Global aftermath of a regional nuclear war
In a commentary in the 2 March issue of Science, a group of environmental scientists has considered the possible consequences of nuclear conflict on a regional rather than a global scale. They emphasise that, although global nuclear warfare may not be a serious threat today, regional-scale conflicts might be envisaged.
Acquiring nuclear weapons is widely viewed as a potent political, military
and social tool, strengthening international status and insurance against aggression.
Eight nations are known to possess nuclear weapons and 32 others, including Argentina,
Brazil, Japan, South Korea and Taiwan, have fissionable material to make their
production feasible. If conflict broke out, the calculated fatality rates would
be terrifying, particularly in China, India and Pakistan. In addition, fires
ignited by nuclear bursts would release smoke into the upper atmosphere, where
the effects of the carbonaceous particles would be worse than after major volcanic
eruptions, upsetting aerial circulation of heat and absorbing light. Indirect
effects on surface land temperatures, precipitation rates and the length of the
growing season would seriously degrade agricultural productivity. This would
result in worldwide effects outside the immediate combat zone. Transport, energy
distribution and medical, social and political infrastructure might be limited
to some extent, but little could be done about the climate anomalies.
Nuclear proliferation, political instability and urban demographics may together
constitute the greatest danger to the stability of human society since the dawn
of humanity.
Back to Top
|