A group of people protest against the Trump administration and demand immediate diplomatic talks with North Korea to prevent nuclear war, August 9, 2017.(Reuters / Eduardo Munoz)
The Doomsday Clock of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists stands at two minutes to midnight, yet risks of the arms race and the costs of militarism are notable for their absence from the presidential campaign. Groups like 350 Action and the League of Conservation Voters are rightly insisting that candidates debate climate change. Activists should also insist they address the arms race. Determined bird-doggers, especially in early primary states, can bring this studiously neglected issue to the attention of candidates and the nation. Here is a starter:
1. Do you support the Trump administration’s $1.2 trillion program to “modernize” US nuclear weapons?
2. Do you support the concept of “usable” nuclear weapons for “limited” nuclear war?
3. Do you support the so-called “low yield” Trident nuclear warhead, the W76-2?
4. Should the United States declare that it will never be the first to use nuclear weapons in a conflict?
5. Should the US nuclear arsenal be restricted to deterrence of a nuclear attack on the US, or should it be used any time the US is at a military disadvantage?
6. Do you agree with President Trump’s decision to pull out of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty?
7. How would you ensure that ongoing tensions with Russian President Vladimir Putin do not threaten cooperation with Russia to reduce nuclear risks? Would you support deep nuclear-weapons reductions in a treaty with Russia?
8. Would you support cutting the $61.5 billion US nuclear-weapons budget and using the money to fund unmet human needs?
9. Should the president have to seek specific congressional authorization before ordering a nuclear strike, other than in response to a direct nuclear attack on the US?
10. Would you reaffirm the nuclear deal with Iran (the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action)?
We hope you enjoyed the story you just read. It’s just one of many examples of incisive, deeply-reported journalism we publish—journalism that shifts the needle on important issues, uncovers malfeasance and corruption, and uplifts voices and perspectives that often go unheard in mainstream media. For nearly 160 years, The Nation has spoken truth to power and shone a light on issues that would otherwise be swept under the rug.
In a critical election year as well as a time of media austerity, independent journalism needs your continued support. The best way to do this is with a recurring donation. This month, we are asking readers like you who value truth and democracy to step up and support The Nation with a monthly contribution. We call these monthly donors Sustainers, a small but mighty group of supporters who ensure our team of writers, editors, and fact-checkers have the resources they need to report on breaking news, investigative feature stories that often take weeks or months to report, and much more.
There’s a lot to talk about in the coming months, from the presidential election and Supreme Court battles to the fight for bodily autonomy. We’ll cover all these issues and more, but this is only made possible with support from sustaining donors. Donate today—any amount you can spare each month is appreciated, even just the price of a cup of coffee.
The Nation does not bow to the interests of a corporate owner or advertisers—we answer only to readers like you who make our work possible. Set up a recurring donation today and ensure we can continue to hold the powerful accountable.
Thank you for your generosity.
11. Would you reaffirm the goal stated by President Obama in Prague of working toward a world free of nuclear weapons? How should the US honor its commitment in the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty to work toward nuclear disarmament, in exchange for nonnuclear states’ abstaining from the bomb?
12. Would you pledge not to take campaign contributions from nuclear-weapons makers such as Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, General Dynamics, and Raytheon?
13. What does the concept of “shared security” mean to you?
David KeppelDavid Keppel has been a peace activist since serving on the Strategy Committee of the Nuclear Weapons Freeze Campaign in the 1980s. Currently living in Bloomington, Indiana, he is writing a book, Creative Uncertainty: Everything You Always Wanted to Know about Not Knowing.