them with military force any more
• Empowering rogue states – essentially a tiny country
with little regard for human life or it’s international
reputation and with the bomb has the ability to
attack and decimate a superpower’s civilian
population.
• The importance of weapon vectors technology
• Differing advancements in weapons technology.
Though many sides may have the bomb, he who
can deliver it most effectively has the edge. E.g.
superior rocketry initially give America an edge over
the soviet union as their reach was further. This
initial distance advantage was a key reason as to
why suppressing Cuba was so important.
 “Unendurable” - The fear of
Mutually Assured Destruction
leads to a Cold War
A p o te n tia lw o rld w a r b re w in g fro m
m u tu a lp a ra n o ia , a n ideological
conflict with the possibility of
destroying everyone if it gets ‘hot’
[direct conflict between the
superpowers]
On simple terms it becomes an
idealogical conflict fuelled by an us
and them mentality.
Commies vs Imperialists.
Side taking on the same scale of the
world war, with the US and USSR at the
head of their respective camps.
Except this one could involve both
sides using more and more nukes –
total war. The geopolitical framework
for “World War III” is in place
Therefore secret wars and underhanded
tactics are used to avoid direct
confrontation.

Only Africa and some of Asia would have been neutral

in a conflict, and that wouldn’t be much good in
nuclear winter
 So - what was American cold war
nuclear policy?
• Essentially all American foreign policy was seen through the filter of
combating [‘containing’] communism, including their nuclear
policy.
• With the Axis destroyed, Communism is seen now as primo threat to
Western way of life. Communism opposes free trade and
suppresses freedom of expression. It must be uprooted wherever
found!
• Truman Doctrine – addressed by Truman to the U.S. Congress on
February 27, 1947 – Goal is to prevent communism's spread to new
countries. Forms the blueprint for all future containment policy
• Marshall Plan - European Recovery Program Economic rebuilding
in European countries threatened by communism [for example,
why West Germany was so much more prosperous than East
Germany]
• NATO - 1949 [North Atlantic Treaty Organization] - A military counter
to the Warsaw Pact – formalization of alliance and detailed
organization of international effort against Soviet forces [for
example; stationing of anti tank aircraft in west Germany to
counter suspected Soviet armored advance].
• Win the DETENTE: Came later, after Vietnam America looked for
more non violent methods to contain the spread of Communism
 American foreign policy as it
relates to Oppenheimer’s
nuclear “different country”
New rules to crush them Commies and avoid a Holocaust.

• Avoid starting all out thermonuclear war, which cannot be won.

• Avoid direct conventional war with USSR which could trigger
thermonuclear war
• Use war by proxy and manipulate foreign interests to suppress
Communism and enrich the USA via trade.
• Use economic sanctions [eg. 1980 American grain embargo of
USSR in response to Afghanistan, supported by European
economic commission]
• Develop nuclear countermeasures [SDI*]
• Protect political and strategic interests – retain established
democracy.
• Introduce democracy as a political countermeasure to
Communism. Support Democratic governments directly
[Vietnam, Korea]
• Develop conventional and nuclear arsenal technology to retain
technological advantage.
• Dirty communism’s reputation. Develop strategic anti communist
alliances. Subvert Communist governments. Internally and
 Better Dead
Than Red
Po licy o f “ m a ssive re ta lia tio n ” w a s
d e ve lo p e d b y th e E ise n h o w e r
a d m in istra tio n .

M cC a rth yism h a s E ve n if th e S o vie ts h a d th e b o m b ,

b e e n co m p a re d to th e U . S . w o u ld m a ssive ly re ta lia te
th e S a le m W itch “ by means and at places of our
Tria ls. o w n ch o o sin g .”
H o u se U n a m e rica n
A ctivitie s C o m m itte e
- Hollywood Blacklist
- Investigates real in
su sp e cte d
C o m m u n ists a like .
R u in live s.

