&w=3840&q=100)
80 years after Hiroshima: Nuclear threat still looms over global security
Last Friday, US President Donald Trump said he had ordered the deployment of two nuclear submarines 'in appropriate regions' following what he described as 'highly provocative comments' by former Russian president Dmitry Medvedev.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
It is ironic that nuclear weapons still exist, despite the well-known devastation they cause to the planet—and the threat of nuclear sabre-rattling remains as constant as the air we breathe. Aside from white lilies and sombre memorial services for the dead, and sympathy for those emotionally and physically maimed by the two blasts in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, little has moved forward in practical terms.
In the prologue of her book Nuclear War: A Scenario, Annie Jacobsen describes a frightening vision of what the next nuclear bomb explosion might look like. For now, it is only imagination—but reality would unfold within minutes if the bombs were ever detonated, for whatever reason. She writes:
'A 1-megaton thermonuclear weapon detonation begins with a flash of light and heat so tremendous it is impossible for the human mind to comprehend. One hundred and Eighty million degrees Fahrenheit is four or five times hotter than the temperature that occurs at the center of the Earth's sun. In the first fraction of a second this thermonuclear bomb strikes… there is light…. Soft X-ray light with a very short wavelength. The light superheats the surrounding air to a millions of degrees, creating a massive fireball that expands at millions of miles per hour. Within a few seconds, this fireball increases to a diameter of a little more than a mile (5,700 feet across), its light and heat so intense that concrete surfaces explode, metal objects melt or evaporate, stone shatters, humans instantaneously convert into combusting carbon.'
This, of course, is Jacobsen's speculative scenario of what might happen if a nuclear bomb were to strike the Pentagon outside Washington. But if such an event were to occur, her imagined horror would become exact, unbearable reality.
In the 653-page book The Effects of Nuclear War, authored along with Philip J Dolan, Samuel Galsstone writes, 'There are inherent difficulties in making exact measurements of weapons effects. The results are often dependent upon circumstances, which are difficult, and sometimes impossible, to control even in tests and would certainly be unpredictable in the event of an attack.'
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
Then, after the immediate destruction there is the curse of a nuclear winter which is inevitable.
A legacy of devastation, a present of peril
Eighty years after the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, which killed more than 200,000 people and left haunting reminders of nuclear warfare, the world remains on edge. Far from fading into the pages of history, nuclear weapons continue to cast a long, ominous shadow over global peace and security.
While the world has avoided another nuclear strike since 1945, today's risks may be even more acute driven by geopolitical volatility, advancing technologies and the slow unravelling of disarmament frameworks.
A world still armed to the teeth
As of early 2025, the global stockpile of nuclear warheads stands at approximately 12,241, with the vast majority—over 90 per cent—held by United States and Russia. This massive arsenal is not just a relic of the Cold War but a continually modernised force, featuring increasingly sophisticated delivery systems and warhead designs, Andrew Hammond writes in The Business Times.
While global treaties have aimed to curb proliferation, they have done little to dismantle the core of existing nuclear forces.
Slowing clock of disarmament
The post-Cold War era witnessed a surge of hope for nuclear disarmament. Treaties such as the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (Start) and initiatives like the Nuclear Security Summits led to tangible reductions and enhanced controls over nuclear materials. However, this progress has since slowed, if not reversed.
Today, the momentum has shifted towards rearmament. The United States is developing a new generation of nuclear weapons and has indicated an openness to resuming nuclear testing.
Meanwhile, China has more than tripled its arsenal, reaching around 600 warheads. These developments have reignited fears of a new arms race, especially as Russia also pursues advanced systems like hypersonic missiles and underwater nuclear drones. Submarines are indeed deadly platforms for nuclear launches.
Efforts such as the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW), which came into force in 2021, have garnered support from many non-nuclear states. Yet, they have been largely dismissed by nuclear-armed nations. The global appetite for disarmament, once buoyed by the horrors of Hiroshima, is faltering in the face of renewed strategic competition.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
Tensions in a fragile world
Geopolitical fault lines are increasingly volatile, exacerbating the risk of nuclear conflict. Recent exchanges between Medvedev and Trump over nuclear threats serve as stark reminders of how easily diplomatic tensions can veer into dangerous territory.
Medvedev's reference to Russia's 'Dead Hand' nuclear retaliation system and Trump's counter by repositioning submarines closer to Russia are not just posturing, they reflect the peril of miscalculation in today's hyper-charged political climate.
Other hotspots, including the enduring India-Pakistan conflict and North Korea's relentless nuclear testing, add layers of complexity. These regions combine deep-seated historical animosities with nuclear capabilities, making them particularly susceptible to escalation.
