Registered user login:

Reasons to be fearful

Rob Blackhurst

Published 31 July 2008

The spectre of atomic weapons has been replaced in the popular imagination by that of climate change - yet two defence analysts convincingly argue that another nuclear catastrophe is as likely as ever

A Nuclear Family Vacation: Travels in the World of Atomic Weaponry

Nathan Hodge and Sharon Weinberger

Bloomsbury, 336pp, £12.99

It seems a law of modern life that there is no crucible of human suffering so horrific that it will not eventually have a heritage order slapped on it and a gift shop attached. Now that the struggles of the Second World War have been memorialised to death, it is the turn of the atomic age to attract its share of the tourist trade. In the US, nuclear weapons - once the terrible cancellers of life on earth - have been turned into a kitsch slice of 1950s Americana, to be treasured alongside Chuck Berry and cars with tail fins.

In A Nuclear Family Vacation, the husband-and-wife team of Nathan Hodge and Sharon Weinberger, both defence analysts, eschew the charms of Disneyland to follow this new heritage trail across the research labs, missile silos and nuclear shelters of the United States, Russia and Kazakhstan. Here, tourists can queue up to turn the launch keys in decommissioned Cold War missile bunkers and visit the first plutonium plant in the US - now proudly trademarked as "the most contaminated place in North America".

On their road trip, Hodge and Weinberger encounter the Special Atomic Demolition Munition - a suitcase bomb, to be carried on suicide missions behind enemy lines, that seems cartoonish enough to belong in a Roger Moore Bond film. They visit a ravaged mock-up of a 1950s town, built in the desert outside Las Vegas, where cellars and picket fences were tested to see how they would survive a nuclear onslaught. And they see a mock-up of the nuclear family in the well-stocked nuclear shelter - with mannequin Fifties housewives cheerfully serving dinner to the kids. It's no surprise that the National Atomic Museum in Albuquerque has become a popular venue to hire out for children's birthday parties.

But this trip is a much more conventional journey than the gonzo title suggests. We see little of the couple's travels on the open road and the nuclear family suggested by the punning title is nowhere to be seen. But we do get a fascinating series of vignettes about an under-reported, vastly expensive nuclear-industrial complex intact but still groping for a role 20 years after the end of the Cold War.

The sense that the west has forgotten how to fear nuclear weapons seeps through A Nuclear Family Vacation. Even the hallowed laboratory at Los Alamos that spawned the first atomic weapon can no longer attract talented graduates. Nuclear war seems irrelevant to the American Ivy-Leaguers who were still in diapers when the Berlin Wall fell. The exaggerations that accompanied the war in Iraq - particularly Dick Cheney's notorious claim that Saddam Hussein was developing a nuclear programme - have made the fear of the atom seem ridiculous for the MoveOn.org generation. Nukes are now ridiculed as a convenient Aunt Sally, used by politicians to hide their real agenda.

The poet Robert Lowell wrote "Fall, 1961" at the height of the Berlin crisis, complaining that "we have talked our extinction to death". Now nuclear weapons are barely mentioned at all. When Hillary Clinton said during the Democratic Party primaries that, as commander-in-chief, she would "totally obliterate" Iran in retaliation for an attack on Israel, it was only a few pundits in the left-wing blogosphere who were fazed that a presidential candidate was threatening a first strike. And when we think of the foreign policy events of the past decade, how many people remember that India and Pakistan came perilously close to nuclear war in 2002?

The startling effect of this silence and amnesia is that, according to Hodge and Weinberger, 61 per cent of Americans believe that Ronald Reagan's fanciful Star Wars system actually exists - and that the US has a working system to protect them from nuclear attack.

No one now below their mid-thirties will be able to remember the terror that nuclear weapons evoked as late as the mid-1980s - the era of When the Wind Blows and Threads: a time when Martin Amis wrote short stories about after the inevitable nuclear holocaust. "They distort all life and they subvert all freedoms," he wrote - a sentiment that has been transferred wholesale to his latest enemy, Islamism - although, like the rest of the intelligentsia, he has gone silent on nukes. In the Armageddon league table, it is now global warming, with its biblical floods and hurricanes, that disturbs our sleep and fills the current affairs shelves at Borders, rather than the mushroom cloud. It is left to ancient Cold War hawks to remember. Robert McNamara flies around the world in a never-ending think-tank seminar warning how close we still are to annihilation. And even that atomic cheerleader, Margaret Thatcher, coolly predicted in her 2002 book Statecraft that battlefield nukes would be used in the "foreseeable future".

Hodge and Weinberger don't exactly provide many reasons to challenge their pessimism. They impart the sobering knowledge that, even though Russia no longer targets its arsenal at western cities, the programming of missile guidance systems means that they will automatically home in on their old targets if they are misfired.

