Acharya Tulsi
On 3rd June, 1980, the world found itself almost on the brink of war. On that day, the Pentagon, the headquarters of the U.S. Forces at Washington, was thrown into turmoil by the sudden news of a missile attack. Russia was slated to be the aggressor. A computer gave out this information. Instantly, the whole machinery for wiping out aggression became activated. The nuclear bomb—carriers got going. The shadow of death lay upon the earth. Hands were raised to push a button, but just then a message was received to the effect that the former information fed out of the computer was wrong. Had not the second message been received in time, the very existence of the human race would have been at stake.
While addressing the big and small nations of the world at the Third Session of the United Nations Organisation on Disarmament, the Indian Prime Minister, Rajiv Gandhi Said, "The twentieth century will be remembered in the history of mankind as the most bloody century in which a hundred million people lost their lives—58 million killed in the two world wars and over for 40 million in other conflicts. In case of an atomic war now because of a computer error tens of millions of people would have lost their lives, which would have meant a total annihilation of the human race from the face of the earth. No man would have remained alive to discover how and why such a blunder occurred."
On the one hand, we find man's great longing for life; on the other, most destructive weapons to end all life. The desire to live in peace and comfort stands contrasted with an extreme war psychosis. According to a survey, from 3600 B.C. up to now. Man has had only 292 years of peace, the rest of the time the world has been subjected to thousands of great and small wars. Still another survey has revealed that 71 per cent Americans, 62 percent Englishmen, 53 per cent Spanish, 49 per cent Irish, 48 percent French, 35 per cent West-Germans and 28 per cent Italians are ready to engage themselves in the next world war.
The struggle between violence and non-violence is not new. Violence is an inevitable part of living, yet it is difficult to imagine a pure and peaceful life without non-violence. To exist somehow is one thing, but to live vitally to achieve a high ideal is an altogether different matter. All people cannot achieve the ideal, but at least they can take a step in the right direction. The discussion held at the U.N.O. is an expression of man’s innate faith in non-violence. Some countries who took the initiative towards bringing about total disarmament along with some other countries belonging to the non-aligned movement, brought forth a proposal to the effect that all kinds of nuclear weapons the world over be withdrawn during the next 22 years. Such a resolution can become effective only if an immediate ban is imposed on the evolution of new weapons based on modern technology and the existing stock of weapons evolved earlier is destroyed. This is a very important task, which neither India nor any other country can accomplish by them, for it requires a collective effort. Irrespective of which country plays the pioneering role, the first and last objective right now should be the destruction of those weapons which pose the danger of an atomic war.
It has been observed that the whole world today is spending on the manufacture of armaments, 13 million rupees per minute. ln some countries the per capita expenditure on education comes to only Rs 2/— as compared to the per capita expenditure of Rs.2000/— on armament. Unless these situation under-goes a total change, no country on earth will be at peace.
The famous American scientists Car Saigon and Paul Krutjen, in their testimony before the Joint Economic Committee of the American Congress, have revealed that the utilization of even one per cent of the stock of nuclear weapons piled by the great powers would result in total destruction of the world.
After studying all these aspects, man will have to take a decision on the necessity of moving from violence towards non- violence. As long as violence dominates the life of a family, society or nation, faith in non-violence will not be strengthened. None—violence alone can provide security to a world torn by violence. lt may not be possible for man to be completely free from violence, but at least he can refrain from deliberate violence. Atomic weapons are not essential for human life. Indeed, the existence of such weapons in a country is inimical to the national interest. Under these circumstances, the discussion on armament in the U.N.O. is extremely relevant. The seeds of disarmament are freedom from fear, goodwill and toleration. The attainment of total freedom from fear by the individual himself, and the ensuring of such freedom for everyone else, and the evolution of mutual goodwill and toleration would naturally bring about complete disarmament. lf along with the destruction of existing weapons we can bring about a transformation in the weapon—mankind mentality, the danger of an atomic war would be greatly obviated.
