During Monday’s press conference held by Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin after their private summit in Helsinki, they talked about how they envisioned the two nations moving forward. However, during that discussion, there arose a clamor.
A disruption was caused by a reporter who attempted some sort of nuclear war protest in the middle of the conference with the two world leaders. However, he couldn’t have picked a worse time, or place, to stage his protest, and was quickly led away. Sam Husseini, was dragged off by secret service agents after he interrupted the event, but he leaves behind a question; was the whole thing planned?
However, he came back in with a little sign, then stood while holding it.
Husseini, who writes for The Nation, held up a sign that said ‘Nuclear Weapon Ban Treaty.’ The sign was handwritten with a marker, and no larger than a normal sheet of 8 x 11-inch paper.
When he held it up, he said that he wanted to ask a question about the issue of a ‘possible’ nuclear weapon ban treaty between Russia and the United States of America.
Security officials began to push him out of the room, as he continued to say that he was interested in asking about nuclear weapons.
Husseini writes almost entirely opinion pieces for The Nation, a publication based in the United States which focuses on political news, as well as analysis of the same.
However, he’s also the communications director of the Institute for Public Advocacy, a Washington D.C.-area non-profit group that spends its budget trying to bring progressive ‘experts’ to greater attention in the news, hoping to use them as alternative sources for mainstream news organizations.
According to his own accounts, he had been hoping to ask the president about the Nuclear Weapon Ban Treaty, the first legally binding international treaty agreement that completely bans nuclear weapons.
However, the United States, other NATO nations, and all countries in the world that actually have functioning nuclear weapons, did not vote in favor of the NWBT in the United Nations. While the treaty passed, none of those countries voted at all. In fact, one nation (Singapore) abstained from voting at all, while 69 simply didn’t show up to vote, and one country, the Netherlands, voted against the treaty.
The United States and Russia had, in fact, expressed their opposition to the treaty before the vote occurred.
The nations in favor of the ban were those nations that had no nuclear program, with two notable exceptions; Kazakhstan and South Africa, the only two nations to ever abandon and disassemble their nuclear arms and nuclear weapon programs.
Once the UN passed the ban, ignoring the protests of many nuclear nations, the United States, United Kingdom, and France came together and issues a statement saying that not only did they have no intention to ratify the treaty, they also had no plan to abide by it.
During the press conference, President Donald J. Trump said that if the nation was going to find a way to solve the problems facing the world, they were going to need to come together and cooperate.
However, it is not likely that a complete and total nuclear ban, including a plan to disassemble the massive nuclear stockpiles that both the United States and Russia maintain, were part of those discussions.
A nuclear arsenal can be a useful thing for a nation, as the United States and Russia showed throughout the Cold War. With a policy of mutually-assured destruction, the two nations kept one another in check, and avoided any direct conflict.
Instead, the Cold War was predominantly fought via a number of ‘proxy wars,’ such as the Korean War, the Vietnam War, and the Soviet-Afghan war.
Although the Soviet Union collapsed more than two decades ago, nuclear weapons still serve as a deterrent to a number of nations. Perhaps chief among those nations is North Korea, which was seeking nuclear weapons of its own for years.
When Julis Robert Oppenheimer detonated the first atomic bomb, 73 years ago to the day, at the Trinity Test in New Mexico, he recited a quote from the Bhagavad Gita.
He said, “Now I am become death, destroyer of worlds.” While he was likely commenting on the horrific new power that he and the Manhattan Project had unleashed on the world, he could just as easily have been commenting on the future, when such technology would allow rogue governments to threaten the wellbeing of the world.
For that reason, it’s likely that not only should Husseini be ignored, but that he will be ignored.
Though many would like to imagine a world with no nuclear weapons, that’s not the world we live in. That Pandora’s Box has been opened, and the world has to deal with it, and hope they’re never used again.