PROPOSITION

 

Nuclear testing is an essential measure that needs to be carried out by governments to ascertain and evaluate the effect of nuclear weapons on the basis of area and extremity of the effect, in the event that the weapon was to be utilized. While this is an essential measure, utilizing the Earth to carry out the tests is definitely not essential, as will be highlighted through the course of this debate, keeping in mind the manifold implications of nuclear radiation, which is emitted in the said nuclear tests. This debate focuses on two principles, 1) Why the Earth is not the apt ground for nuclear testing and 2) Why it would be in the interest of humanity for these tests to be carried out on other celestial bodies.

 

Coming to the first aspect, that of banning nuclear weapon testing on Earth itself. A commodity or procedure is banned when it is found to have detrimental effects on humanity. And nuclear testing is definitely detrimental, largely on the basis of the health risks it poses and the environmental hazards that are secondary implications. Looking at health issues of nuclear tests, ‘downwinders,’ are those individuals exposed to radioactive contamination or nuclear fallout from atmospheric or underground nuclear weapon testing. These communities are susceptible to thyroid cancers, leukaemia, solid tumours and destruction of the immune system. Moreover, the offsprings of the exposed are subject to genetic alterations through foetal malformations. So, if affecting one generation wasn’t enough, you have two generations affected quite substantially.

 

The second consideration of the compromise of human life is based on environmental hazards caused by nuclear testing. Plutonium, uranium, strontium, caesium and benzene are utilized in the formation of nuclear weapons. Now when these tests are carried out, they can be carried out in the atmosphere, underground and underwater. Each of these planes is independently affected. Leakage of these substances renders agricultural land unusable. Underwater marine life is destroyed whether by underwater testing or by the dumping of the wastes into lakes. The atmosphere that is already suffering from carbon emissions that have reached sky rocketing levels, due to the 21st century way of life is also subjected to nuclear emissions, compromising the quality of air around us as well as our quality of life. Or lack of life.

 

So essentially, what has been understood until now is the fact that there are health and environmental hazards to nuclear testing. What has not been analysed as of now is the fact that these tests are carried out with state sanctions. Research institutions get the go-ahead from the state, the ‘governing body’ that sanctions, not protection of citizens’ quality of life, but health issues and environmental hazards that compromise citizens’ quality of life, leading to a definitive lack of faith in the state on the part of its citizens. Another consideration is the tightening of sanctions, bans and political insecurity of nuclear tests in airspace.

 

Having analysed the health, environmental and political implications of nuclear tests on downwinders and the global community, we will now be looking at why other celestial bodies are more apt grounds for nuclear testing. This can be argued on the grounds of lack of evidence of human existence and earth like conditions of the environment on any other celestial body. Now when you don’t have people living on other celestial bodies, you don’t have downwinders and their offspring who are adversely affected. Nor do you compromise quality of life, since there is no life to be compromised in the first place, eliminating primary stakeholders like the downwinders, or secondary stakeholders, who would be affected by lack of economic activity if agricultural and marine life were destroyed. So, essentially, testing nuclear weapons on other celestial bodies is clearly the method that renders human life sanctimonious. You also have a state that actually protects it citizens this way.

 

Through the course of side proposition’s stance, it has become evident that nuclear weapon tests compromise life on earth. A suitable alternative to carry out these essential tests would be on other celestial bodies that do not have life to be compromised. After-all, life is sought after, not death.

 

OPPOSITION

 

Before we launch into the actual debate, it needs to be understood that  we cant just decide to test nuclear weapons on other planets and go forward with the idea. On an average a one man space travel expedition costs more than 1.5 billion dollars alone. This by itself means two things:

 

Firstly, nuclear testing on other planets will be available to only a few first world countries that have strong economies and can afford to spend such large amounts of money on nuclear research, rather than in education, healthcare, and other such spheres. Hence, banning nuclear weapon testing will eventually lead to a monopolisation of the energy industry, in which only the wealthy countries will be able to lead the path to the future. This monopoly will itself have socio-political effects as it will disturb the global power equilibrium and put nations in vulnerable and susceptible positions, forced to succumb to unreasonable demands due to necessity of future energy resources. While some may feel this is too extreme, we must realize that this has happened in the economic sphere in the past when the world bank has forced nations to alter their policies and completely u-turn their ideologies. Therefore, what the proposition proposes will ultimately go against itself and cause further socio-political-economic disharmony throughout the globe.

 

Secondly,it also means that nations will be compelled to spend a significant percentage of their budget on energy research. Since the GDP cannot increase to make this happen, it means that nations will HAVE to make cuts in other spheres. These spheres may include education, healthcare, military, etc. This by itself is disadvantageous to the citizens since it means that there is less investment in Human Resource Development, something that the proposition firmly believes in! Hence the proposition’s demise lies in its own plan of action.

 

Thirdly, even if we consider that we have the opportunity to test nuclear weapons on other celestial bodies, we cant assume that just because there are no human inhabitants, the testing cannot have an effect on the earth or, in a larger context, the universe. We would have no means of controlling any of the effects on other celestial bodies. If there is a nuclear fallout on earth, we can restrict the spread with the help of technology. On other celestial bodies, there will be no access to such resources since that would cost even more money for the government. The atmosphere may not be restricting and the nuclear dust etc. It may even penetrate into space. If the existence of Earth is endangered by asteroids, it is needless to say that significant danger is posed from incoming nuclear wastes from other celestial bodies!

 

Lastly, the proposition cannot simply assume that earth as a WHOLE is “unfit” for nuclear testing of weapons. While it is true that nuclear testing mustn’t be done in cosmopolitan/densely populated areas, there are places on the earth that are uninhabited. It is in these uninhabited areas that nuclear testing can and should be done. Along with this, technology can be improved to manage nuclear wastes. Perhaps instead of “outsourcing” the entire process, if we could simply “outsource” the wastes, we would not be having this debate. That would even solve all the proposition’s questions and provide a reasonable, economic solution to nuclear testing!

To sum it up, the world, at the end of the day, is an economic web in which socio-political events/occurrences boil down to economic causes. Keeping that in mind, for the survival of global economy, for the bolstering and survival of humanity, it is imperative to allow nuclear testing of weapons on the earth. “After all, life is sought after, not death”.