S ta m p o u t
C o m m u n ism
w h e re ve r yo u fin d it,
e sp e cia lly a t h o m e .
Nuclear treaties – taming the
‘different country’ with
litigation?
T h e w o rld a s a w h o le w a s cle ve r e n o u g h to re a lize th a t th e C o ld W a r
co u ld n o t b e e n w o n in a sce n a rio w h e re a n u cle a r exch a n g e w a s
in vo lve d . M a n y in te rn a tio n a l tre a tie s w h e re in tro d u ce d to try a n d
lim it o r re m o ve th e n u m b e r o f, a n d u sa g e o f, n u cle a r w e a p o n s
i. N o n p ro life ra tio n : sig n a to rie s
i.
a g re e n o t to u se n u cle a r
w eapons
ii. Te st b a n s : sig n a to rie s a g re e to
sto p b la stin g th e p la n e t to
p ie ce s w ith n u ke te sts
iii. A rm s re d u ctio n : T h e se co m e
la te r. S ig n a to rie s a g re e to
re d u ce a rse n a lsize .
iv . A rm s L im ita tio n : B a n ce rta in
so rts o f d e live ry syste m s
w h ich a re ‘ to o e ffe ctive ’, fo r
exa m p le M IR V m issile s
•
•
1963 Limited Test Ban Treaty
An agreement between the US, USSR, and UK which prevented nuclear testing above
ground, underwater, and in outer space. But it does allow testing to occurr
underground as long as the radioactive fallout is not widespread. A total of 116
countries have signed this, and China, who had not signed, did testing in 1992
The List..
that violated the treaty's guidelines.
• 1967 Outer Space Treaty
• An agreement between the US, USSR, and UK which banned placing weapons of mass
destruction in orbit, on the moon, or in any other location in outerspace for
military purposes. Eighty-six nations have signed this agreement.
• 1968 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty
• An agreement among the US, USSR, UK, and 133 non nuclear weapon countries which
prevented the spread of nuclear weapons. It made sure that non-nuclear-
weapon countries did not start weapons production. This treaty was made
permanent in May 1995.
• 1972 Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty I ABM treaty
• A Treaty between the US and USSR which limited the anti-ballistic missle systems to a
maximum of 100 ABMS launchers and missles. It also prohibits the testing and
application of any of these components
• 1972 Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty I Interim Agreement
• An agreement between the US and USSR keeping the number of strategic ballistic
missles at the same level for 5 years. The construction of more ICBM silos was
restricted, but SLBM launcher amounts could increase if there was a reduction
in ICBM or SLBM.
• 1979 Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty II 1963 : Three of the four nuclear powers sign a limited treaty
that bans most, but not all, nuclear weapons testing.
• An agreement between the US and USSR which put a limit on offensive weapons
systems and strategic systems. A 2,400 limit was put on amount of strategic The Limited Nuclear Test Ban Treaty was signed in
nuclear weapon delivery vehicles, and a max of 1,320 was put on MIRVed Moscow by the United States, Soviet Union and Great Britain.
ballistic missles. The U.S. voided the treaty in 1986. France did not sign the treaty.
• 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF)
• A treaty between the US and USSR which bans all intermediate range missiles (IRMs),
short range missles, and all associated facilities and equipment. On-site
inspection is used to make sure that both countries are following the treaty.
• 1991 Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty
• An agreement between the US and USSR which limited the number of strategic
nuclear delivery vehicles to 1,600. It also limited the number of warheads per
country to 6,000; this treaty reduced the U.S.'s and Soviet's warheads by 15%
and 25% respectively.
• 1993 Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty II
• This treaty is an agreement between the US and Russia which will further reduce the
number of warheads by 5,000. Both sides must reduce their warheads by this
amount by December 4, 2001.
• 1996 Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT)
• An agreement signed by the US, CIS, UK, and 90 other countries which banned all
nuclear tests above and below the Earth's surface. A worldwide monitoring
system including 170 seismic stations checked for any signs of nuclear
explosion. India was the only nuclear country that didn't sign; it has conducted
five nuclear tests recently.
 Wars By Proxy
• FIRST KOREAN WAR
• 5 June 1950—ceasefire
27 July 1953
• Conflict between
Republic of Korea,
supported by the
United Nations, and
the Democratic
People's Republic of
Korea, supported by
the People's Republic
of China and the
Soviet Union
• No real winner, tense
Demilitarized situation
 Wars By Proxy
• VIETNAM
• September 26, 1959 –
April 30, 1975
• North Vietnamese
victory. Eventual
American withdrawal
• Communist takeover of
South Vietnam, Laos
and Cambodia The brutal treatment of the
• Unification of North civilian population of Vietnam
and South did little for America’s
imperialist image.
Vietnam under
North Vietnamese
rule.

 Wars By Proxy
• SOVIET INVASION OF
AFGHANISTAN aka. Soviet
Vietnam
• 27 December, 1979 – 15
February, 1989
• Result: Soviet withdrawal
• Soviet Union, supporting the
Marxist government of the
Democratic Republic of
Afghanistan at their own
request against the Islamist
Mujahideen Resistance
• A ‘free world’ conglomeration
including the USA, Great
Britain, Canada and Israel
support the local M u ja h id e e n re sista n ce fig h te r
Afghanistani resistance w ith ca p tu re d so vie t ro cke t
fighters, the Mujhadeen. la u n ch e r.
•

A m e rica n Pe a ce ke e p e r
n u cle a r m issile – Pro te cte d
fro m d ire ct h its b y it’ s silo
Nobody Wins –
Deterrence and MAD
Soviet SS-25 Sickle Mobile missile system –
The Soviets where fond of moving these all
over the dense forests of Eastern Europe
where American spyplanes found it hard to
track them.
Nuclear weapons were essentially so well
defended and distributed that there would
be no chance that one side could ‘first
strike’ the other and not face a
retaliation of some strength. This is
nuclear deterrence.
There was no advantage to be gained from
being the first to attack. In any scenario
there would be Mutually Assured
Destruction
 The Strategic Defense
Initiative [‘Star Wars’]

