Why we’re complacent about the ‘real and present danger’ of nuclear war

By Mark Waghorn via SWNS

People in the United States and Britain are complacent about the "real and present danger" of nuclear war, reveals a new study.

A full-blown conflict would cause global famine – wiping out almost two-thirds of the world's population.

But there is a lack of awareness among U.S. and UK populations of "nuclear winter" - the catastrophic long-term environmental consequences.

Russia's unlawful invasion of Ukraine has made it more likely than at any time in the last 40 years.

The scientific theory sees detonations from exchanges throw vast amounts of debris into the stratosphere which blocks out much of the sun for up to a decade.

It causes global drops in temperature, mass crop failure and widespread starvation. Combined with radiation fall-out, knock-on effects would see millions more perish - even if they are far outside of any blast zone.

Paul Ingram, of the University of Cambridge's Centre for the Study of Existential Risk (CSER), said: "In 2023, we find ourselves facing a risk of nuclear conflict greater than we've seen since the early eighties.

"Yet there is little in the way of public knowledge or debate of the unimaginably dire long-term consequences of nuclear war for the planet and global populations."

In January he polled 3,000 participants online - half in the UK, half in the US – to self-report on a sliding scale whether they felt they knew a lot about "nuclear winter."

In the UK around one-in-20 remembered hearing about it (5.4 percent) during the 1980s - rising to nine percent in the US.

The other little information they had came from contemporary media or culture, 3.2 and 7.5 percent respectively, and recent academic studies - 1.6 and 5.2 percent.

Ideas of nuclear winter permeated UK and US culture during the Cold War through TV shows and films such as Threads and The Day After, as well as in novels such as Z for Zachariah.

Last month, state TV propagandist Vladimir Solovyov urged Russia to nuke Britain for supplying tanks and other weapons to Ukraine.

Ingram said: "Of course, it is distressing to consider large-scale catastrophes, but decisions need to account for all potential consequences, to minimize the risk.

"Any stability within nuclear deterrence is undermined if it is based on decisions that are ignorant of the worst consequences of using nuclear weapons."

Participants were also presented with fictional media reports from the near future dated July 2023 relaying news of nuclear attacks.

In the event of Russia hitting Ukraine, fewer than one in five in both countries supported in-kind retaliation, with men more likely than women to back reprisal - 20.7% (US) and 24.4% (UK) compared to 14.1% (US) and 16.1% (UK).

The survey used infographics summarizing nuclear winter effects laid out in a recent study using climate modeling and observations from forest fires and volcanoes.

It found even a limited nuclear war could cause mass starvation of hundreds of millions in countries uninvolved in any conflict.

Support for nuclear retaliation was lower by 16 percent in the US and 13 percent in the UK among those shown the findings than among the other half who acted as a control.

The effect was more significant for those supporting the parties of the US President and the UK Government.

Support for nuclear retaliation was lower by 33 percent among Conservative Party voters and 36 percent among U.S. Democrat voters when participants were briefly exposed to recent nuclear winter research.

Ingram said: "There is an urgent need for public education within all nuclear-armed states that is informed by the latest research.

"We need to collectively reduce the temptation that leaders of nuclear-armed states might have to threaten or even use such weapons in support of military operations."

If we assume Russia has a comparable nuclear destructive force to that of the US – just under 780 megatons – then the least devastating scenario in which nuclear winter claims 225 million lives could involve just 0.1% of this joint arsenal.

The findings were published in a report on the CSER website.