Iran, for its part, remains a significant concern. Reeling from attacks on its nuclear facilities, Tehran may further accelerate its nuclear programme, potentially pushing other regional powers like Saudi Arabia and Turkey toward similar ambitions.
Technology: The new wildcard
While nuclear weapons have always embodied existential danger, emerging technologies are making the nuclear scenario even more unpredictable. Artificial intelligence, cyber warfare and advanced missile defence systems are disrupting the traditional logic of nuclear deterrence.
According to Hammond, AI-driven systems, if poorly managed, could make decisions faster than human operators can verify, increasing the likelihood of misjudgements. Meanwhile, cyberattacks on nuclear command and control systems could trigger false alarms or disable safeguards.
The potential for accidental launches or misinterpreted threats has grown significantly in an era of digital warfare and machine decision-making.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
During the Cold War and into the 1990s, several false alarms nearly triggered nuclear war due to technical errors and misinterpretations. In the 1950s, a flock of Canadian geese was mistaken for a Soviet bomber attack by radar systems.
The 1960s saw meteor showers and radar reflections from the moon falsely indicating a missile strike, while in 1979, a human error led to a false nuclear alert, causing Norad (North American Aerospace Defense Command) to scramble fighter jets.
A year later, a faulty computer chip triggered a similar scare, prompting the preparation of B-52 bombers and the President's emergency aircraft. The most serious incident occurred in 1995 when a Norwegian research rocket was misidentified by Russian systems as a US nuclear missile, prompting president Boris Yeltsin to consider a retaliatory strike, an act he ultimately resisted, narrowly avoiding catastrophe.
Terrorism threat
Beyond state actors, the threat of nuclear terrorism has not disappeared. While acquiring a functional nuclear weapon remains a high barrier for non-state groups, the possibility of a radiological dispersal device (dirty bomb) is far more feasible. Such a weapon would use conventional explosives to spread radioactive material, potentially causing mass panic, economic chaos and long-term contamination of urban centres..
Hammond mentions former US defence secretary Robert Gates who once remarked that the thought of a terrorist obtaining a nuclear weapon was what kept him awake at night.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
Treaties undermined, norms at risk
International treaties and arms control frameworks that once served as guardrails are now fraying. The Doomsday Clock, maintained by the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, was set just one second from midnight earlier this year, the closest it has ever been to global catastrophe.
Eighty years after Hiroshima, the world faces a dual nuclear threat: that of state-led warfare and non-state terrorism. While the horrors of 1945 forged a powerful global aversion to nuclear war, that consensus is under threat. The only way to ensure nuclear weapons are never used again is to eliminate them altogether. Eight decades on, the urgency of that mission has never been clearer.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)

First Post
11 minutes ago
- First Post
Trump says he 'does not know anything about' US imports of uranium, fertilizers from Russia
Trump on Tuesday said he was unaware that the United States imports uranium and fertilisers from Russia, a point India has raised while defending its oil trade with Moscow against Western criticism. read more US President Donald Trump on Tuesday said he was unaware and 'don't know anything about' United States imports uranium and fertilisers from Russia, a point India has highlighted while defending its trade ties with Moscow amid growing Western criticism. Responding to a question about US imports of Russian uranium and chemical fertilisers, even as Washington targets India's oil trade with Moscow, Trump said, 'I don't know anything about it. I have to check…' STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD US imports from Russia quietly rise #WATCH | Responding to ANI's question on US imports of Russian Uranium, chemical fertilisers while criticising their (Indian) energy imports', US President Donald Trump says, "I don't know anything about it. I have to check..." (Source: US Network Pool via Reuters) — ANI (@ANI) August 5, 2025 His remarks come even as American imports from Russia continue to quietly rise. Between January and May this year, US imports jumped 23 per cent year-on-year to $2.1 billion, driven by sharp increases in palladium (up 37 per cent), uranium (28 per cent), and fertilisers (21 per cent). While this marks a partial rebound, overall US merchandise imports from Russia had fallen to $3 billion in 2024, down 90 per cent from 2021, the year before the Ukraine war began. Trump ramps up pressure on India Trump earlier ramped up pressure on India, warning of a sharp increase in tariffs within '24 hours' over its continued oil purchases from Russia. 'India hasn't been a fair trading partner. They do a lot of business with us, but we don't get the same in return,' he said in an interview with CNBC. 'We had settled on a 25 percent tariff, but I'm going to raise it significantly because they're buying Russian oil and fueling the war machine,' he added. India hits back over 'unjustified and unreasonable' tariffs India hit back strongly on Monday, calling the threat 'unjustified and unreasonable' and asserting it would take all necessary steps to safeguard its national interests and economic security. External affairs ministry spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal pointed out that India has been repeatedly targeted by the US and EU over its energy imports from Russia, even as many Western nations continue trade with Moscow. 'In this background, the targeting of India is unjustified. Like any major economy, India will act to protect its interests,' he said. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD


India.com
11 minutes ago
- India.com
‘I Never Said A Percentage': Trump Backtracks On Russian Oil Tariff Threat — What It Means For India, China And Who's Really In The Crosshairs
Washington: What began as a routine press briefing on the 2028 Los Angeles Olympics quickly turned into a window into Donald Trump's evolving global agenda. Fielding an unexpected question, the U.S. president pivoted, hinting at fresh tariffs on countries buying Russian oil. The off-the-cuff remark, though brief, sent ripples through foreign capitals, exposing a potentially dramatic shift in U.S. economic pressure tactics that could hit allies like India, even as China avoids similar scrutiny. 'I never said a percentage. But we will be doing quite a bit of that. We will see what happens over the next fairly short period of time. We have a meeting with Russia tomorrow. We are going to see what happens,' Trump clarified when asked about plans for a 100% tariff. This statement followed earlier his remarks, suggesting he could raise tariffs on Indian imports 'very substantially' within 24 hours. He explained that the reason was India's continued energy trade with Russia. 'They are fueling the war machine, and if they are going to do that, then I am not going to be happy,' Trump told CNBC in an interview, as reported by Reuters. He also flagged India's existing tariff structure as a sticking point in bilateral trade. Trump first posted the warning on his social media platform Truth Social. There, he said, 'India is not only buying massive amounts of Russian Oil, they are then, for much of the Oil purchased, selling it on the Open Market for big profits. They don't care how many people in Ukraine are being killed by the Russian War Machine. Because of this, I will be substantially raising the Tariff paid by India to the USA. Thank you for your attention to this matter!!!' Former U.S, Ambassador to the United Nations, Nikki Haley, also weighed in on the matter. In a post on X (formerly Twitter), she called attention to how the Trump administration has treated China during this time. She pointed out that China, which she described as an adversary and the 'number one buyer of Russian and Iranian oil', had been granted a 90-day tariff pause. 'India should not be buying oil from Russia. But China, an adversary and the number one buyer of Russian and Iranian oil, got a 90-day tariff pause. Don't give China a pass and burn a relationship with a strong ally like India,' she posted. Haley previously competed in the Republican primaries but was the last of Trump's major rivals to exit the race. While Trump continues to signal tariff hikes, Haley's statement serves as a reminder of the broader geopolitical implications. The conversation around oil imports, strategic alliances and tariff policy now includes strong voices from within the U.S. political establishment. The days ahead may bring new policy decisions and further clarification on tariffs, as the White House prepares for its meeting with Russia.

Hindustan Times
11 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Trump reacts to India citing US trade with Russia amid tariff threat: 'Don't know...'
US President Donald Trump on Tuesday reacted to India citing the United States doing trade with Russia and yet criticising New Delhi for doing business with Russia. "I don't know anything about it, I'd have to check, but we'll get back to you on that," he said in reply to a reporter's question. US President Donald Trump reacted to India's remarks citing America doing trade with Russia.(REUTERS) Trump announced 25 per cent tariffs on Indian imports and unspecified penalties last week, ahead of his August 1 deadline for tariffs to come into effect even as talks for a deal are ongoing. Later, Trump threatened to hike that rate due to New Delhi buying military equipment and oil from Russia, calling India "Russia's largest buyer of energy, along with China". Hitting back at Trump's tariff move, India pointed out to the US imports from Russia. 'Where the US is concerned, it continues to import from Russia uranium hexafluoride for its nuclear industry, palladium for its EV industry, fertilisers as well as chemicals,' Ministry of External Affairs spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal said. Citing this, New Delhi called Trump's targeting of India 'unjustified and unreasonable', and reiterated that the government would safeguard its national interests and economic security. Even in the face of Trump's tariff threats, the Indian government has reportedly not issued any directives asking importers to reduce trade with Russia. India clarified its stance on sourcing energy in particular, saying the country was "guided by what is on offer in markets and prevailing global situation". India also stated that the relationship it shares with any country should not be viewed through the prism of a third nation. 'The sourcing of defence requirement is determined solely by our national security imperatives and strategic assessments. Similarly, the sourcing of our energy are guided by what is available in the markets and by prevailing global circumstances," Jaiswal said during a press briefing last week. According to a Reuters report, in 2024-25, India purchased Russian oil worth $50.2 billion. India ramped up imports of discounted Russian commodities after the US and its western allies imposed sanctions on Russia as its war with Ukraine began in 2022.