JANUARY
9, 2018
by JAMES HEDDLE
Photo
by The Official CTBTO Photo | CC BY 2.0
I
want to say – and this is very important – in the end, we lucked out! It
was luck that prevented nuclear war. Khrushchev was rational.
Kennedy was rational. Castro was rational. [Holding up
his thumb and forefinger slightly apart.] Rational individuals
came that close to total devastation of their societies…and
that danger exists today.
Former
U.S. Sec. of Defense Robert McNamara – talking about the Cuban
Missile Crisis – in ‘The Fog of War,” a documentary film by Errol Morris
“Today
we still have over 20 thousand real world nuclear weapons. Enough to blow
up everybody on the planet several times over. Those weapons pose the
immediate problem of a danger of terrorism, the immediate problem of the
possibility of nuclear war.… I believe we are on the brink of a new
nuclear arms race. It breaks my heart. Today, the danger of a
nuclear catastrophe is actually higher than it was during the cold war. Let me
say that again…”
Former
U.S. Sec. of Defense, William J. Perry, January, 2016
A
nuclear war anywhere will disrupt—and possibly destroy—civilized life
everywhere.
The
Cuban Missile Crisis at 55 – James G. Blight and Janet M. Lang
There
is such a thing as being too late…. We still have a choice today: nonviolent
coexistence or violent coannihilation… Now let us begin… let us rededicate
ourselves to the long and bitter, but beautiful, struggle for a new world.
Martin
Luther King, Jr. April 4, 1967
Present
Threat Level:’High’
The
current Silicon Valley meme is that Artificial Intelligence, or AI, may –
someday – pose a danger to human existence. But plain old human intelligence
already does pose that threat. And it has for some time.
Some
critic reportedly quipped that “NATO exists to deal with problems created by
its own existence.”
Whether
or not you agree with that assessment of NATO, it’s hard to deny that this
dictum accurately applies to the long much-celebrated geo-strategic system of
so-called ‘nuclear deterrence.’
The
creation of ‘command & control’ structures by nuclear weapons states –
purportedly designed to reduce the threat of nuclear war – are more than likely
to produce precisely the outcome they are allegedly created to prevent.
That’s
the sobering wake-up call message of Daniel Ellsberg’s important new book THE
DOOMSDAY MACHINE: Confessions of a Nuclear War Planner.
Still
at it, after all these years
At
eighty-six years of age, Ellsberg – perhaps the world’s most celebrated
whistleblower for his Viet Nam era Pentagon Papers revelations – is still going
strong, and now working urgently to share even more crucial information, long
kept secret from the American public and the world.
He
is a man who walks his talk. I last saw him on a hot day last August,
lying on the tarmac with about a hundred people at the gate of Livermore
Laboratory, California’s nuclear weapons design shop, which bills itself as
‘The Smartest Place on Earth.’ Their bodies were outlined in chalk,
commemorating the Atomic Shadows left by the vaporized victims of the US atomic
bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Virtually every weapon in the U.S.
Doomsday Machine’s arsenal has been at least partially designed at Livermore,
under the aegis of the University of California, Berkeley. For many
years, a rally,
march and ‘die-in’ has been organized there every year on Hiroshima
Day by a coalition of groups headed by TriValleyCARES and its Indefatigable
Director, Marylia Kelly. Ellsberg has been a long-time rally speaker and protest
participant. On this occasion, he was lying there, chatting with his old
friend Fr. Louis Vitale, as they waited to get arrested – the umpteenth time
for both of them.
Evolution
of a Nuclear War Planner – Into the ‘realm of madness’
It
started in Detroit, Michigan, where his engineer father was a designer of the
long, moving assembly lines then being initiated, first for motor cars, then –
as WWII geared up – for war planes. As a high school student at the
up-scale Cranbrook boarding school, he was one of the first of his generation
to learn about the then new concept of ‘cultural lag.’ Introduced by
sociologist William Ogburn, the term drew attention to the fact that
technological innovations advance faster than the cultural, moral and political
systems needed to manage them. It was a concept to be epitomized in
spades in the coming Atomic Age.