The University of Chicago's doomsday clock was advanced by two minutes last year to stand at five to midnight. A combination of Iranian and North Korean nuclear ambitions, loose nuclear materials around the world and potential nuclear terrorism make this the most dangerous time since the Cold War. But it is unclear how the vast US nuclear-industrial complex can protect Americans against these threats.

This is where A Nuclear Family Vacation is best, in describing how the nuclear weapons industry staggers on in a kind of superannuated half-life. The US signed up to a ban on testing in the early 1990s and the last nuclear weapons designer with actual experience of designing a thermonuclear weapon is due to retire soon. But because of the industry's shrewd lobbying, it receives more public funds than it did at the height of the Cold War, largely for its "stockpile stewardship work".

The political price for the Clinton administration of getting warhead reductions through Congress was that the testing and manufacturing facilities would continue to be funded lavishly. The result of all this pointless activity, however, is an industry plunged into "despair and desperation" about its ill-defined role, with office politics replacing geopolitics. Disgruntled scientists, unable to engage in their passion for designing weapons, expend their energy writing blogs criticising management.

As in the tendentious recent debates about Trident in Britain, none of the PowerPoint warriors whom Hodge and Weinberger encounter in upper echelons of the military can articulate a purpose for their weapons. "We came away less convinced than ever that there was any strategy to speak of. The infrastructure exists because no one can come up with a compelling reason to shut it down," they conclude.

This mission fuzz reaches a comic climax when the couple visit the Global Innovation and Strategy Centre, a new, Pentagon-funded military think tank, run along the lines of a Silicon Valley dotcom - with bottles of peach-flavoured water, Scandinavian wood tables and a "storytelling room". Here, generals talk about "knowledge discovery", "the wired generation" and quote the globalisation proselytiser Thomas Friedman. The icy clarity of nuclear deterrence has been replaced by "military psychobabble", in which the think tank "looks at anything that can change an adversary's mind" - which can be anything from instant messaging to a nuclear weapon.

For all its insights and comic moments (including a safety announcement about turkey barbecues being piped to workers on the warhead production line), A Nuclear Vacation can be heavy going. Monochrome installations and perimeter fences, whether in windswept corners of Wyoming, Nevada or Kazakhstan, make for a dull backdrop. The writers are policy-wonks rather than raconteurs, and their descriptions-by-numbers betray the way this book has been stitched together from articles already published in the online magazine Slate. At least three people are described as having "salt and pepper hair". More importantly, it is a glaring omission in the writers' travel itinerary that they do not travel to India and Pakistan - which is surely the odds-on killing field for the world's third nuclear holocaust.

Yet the book should at least be required deck-chair reading for one man: Barack Obama. He has called for the US to further reduce its nuclear stockpile and eventually eliminate all nuclear weapons from the world. The constant invo cation of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty by the US when dealing with the "axis of evil" lacks all legitimacy when neither the Americans nor the other declared nuclear powers have stuck to a commitment to make "tangible efforts" towards disarmament.

Hodge and Weinberger's chronicle of the trillions of wasted nuclear dollars might stiffen Obama's resolve to take the moral high ground - and put this expenditure to better use. Then again, its portrait of a powerful military-industrial complex, desperate to preserve its nukes at all costs, might, in time-honoured Cold War fashion, deter him from making a first strike.

Rob Blackhurst writes for the Financial Times

Post this article to

  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • newsvine
  • Reddit

9 comments from readers

knave
31 July 2008 at 09:20

I actually think you wrong.

The greatest danger to mankind is bio weapons.

Cybertiger
31 July 2008 at 12:29

"The greatest danger to mankind is ...."

... George Bush and the kind of folk who would vote for a dangerous critter like that ...

nawawimohamad
01 August 2008 at 04:48

The greatest danger to mankind is the US administration. That group of people is not only capable of doing everything bad but have been proven so even onto its own citizens!

Douglas Chalmers
01 August 2008 at 14:28

He said he had no regrets. Robert Oppenheimer’s story, 1945..... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l8w3Y-dskeg

Riaz Ahmad
01 August 2008 at 21:07

Currently, the greatest danger to the world is a rogue super power called USA. On the decline, both as an economic and as a militory power, it is crossing all norms of decency. Torture, suspension of due judicial process, utter contempt of international law, disregard of human rights and Geneva convention, slaughter of innocent civilians by thousands and writing it off as colleteral demage in the name of phoney war on terror have become the daily norms. In desperation, it is threatening the world with premtive nuclear strikes. How can such a stupid and dangerous country speak on the behalf of world comunity.

knave
02 August 2008 at 07:19

Two words

Biological weapons

Carl Jones
05 August 2008 at 10:01

Rob, you mock at your peril. It is an unfortunate fact the public are ignorant of potential current nuclear weapons technology. Scared by early nuclear weapons images from the 50`s.