A m e rica m a d e m a n y a tte m p ts a t m itig a tin g th e n u cle a r th re a t w ith

it’ s su p e rio r te ch n o lo g y
A fte r so m e ye a rs o f in itia l d e ve lo p m e n t it is o fficia lly a n n o u n ce d b y
R e a g a n in 1 9 8 3 .
It w a s n o t o n e w e a p o n b u t a se rie s o f d iffe re n t m e th o d s in a sin g le
p ro g ra m , so m e p u re ly h yp o th e tica l, so m e su cce ssfu lly im p le m e n te d
In clu d in g g ro u n d b a se d la se r in te rce p tio n syste m s
S p a ce b a se d ch a ff :‘ b rillia n t p e b b le s’
H yp e rve lo city p ro je ctile s
E xte n d e d sp a ce a n d g ro u n d b a se d tra ckin g syste m s
A n d n o d o u b t m a n y m o re th in g s th e y a re n ’ t te llin g u s a b o u t..
A s fa r a s w e kn o w a s a w h o le it w a s n e ve r im p le m e n te d , th o u g h p a rts
o f th e te ch n o lo g y a re in A m e rica ’ s M issile S h ie ld .
 Conclusion: Soviet Union
collapses –but the bomb lives
on
In the 21st century, the nuclear threat
continues to be a major effect on
political processes.

At the time of me preparing this

presentation the USA and Russia are
on the verge of singing a new treaty
that will reduce the amount of total
nuclear warheads each side
possesses [Strategic Arms Reduction
Treaty IV– START]

"..we believe that there is an

opportunity for cooperation between
Russia and the United States on
missile defense against the threats
coming from rogue regimes and
extremist networks" Clinton said.
 Terrorism
• "The next generation of terrorists,
rather than going for little dramas,
will go for the big one...something so
horrific that it gets into the Guinness
Book of Records for terrorism.'
Richard Holbrooke, former US
ambassador to the UN, November
If Ira n o b ta in s a n o p e ra tin g fa st b re e d e r
2001"
re a cto r, it co u ld b e co m e e ve n h a rd e r fo r th e
W e ste rn w o rld to co n tro l th e flo w o f fissile
su b sta n ce s.
E ve n if te rro rists la ck th e e q u ip m e n t o r
exp e rtise to cre a te n u cle a r d e vice s, th e
m a te ria l co u ld b e u se d in a cru d e ‘ d irty b o m b ’
How is the US dealing with potential
Nuclear Flashpoints today?

Israel and Iran

US policy : support Israel

directly, retain Jewish vote
and damage Muslim interests.
Israel is a military and
cultural buffer to an Islamic
caliphate, which would be a
threat to the West.
India and Pakistan
US Policy: Broker peace
talks: favor neither side,
pursue expansionist policy in
Asia for trade, combating
terrorism and controlling
drug trafficking.
 REFERENCES
 Bay of Pigs Invasion. U-S History. Available at: http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h1765.html [Accessed March 16,


2010].
•  
• Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament - CND as a pressure group. Campaign For Nuclear Disarmament.
Available at: http://www.cnduk.org/index.php/information/info-sheets/cnd-as-a-pressure-group.html
[Accessed March 17, 2010].
•  
• Index - Dynamic Learning Online. Available at: http://www.learningonline.com.au/topics/11/books/71
[Accessed March 16, 2010].
•  
• Barnaby, F., 2004. How to Build a Nuclear Bomb: And Other Weapons of Mass Destruction (Paperback),
Granta Books.
•  
• Conceive Ltd, Nuclear Weapons and Weapons Treaties Timeline. timelines.info. Available at:
http://www.timelines.info/history/ages_and_periods/the_modern_world/the_cold_war/nuclear_weapons_a
nd_weapons_treaties/ [Accessed March 17, 2010].
•  
• Kristensen, H.M. & Godsberg, A., Nuclear Forces Guide. Federation Of American Scientists. Available at:
http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/index.html [Accessed March 16, 2010].
•  
• Pike, J. et al., 2000. RT-2PM - SS-25 SICKLE - Russian / Soviet Nuclear Forces. Federation Of American
Scientists. Available at: http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/russia/icbm/rt-2pm.htm [Accessed March 16,
2010].
•  
• Rhodes, R., 1996. Dark Sun: The Making of the Hydrogen Bomb, Simon & Schuster.
•  
• Rhodes, R., 1998. The Making Of The Atomic Bomb New Edition., Simon & Schuster Ltd.
•