Later,
as a Harvard graduate economist with a focus on the then hot topics of
‘decision theory’ and ‘game theory,’ as well as a former Marine officer with
combat experience in Viet Nam, Ellsberg, in his late twenties, was recognized
by those who notice such things as having a great set of qualification for a
war planner.
Moving
from an Honors Fellowship at Harvard to a consultant job at the RAND
corporation, in an office with an ocean view in Santa Monica, and colleagues
like the famous (or infamous) Herman Kahn, was a natural transition.
This
was in the early days of the now wide-spread practice of ‘contracting’ out
government functions to private corporations. RAND was one of the first
of such firms, the number of which is now legion.
The
young Ellsberg’s quickly demonstrated abilities soon put him into circulation
as a trusted private consultant in the highest circles of the Washington
national security establishment with eventually some of the highest
‘clearances’ and a unique breadth of access to information known only to a few.
What
he discovered horrified him. With youthful idealism (and perhaps more
than a dash of youthful hubris), he set out to change it.
This
book tells the story of some of his impressive successes. But it’s also
the story – as the sub-title ‘confessions’ indicates – of some of the ways he
now believes his efforts may have inadvertently helped to make things worse.
“RAND
analysts, of whom I was one,” he writes, “sought to bring about less insane
planning for nuclear war. We failed.” As he now sees it, the
institutional systems in which they were embedded, “still held us prisoners
within the realm of madness.”
His
purpose now is to contribute to wide public knowledge beyond the myths,
deceptions and cover-ups which we have long been fed.
“We
need,” he says, “a new understanding of the real history of the nuclear age.”
Lessons
Learned
Eventually
moving from RAND to the Defense Department, Ellsberg once briefed presidents
and high officials, and – were he to do so again today – he says the item at
the top of his list would be what is, in effect, Washington’s historically
consistent first-strike policy:
The
basic elements of American readiness for nuclear war remain today what they were
almost sixty years ago. Thousands of nuclear weapons remain on hair-trigger
alert, aimed mainly at Russian military targets including command and control,
many in or near cities. The declared official rationale for such a system has
always been primarily the supposed need to deter – or if necessary respond to –
an aggressive Russian nuclear first strike against the United States. That
widely believed public rationale is a deliberate deception….
The
required U.S. strategic capabilities have always been for a
first-strike force: not, under any president, for a U.S. surprise attack,
unprovoked or ‘a bolt out of the blue,’ but not, either, with an aim of
striking ‘second’ under any circumstances, if that can be avoided by
preemption. Though officially denied, preemptive ‘launch on warning (LOW) –
either on tactical warning of an incoming attack or strategic warning that
nuclear escalation is probably impending – has always been at the heart
of our strategic alert. [Emphasis added.]
But
it gets worse.
As
an advisor to Kennedy, Ellsberg had the opportunity to query the Joint Chiefs
of Staff (over the President’s signature) if they had done estimates of
how many human beings would be killed if U.S. nuclear war plans were carried
out against the then Sino-Soviet Bloc. He was stunned by the answers.
“The
total death toll as calculated by the Joint Chiefs,” he was told, “from a U.S.
first strike aimed at the Soviet Union, its Warsaw Pact satellites, and China,
would be roughly six hundred million dead. A hundred Holocausts.
“From
that day,” he writes, “I have had one overriding life purpose: to prevent the
execution of any such plan.”
A
Global Machine With No ‘Off’ Switch
As
part of his unusual ‘go anywhere, ask anything, see everything’ mandate,
Ellsberg was told of the existence of a plan that the military kept secret from
the President, the Secretary of Defense and all other civilian
authorities. It was called JSCAP ( pronounced J-SCAP) for Joint Strategic
Capabilities Plan. Out of it had developed, by 1960, the Single
Integrated Operational Plan (SIOP), the single strategic plan governing
the entire U.S. nuclear arsenal including all Strategic Air Command (SAC) bombers,
land-based ICBMs and all the Navy’s submarine based nuclear missiles.
In
1961, SAC had around seventeen hundred bombers, each carrying thermonuclear –
i.e., hydrogen, bombs – many of them between five and twenty-five megatons in
explosive power, or ‘yield.’
Each
twenty-five megaton bomb – with 1,250 times the yield of the fission bomb that
destroyed Nagasaki – was the equivalent of twenty-five million tons of TNT, or
over twelve times the total bomb tonnage we dropped in World War II.