Suitcase nukes....LOL, more like micro nukes that fit in the palm of your hand, very low, low yield and very, very clean. Then we have another sub-class where the weapon does not reach criticallity, but is still much more powerful than conventional weapons.

The NWO has been using these micro nukes for well over a decade, all over the world and mostly in its sham war on terror.

SDI (star wars and Raygun lol) was really a decoy. There is no way that a Russian ballistic missile could hit the US. Because technology has moved on and I have no doubt the Russians have the same ability.

No, we are now in the era of natural event control nd weather modification on a continental scale. So while middle world races to catch up, the West can afford to trade their vast and expensive nukes with countries like India. The NS ran a recent article on the US/India agreement and I commented....but it was censored.LOL For quite some time, the US has been creaming off India`s best commercial talent, but the reallity is that Amerika needs to get into the seed and this is the real reason why the US is using gloved hands in its dealings with an India that has potentially six times US brain power. Of course, I`m not sure why that comment was censored, it could have been the elite joint fighter pilot exercises where the Indians ran the US very close and in some areas beat them....no wonder Colin Powell took so much interest.

Knave; biological genetic weapons....AIDS, SARS and H5N1 looks on track for staggering population reduction. My recommendation....don`t take any NWO medication.

Carl Jones
05 August 2008 at 18:01

I realise the article is about nukes, but "Knave" mentioned biological weapons. We really don`t know for sure just how advanced US nuclear weapons technology is, although I have illustrated my own understanding in the previous. Below is an excellent link on bio-weapons history and especially good history of US activity since the 2nd WW. I think it makes an excellent comparison to US nuclear weapons research, which must be comparable and likely much greater than biological weapons research.

Some say real MP`s visit this site. For those MP`s who aren`t signed up by either the CIA, MI6, or Mossad. Maybe you should seriously consider your future support (if given the opportunity lol) for backing future/additional UK military support of MI6/NWO policy, directed through the US government.

http://www.rense.com/general82/suh.htm

Gideon Polya
05 August 2008 at 22:45

A very scary thing is the IGNORING of the nuclear threat from existing nuclear powers (US, Russia, UK, France, China, Israel, India, Pakistan, and barely begun and dismantling North Korea) by Mainstream media and politicians - with the notable exception of Obama who blots his copybook by wanting to "bahm" nuclear power Pakistan and to continue America's war criminal, genocidal "bahming" of Pakistan's co-religionist neighbour Occupied Afghanistan (see: "Obama, McCain, Iraqi Genocide, & Afghan Genocide": http://www.newsvine.com/qana ) .

Rational risk management (as very successfully applied in the nuclear industry, aviation and "defence") successively involves (a) getting accurate information , (b) scientific analysis (involving critical testing of potentially falsifiable hypotheses) and (c) informed systemic change to minimize risk. Unfortunately in the Bush-Blair era the converse is de rigeur i.e. (a) lies, propaganda, ignoring, censorship, (b) anti-science spin involving selective use of asserted facts to support a partisan position (e.g. the falsely alleged Iraqi WMDs etc) and (c) blame and shame (e.g. Clinton's threat to "obliterate" Iran and other sabre-rattling by nuclear terrorist states, notably the US and Apartheid Israel, over Iran's nuclear energy program while resolutely opposing moves and votes for a nuclear-free ME by Iran and other Muslim countries).

Ignore the Bush-ite and neo-Bush-ite, genocide-ignoring and nuclear holocaust-ignoring Mainstream media and politicians - and listen to the SCIENTISTS (and especially the top scientists)! Thus the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) declares that the 3 acute threats to the World are nuclear, greenhouse and poverty threats (for a detailed analysis see "Rational Risk Management": http://rationalriskmanagement.blogspot.com/ ).

Scientists are not just making the sensible warnings, they are also providing the SOLUTIONS to poverty, global warming and the nuclear threat. Thus Dr Tilman Ruff, Head of Australia's Medical Association for the Prevention of War (MAPW) explains that the technical steps for nuclear disarmament have already been worked out by experts - see "Abolishing weapons of terror": http://www.abc.net.au/rn/ockhamsrazor/stories/2007/1995827.h...).

Post your comment

Please note: you will need to login or register before your comment is displayed on the website

You may enter up to 2000 characters (about 300-350 words)

Characters left:

We want to encourage people to comment on our content and to exchange views with other readers and hope this will be done on a courteous basis. However, if you encounter posts which are offensive please let us know by emailing comments@newstatesman.co.uk and we will take swift action where necessary.

Read More

Vote!

Should Darling have been bolder with the 45% tax rate?