• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

"Britain should undertake unilateral nuclear disarmament": Discuss

Extracts from this document...


"Britain should undertake unilateral nuclear disarmament": Discuss There is pressure put upon many countries with nuclear capabilities to disarm and dispose of all of their nuclear weapons. There are obvious benefits of a nuclear free world and some people say that the only way for this to happen is for Britain to lead by example and disarm. Although some people believe this is the morally correct choice, some say that nuclear weapons are must in an unstable world. This essay will decide whether Britain should go it alone and undertake unilateral disarmament. Britain has a strong influence in international affairs and if it decided to disarm this would encourage many other countries to do the same. This could eventually lead to the disarming of all countries in the world and thus a nuclear war could never happen again. If this is achieved millions of lives could be saved. ...read more.


Whilst the Pope acknowledges that this could have been justified before the atom bomb, it is immoral to kill potentially millions of innocent people, regardless of however many would be saved. The Church of England is in favour of unilateral disarmament and showed it's support in "The Church and the Bomb" in 1982. Despite this the General Synod was not in favour of unilateral disarmament and preferred multilateral disarmament. It could be argued that while unilateral disarmament could save lives, the General Synod saw this as a big risk and it could kill more than it saved, as countries would still possess nuclear weapons. Although it would be harder to obtain, The General Synod believes that more lives would be saved if there were multilateral disarmament. The main reason for most countries possessing nuclear weapons is deterrence. Many people would say that Britain should not undertake unilateral disarmament because it leaves them wide open to attacks, specifically from Iraq and Al Qaeda. ...read more.


There are many parts of the Bible that are in support of peace, "Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of peace" (Isaiah 9:6), "Blessed are the peacemakers for they shall be called Sons of God". Although these authors clearly favour peace, it is hard to say if they would want Britain to undertake a policy of isolation. It is down to a matter of opinion as to whether Britain following a policy of unilateral disarmament is in the best interests of peace. Personally, I believe that unilateral nuclear disarmament is very foolish and that it will do more harm than good. Although it works in theory, it is idealistic and in reality it is potentially catastrophic. We would be vulnerable to attacks and if we were attacked, the government would retaliate by sending in troops or warplanes. This would inevitably result in hundreds of thousands of deaths- possibly on both sides. The fact is that we need nuclear weapons to deter other unstable countries from taking advantage of us and other countries without nuclear capabilities. Ultimately, these deterrents save lives. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level International History, 1945-1991 section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level International History, 1945-1991 essays

  1. Should Britain eliminate its nuclear arsenal?

    The discussion is by no means explicit or rudimentary, thus a number of issues need to be discussed, analysed and evaluated in order to establish whether this goal of abolition is desirable or even possible. The thesis proposed in this essay is that Britain should work towards the elimination of its nuclear arsenal.

  2. "War in the Modern World includes terrorism and the threat of Nuclear War. How ...

    So some theologians came up with a new set of rules which accept the terms of war today but also limit its effects in the long run. War is part of our animal instincts and is in human nature and we cannot change how we are made up- can we?

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work