Within the arsenal there were some five hundred bombs with an explosive
power of twenty five megatons. Each of these warheads
had more firepower than all the bombs and shells exploded in all the wars of
human history. [His italics. ]
In
the event of a so-called ‘general war’ with the Soviet Union, the SIOP called
for the simultaneous launch of all those world-wide systems. The
pre-determined targets, he learned, would not only include every major
city in the Soviet Union and all its satellite allies, but all the cities in
China and all its allies
Oh,
and Then There’s Nuclear Winter
Two
decades later, in 1983, it was discovered what none of them – Ellsberg, his
RAND colleagues, the Joint Chiefs, the President, or his science advisors – had
known about in the ‘60s: the phenomenon of ‘nuclear winter.’
In
retrospect he realized,
It
is the smoke, after all (not the fallout, which would remain mostly limited to
the northern hemisphere), that would do it worldwide: smoke and soot lofted by
the fierce firestorms in hundreds of burning cities into the stratosphere,
where it would not rain out and would remain for a decade or more, enveloping
the globe and blocking most sunlight, lowering annual global temperatures to
the level of the last Ice Age, and killing all harvests worldwide, causing
near-universal starvation within a year or two…. Which meant that a large
nuclear war of the kind we prepared for then or later would kill nearly every
human on earth (along with most other large species.)
But
there was more.
The
SIOP included no way to separate blanket attacks on both Russia
and China once the ‘Go’ order has been given…and there was no desire to do so.
Ellsberg
quotes a report from the memoir of colleague John Rubel about his experience at
a 1960 briefing at SAC headquarters at Offutt Air Force Base near Omaha,
Nebraska. It was attended by Defense Department officials, the Joint
Chiefs of Staff and military commanders from around the world, and presided
over by SAC Commander General Thomas Power. On a huge screen in the
darkened command center, successive overlays portrayed the cumulative bombing
of all the SIOP’s targets. In conclusion, a briefer reported that fallout
alone would eventually kill half the population of China, in addition to those
killed in the initial blasts.
Rubel
recalls,
A
voice out of the gloom from somewhere behind me interrupted, saying, “May I ask
a question?” General Power turned…in his front-row seat, stared into the
darkness and said, “Yeah, what is it?” in a tone not likely to encourage the
timid. “What if this isn’t China’s war?” the voice asked. “What if this is just
a war with the Soviets? Can you change the plan?”
“Well,
yeah,” said General Power resignedly, “we can, but I hope nobody thinks of it,
because it would really screw up the plan.”
Ellsberg
tells of leaving the Pentagon one afternoon with a colleague to do ‘operational
research’ at a showing of the then just-released, now classic, Stanley Kubrick
film ‘Dr. Strangelove.’ They were surprised at how accurately the film
portrayed the impossibility of reversing the order, once the system has been
triggered by a single, rogue commander.
Rewriting
the War Plan
Ellsberg
had set his sights on changing that plan, and, to some extent, he succeeded.
Under
Kennedy and McNamara, he was assigned to redraft the general war section of the
BSNP or Basic National Security Policy, civilian guidance for war planning.
In
the late afternoon of April 7, 1961, he finished his first draft and realized
it was his thirtieth birthday. “I remember thinking: for the rest of my
life, I won’t have done anything more important than this.”
Among
many other significant changes, the re-draft he wrote called for:
+
elimination of the SIOP as the single, automatic response
+
elimination of the automatic inclusion of China and Soviet Satellite states
+
creation of a command and control system for issuing reliable ‘stop’ or
‘recall’ orders.
A
final version was sent to the Joint Chiefs on May 5, 1961. He reports,
“My”
revised guidance became the basis for the operational war plans under Kennedy –
reviewed by me for Deputy Secretary Gilpatric in 1962, 1963, and again in the
Johnson administration in 1964. It has been reported by insiders and
scholars to have been a critical influence on U.S. strategic war planning ever
since. [ For texts of related memos and drafts, see ellsberg.net/BNSP. ]
But,
after all, it was still a nuclear war plan. He notes, “In years to come,
the memory of this accomplishment did not bring me the same satisfaction it
brought when I was thirty.”
Delegation
or Decapitation? – That is the question
Given
POTUS Trump’s growing reputation as a ‘malignant narcissist’ running rogue in
the Oval Office, there has been much media and Congressional concern expressed
of late about the presumption that just one man, – whether rational or crazed –
is the only one with access to the ‘nuclear football,’ its launch codes and
‘having his finger on The Button.’
Harvard
Professor Elaine Scary has written a fascinating, in depth, scholarly analysis
of this notion in her impressive THERMONUCLEAR
MONARCHY – Choosing Between Democracy and Doom.
But
it turns out, according to another alarming revelation in Ellsberg’s book,
that, from the very beginning of U.S. nuclear war planning,
One-Finger-on-The-Button has by no means been the case.
According
to Ellsberg, “… the hand authorized to pull the trigger on U.S. nuclear forces
has never been exclusively that of the president, nor even his
highest military officials.” [His emphasis.]
The
operative policy, from Eisenhower and Kennedy on down, has been to delegate
‘Execute’ authority to subordinate commanders, – even, depending on
circumstances, far down the chain of command – to avoid ‘decapitation’ –
elimination of centralized authority.
“This
delegation has been one of our highest national secrets,” writes
Ellsberg. “The same was true for the Soviet Union, now Russia.”
And,
one can assume, to this day, for all other nuclear weapons powers.
Three
Hats
Ellsberg
writes from three complementary perspectives:
+
as an ‘insider’ with top level security clearances working to discover and
mitigate what he sees as ill-conceived, omnicidal policies;
+
as an analyst/historian striving to understand how such a system has come into
being;
+
and as a whistleblowing reformer working to alert and mobilize an informed
public to dis-assemble the very system he spent much of his professional life
helping create.
His
is a rich and complex narrative. Here are some of its key points.
Inside
the Cuban Missile Crisis – ‘The most dangerous moment in recorded history’
Ellsberg,
the insider, throws new light on the myths and misinformation surrounding this
pivotal historical event. It’s too complex a story – as Ellsberg’s
narrative shows in depth – to do more than summarize here. [ See: Ellsberg.net/Doomsday/cubanmissilcrisis for
his files. ] It happened in 1962, but it’s take-home lesson is as current as
today’s headlines.
The
essence of it is this: none of the participants at the time had a full
and accurate picture of what was really going on.
It
wasn’t until decades later that the full facts came into focus.
McNamara’s thumb and forefinger, held barely apart, tell the story.
Global nuclear Armageddon had been avoided by “that much.”
In
retrospect, it was a tragi-comedy of errors, projections, and miscalculations
on all sides – a microcosm of the Doomsday Machine Dilemma.
Yet,
the fate of the earth hung in the balance…just as it does in the several
nuclear confrontations emerging today.
On
Monday, October 22, 1962 President Kennedy went on national TV to announce the
discovery that Soviet ballistic missiles were being shipped to Cuba, and that,
in response, he was imposing a naval ‘quarantine’ around the island nation.
He said that the launch of any missile from Cuba “against any nation in
the Western Hemisphere” would trigger “a full retaliatory response upon the
Soviet Union.”
Watching
Kennedy’s speech from his Malibu home, and knowing full well what “a full
retaliatory response” would mean, Ellsberg headed for Washington.
The
global context was this:
In
April, 1961, a CIA sponsored invasion of Cuba at the Bay of Pigs had failed.
In
August, 1961, the long-standing Berlin Crisis had ended with the partition of
that German city between Soviet and Allied forces, and the erection of the
Berlin Wall.
U.S.
and Soviet forces were arrayed against each other across Europe, with American
nuclear missiles stationed in Turkey.
The
U.S. Joint Chiefs had long been itching to invade Cuba on any pretext.
Remembering the Bay of Pigs, both Cuban President Castro and Soviet
Premiere Khrushchev knew this and took the threat very seriously.
Khrushchev had sent the missiles to prevent such an invasion. U.S.
intelligence thought there were thirty-eight.
On
arrival in DC, Ellsberg was tasked to “Write a memo on what thirty-eight
missiles could do to our strike-back ability.” The conclusion was, given
the balance of American and Soviet nuclear forces, not much. The Soviet
Union would still be turned into a large smoking hole from the U.S. ‘full
retaliatory response.’
Throughout
the next thirteen tension-filled days, Ellsberg and most of those around him
believed that Khrushchev knew he was way out-gunned and would ultimately
‘blink,’ ‘back down’ and remove the missiles. On October 27, 1962
he did.
It
was the day afterward that Ellsberg discovered that Defense Secretary McNamara
and others around Kennedy had put the chance of Armageddon happening much
higher, like maybe 1 in 10. Later, McNamara revealed, “the Saturday
before the Sunday in which Khrushchev announced withdrawal of the missiles… and
a U-2 [U.S. spy plane ] was shot down…I remember leaving the White House
at the end of that Saturday. It was a beautiful fall day. And thinking
that might well be the last sunset I saw. You couldn’t tell what was going to
follow.”
Ellsberg
was appalled. “One in ten?! Nuclear war…And we were doing
what we were doing?!”
‘What
they had been doing’ included:
+
the blockade itself, at the risk of armed conflict with Soviet warships;
+
forcing Soviet submarines to surface with depth grenades
+
a large-scale airborne bomber alert with significant risk of accidents
involving nuclear weapons;
+
continuing reconnaissance, even after several spy planes were fired on over
Cuba and one shot down on Saturday; and
+
full preparations(“if they were wholly a bluff,” he says, “they fooled us”) for
invasion and airstrike
He
thought, “Who were these people I was working for? Were they
all insane?
Subsequent
research by Ellsberg and others has
now revealed that the real situation was much worse than any U.S. officials
knew at the time.
In
fact, there had been 162 Soviet missiles already in Cuba, not 38. Some of
them were tactical, short-range nuclear missiles to be aimed at invading U.S.
forces and the U.S. base at Guantanamo Bay. Soviet submarines being
bombarded with U.S. grenades were – unknown to Washington – equipped with
nuclear torpedoes.
Neither
Kennedy nor Khrushchev had any intention of triggering a nuclear war.
They were both bluffing, hoping to get a better deal. No invasion
of Cuba was planned. But none of their subordinates knew that. Castro,
believing a U.S. invasion to be inevitable and that Cuba would be made to
‘disappear,’ had written to Khrushchev urging a full Soviet nuclear response on
the U.S. once the expected invasion was underway.
Finally,
when Khrushchev and Kennedy both realized that their brinksmanship was
spiraling out of their control, they worked urgently together to defuse
it. Contrary to popular myth, neither country ‘won’ or ‘lost.’
Global
nuclear destruction had been averted by just ‘that much.’
A
tiny country, previously attacked by the United States, believes another attack
is imminent and contemplates ‘the nuclear suicide option.’ Sound
familiar?
The
Fire Every Time – Incinerating Civilians
Ellsberg,
the historian, traces the growth of the omnicidal nuclear mindset from British
and American bombing strategy evolved in WW II.
When
the war began on September 1, 1939, with Hitler’s invasion of Poland, President
Roosevelt issued an appeal to all of the states involved, to avoid the ‘human
barbarism’ of targeting civilians, who he described as “innocent human
beings who have no responsibility for, and who are not even remotely
participating in, the hostilities that have now broken out….”
With
then recent historical atrocities in mind, no doubt like the one immortalized
in Picasso’s famous painting ‘Guernica,’ he went on,
I
am therefore directing this urgent appeal to every Government which may be
engaged in hostilities publicly to affirm its determination that its armed forces
shall in no event, and under no circumstances, undertake the bombardment from
the air of civilian populations or of unfortified cities, upon the
understanding that these same rules of warfare will be scrupulously observed by
all of their opponents. I request an immediate reply.
Britain,
then Germany, quickly agreed. In fact, none of the countries involved saw
this an unusual request, for Roosevelt was simply affirming what was then
considered an accepted international norm of warfare: avoid harming non-combatants.
By
war’s end, this supposed norm, violated first by Britain, then the U.S., had
not only been abandoned, but completely reversed.
Militarists
had come to regard war from the air as the one sure path to victory, and
civilian officials had come to see cities – that is, civilians – as legitimate
targets.
But
that was not all.
It
had been discovered that – given the right atmospheric and wind conditions –
saturation bombing of a city could create ‘firestorms ’ – in effect altering
local weather as what would come to be called a ‘force multiplier’ –
incinerating entire urban populations and destroying all existing structures.
One
such event, was the firebombing of the German city of Dresden, later portrayed
by an American prisoner of war survivor, Kurt Vonnegut in his novel, Slaughterhouse
Five. But there were many others. More than half a
million German civilians were killed. Creating intentional urban
firestorms had become the principle objective of aerial warfare, under the
rationale that ‘terror bombing’ would destroy moral and end hostilities sooner,
thus ‘saving lives’ in the long run.
With
the German defeat, U.S. attention shifted to Japan and ‘scientific’ firebombing
of cities was honed to a fine art under General Curtis LeMay. Using
his new approach, reports Ellsberg, “It would be possible, LeMay thought,
‘to knock out all of Japan’s major industrial cities during the next ten
nights.’ And he set out to burn the next most populous seventeen cities in
succession. After that, the next fifty.”
Creating
firestorms, like the one that destroyed Tokyo, with ‘conventional’ explosives
required many planes. With atomic weapons like those used on Hiroshima
and Nagasaki, you could do the job with just one bomber per city. But,
aside from subsequent deaths caused by exposure to radioactive fallout, the
deadly results were basically the same.
Later,
LeMay would boast, “we scorched and boiled and baked to death more people in
Tokyo on that night of March 9-10 than went up in vapor at Hiroshima and
Nagasaki combined.”
Firebombing
and mass murder from the air – with or without nukes – had become the American
way of war. In the early 1950s, in the Korean war, LeMay recalled in a
1988 interview, “We went over there and fought the war and eventually burned
down every town in North Korea….”
The
legendary Gen. Douglas MacArthur – no stranger to mass slaughter – testified in
a 1951 Congressional
hearing, “The war in Korea has already almost destroyed that nation of
20,000,000 people. I have never seen such devastation. I have seen, I
guess, as much blood and disaster as any living man, and it just curdled my
stomach, the last time I was there. After I looked at that wreckage and
those thousands of women and children and everything, I vomited.”
Taking
Bets on Atmospheric Ignition
The
high risk attitude of what might be called – with a nod to C. Wright Mills –
‘crackpot nuclearism,’ was born in the New Mexico desert with the July 16, 1945
Trinity Test, the world first atomic bomb. It has dominated nuclear
policy ever since.
Some
of the Manhattan Project scientists were doing calculations aimed at predicting
whether or not the planned test would ignite the planet’s entire atmosphere
thus ending life on earth. There were arguments and conflicting
conclusions. Nobody was quite sure either way.
On
the eve of the test, Enrico Fermi offered to take bets on if atmospheric
ignition would occur. “I am now in a position,” he said, “to make book on
one of two contingencies: 1) that the explosion will burn New Mexico; 2) that
it will ignite the whole world.”
The
odds Fermi offered are not recorded, nor if anyone took his bet.
The consensus apparently was that both outcomes were unlikely…but
possible. The test went ahead anyway.
The
Threat of Use is Use – a Terrorist Threat
The
gun in the hand of the robber aimed at the victim’s head – whether or not the
trigger is pulled – is being ‘used.’ The same is true of the U.S. nuclear
arsenal.
One
often hears that The Bomb was only ‘used’ twice, by President Truman on
Hiroshima and Nagasaki. But, as Ellsberg documents, every president since
– right down to the current occupant of the Oval Office – has used the Doomsday
Machine in the same way the robber uses the gun, as a credible threat to impose
his will.
Even
one tactical nuclear weapon attacking a heavily populated area could kill
hundreds of thousands of non-combatants. “Thus,” Ellsberg concludes,
“virtually any threat of first use of a nuclear weapon is a terrorist threat.
Any nation making such threats is a terrorist nation. That means the United
States and all its allies, including Israel, along with Russia, Pakistan, and
North Korea.”
Dissent
as a Family Trait
Ellsberg
discloses many institutional secrets discovered in the course of his
career. But there is a personal one he saves until almost last. As
noted above, his father had been a distinguished engineer and factory designer
involved in the war effort. During the whistleblower days, when Kissinger
had labeled him ‘the most dangerous man in America,’ Ellsberg says he had
little contact with his father. Much later the two had a conversation in
which the son learned that the father, too, had not only had many of the same
top security clearances, and had worked on building the A-bomb, but had also
been a dissenter.
At
the top of his career, the elder Ellsberg had been engaged to design a plant
that would produce material for an H-bomb, the hydrogen bomb. It was to be a
thousand times more powerful than the A-bombs used on Japan. In fact, the
A-bomb is now simply used as the detonation trigger for the H-bomb.
“That
was it for me,” his father recalled at the age of 89. “I went back to my office
and I said to my deputy, ‘These guys are crazy.’”
“There
was another thing about it I couldn’t stand,” his father continued.
“Building these things generated a lot of radioactive waste…. That stuff was
deadly for ever.”
Ellsberg
recalls there were tears in his father’s eyes as he went on huskily, “I
couldn’t stand the thought that I was working on a project that was poisoning
parts of my country for forever, that might make parts of it uninhabitable for
thousands of years.”
His
father – unlike the many others engaged to make the H-bomb – resigned rather
than participating in the project.
Asked
what had made him feel so strongly, his father responded, “You did.”
Turns
out that back in 1946 the young Ellsberg had come home crying, carrying a copy
of John Hersey’s just-published book Hiroshima, a report on
the horrors of atomic warfare. Recalled his father, “You said, ‘Dad,
you’ve got to read this. It’s the worst thing I’ve ever read.’ So I read
it, and you were right.”
Peaceful
Co-existence or Violent Co-annihilation – That Is Still the
Question
Being
a nuclear war planner and risk analyst means developing the capacity of
imagining the unthinkable. It’s a great skill set to have.
Especially if, like Ellsberg (and others), you have awakened to the
omnicidal danger of the doomsday machine you have participated in creating.
Now,
when many despairing pessimists are concluding that the Doomsday Machine
Syndrome has taken on an autonomous life of its own, and that it’s political,
economic, and military institutionalization on a global level has made deconstructing
it ‘realistically unthinkable,’ Ellsberg’s informed conviction that
deconstruction IS not only possible, but doable within a year’s time, is
invigorating to the soul. Human ingenuity has created multiple doomsday
machines; human ingenuity can take them down.
Steve
Bannon, Trump’s erstwhile ‘brain,’ infamously described the prime agenda item
of the Trump/GOP wrecking crew as ‘deconstruction of the administrative
state.’ In fact, they’re doing it as we watch. Proving precisely
that, what humans have put together, humans can pull asunder.
Ellsberg’s
bold, ‘unthinkable,’ essentially revolutionary agenda is nothing less than the
deconstruction of the Doomsday Machine itself.
According
to his vision, Truman’s proverbial ‘buck’ both stops and starts here, in
America, the birthplace of the Doomsday Machinery, the only country to have not
only actually dropped The Bomb, but to have ‘used’ The
Bomb for the last seventy-plus years, in over two dozen credible international
threats (which he documents), as a gun to the heads of other nations of the
world.
He
addresses the common argument that ‘You can’t uninvent nuclear weapons.’
That
has been a widespread and effective argument against a total unilateral
abolition over the past seventy years. True, you can’t eradicate the knowledge
of how to make nuclear weapons and delivery systems. But you can
dismantle a Doomsday Machine. And that, at minimum, is what we must
hasten to do. There is no need or justification for us to wait for the Russians
to do it to theirs first or in step with us, though that global imperative
applies just well to them.
Here’s
his Six-Step Program:
+
A U.S, no-first-use policy
+
Probing investigative hearings on our war plans in the light of nuclear winter
+
Eliminating our ICBMs
+
Forgoing the delusion of preemptive damage-limiting by our first-strike forces
+
Giving up the profits, jobs, and alliance hegemony based on maintaining that
pretense
+
Otherwise dismantling the American Doomsday Machine.
Being
a realist, he observes that, “Both parties as currently constituted oppose
every one of these measures.” Further, he admits, “the news is equally
bad when it comes to the prospects of reversing American energy policy in time
and on a scale to avert catastrophic climate change.” He concludes,
The
steps I have indicated are only a beginning toward the ultimate delegitimation
of nuclear weapons and nuclear threats. But none of the necessary changes can
occur without an informed public, suitably alarmed by a situation that properly
evokes horror, fear, revulsion, and incredulity, accompanied, hopefully by the
determination of the highest order and urgency to eliminate it.
The
White House as Madhouse
At
the time Ellsberg worked at RAND, U.S. war planners had long been obsessed by
belief in a series of ‘gaps:’ a ‘bomber gap;’ a ‘missile gap;’ a
‘deterrent gap.’ Kennedy himself had campaigned and been elected on the
fiction of a ‘missile gap,’ with the Soviet Union being erroneously claimed to
possess ‘strategic superiority.’
Ellsberg
found that none of these supposed ‘gaps’ had actually existed. They were
really claims cooked up by competing branches of the military aimed at securing
a bigger share of the defense budget, and a more important role in the ‘Big
Game.’ RAND’s whole program had been based on delusion.
He
writes, “To recognize that was to face the conclusion that RAND had, in all
good faith, been working obsessively and with a sense of frantic urgency on a
wrong set of problems, an irrelevant pursuit in respect to national security.”
Yet RAND’s program continued for years after the gap concepts had been
debunked.
Donald
(My-Button-is-Bigger-than-Your-Button) Trump is not only continuing the
trillion dollar nuclear weapons upgrade begun under Obama, but calling for 10
times as many thermonuclear devices as are already in the US arsenal.
One
wonders what delusional ‘risk assessments’ are currently being used by today’s
generation of war planners to rationalize this level of institutionalized
insanity.
Toward
A New Nuclear Consciousness and Abolition Movement
The
five ‘original’ nuclear powers – the US, UK, France, Russia and China – have
since been joined by Israel, India, Pakistan and North Korea. So now
there are nine known national Doomsday Machines – one for every nuclear weapons
state – all on hair trigger alert for some future wargasm, maybe just around
the corner.
And
then there are the other – presently operating – DNA-destroying radioactive,
electro-magnetic and chemical pollution doomsday machines, as well as the carbonization-of-the-atmosphere
doomsday machine already causing catastrophic climate change…not to mention the
on-going Sixth Great Extinction.
I
chose to spend the week between Christmas and New Year’s day immersed in
Ellsberg’s book. It may not have been the most pleasant holiday season
I’ve experienced, but it was definitely the most informative and enlightening.
It’s
my bad habit, with a read I like, to underline sentences, star paragraphs, and
dog-ear pages that seem especially important. I found myself doing that
on almost every page.
Ellsberg’s website contains massive documentation
supporting his book’s disclosures.
He
is not alone among former nuclear war planners that have become nuclear
abolitionists in their later years. Former U.S. Secretary of Defense
William Perry, [his website ; video
link ] has joined former Secretaries of State George Schultz and Henry
Kissinger and Senator Sam Nunn to write a groundbreaking Wall
Street Journal op-ed series on the issues. They have also
co-founded the Nuclear
Security Project.
Toward
the end of their lives, both McNamara and Castro also became ardent nuclear
abolitionists.
These
are good signs. Crackpot nuclearism may yet be overcome.
The Doomsday
Machine – my nominee for ‘the most important book of 2017’ – is
at once an empowering, and a cautionary tale about the ‘power of one’ to
catalyze change in a labyrinthine, entrenched, corporate/government bureaucracy
… AND, about how the many paths to doomsday can be paved with good intentions.
Get
it. Read it. And don’t mourn, organize and pass the word!
Spread awareness of both the risks and the mitigating
possibilities. Informed, concerted public action has made a huge
difference throughout the Atomic Age, and it can again.
As
the UN’s recent historic vote by more than 120 nations to ban the possession,
use, or threatened use of nuclear weapons, and the Nobel Peace Prize award to
ICAN make clear, the once powerful no nukes abolition movement is again
resurgent.
Maybe,
just maybe – as Reverend King was warning way back in 1967 – it’s still not too
late…
More
articles by:JAMES
HEDDLE
James
Heddle is a filmmaker and writer who
co-directs EON – the Ecological
Options Network with Mary Beth Brangan. Their forthcoming documentary SHUTDOWN: The California-Fukushima
Connection Pt. ! – The Case of San Onofre is now in
post-production. He can be reached at jamesmheddle@gmail.com
No comments:
Post a Comment