-
Not Synced
So you know when
you're doubled over in pain
-
Not Synced
and you're wondering, is it your appendix
-
Not Synced
or maybe you ate something funny.
-
Not Synced
Well, when that happens to me,
-
Not Synced
I call my friend Sasha --
-
Not Synced
Sasha is a doctor --
-
Not Synced
and I say, "Should I rush
to the nearest emergency room
-
Not Synced
in a panic?
-
Not Synced
Or am I OK to relax and just wait it out?"
-
Not Synced
Yes, I am that annoying friend.
-
Not Synced
But in September 2017,
-
Not Synced
friends of mine were suddenly calling me
-
Not Synced
for my professional opinion,
-
Not Synced
and no, I'm not a doctor,
-
Not Synced
but they were asking me
questions of life and death.
-
Not Synced
So what was going on in September of 2017?
-
Not Synced
Well, North Korea was suddenly
and scarily all over the news.
-
Not Synced
Kim Jong-un had test missiles
-
Not Synced
potentially capable of hitting
major US cities,
-
Not Synced
and President Trump had responded
with tweets of "fire and fury."
-
Not Synced
And there was a real concern
that tensions would escalate
-
Not Synced
to a potential war
-
Not Synced
or even nuclear weapons use.
-
Not Synced
So what my friends were calling and asking
-
Not Synced
was, should they panic
or were the OK to relax?
-
Not Synced
But really, they were asking me
a fundamental question:
-
Not Synced
am I safe?
-
Not Synced
While I was reassuring them that,
no, they didn't need to worry just yet,
-
Not Synced
the irony of their question dawned on me.
-
Not Synced
What they hadn't really thought about
-
Not Synced
is that we've all been living
under a much larger cloud for decades,
-
Not Synced
potentially a mushroom cloud,
-
Not Synced
without giving it much thought.
-
Not Synced
Now, it's not surprising
that friends of mine
-
Not Synced
and many others like them
don't know much about nuclear weapons
-
Not Synced
and don't think about them.
-
Not Synced
After all, the end of the Cold War,
-
Not Synced
the United States and Russia,
-
Not Synced
tension abated,
-
Not Synced
we started dismantling nuclear weapons
-
Not Synced
and they started to become
a relic of the past.
-
Not Synced
Generations didn't have to grow up
with the specter of nuclear war
-
Not Synced
hanging over their heads.
-
Not Synced
And there other reasons people don't like
to think about nuclear weapons.
-
Not Synced
It's scary, overwhelming.
-
Not Synced
I get it.
-
Not Synced
Sometimes I wish I could have chosen
a cheerier field to study.
-
Not Synced
Perhaps tax law would
have been more uplifting.
-
Not Synced
But in addition to that,
-
Not Synced
people have so many other things
to think about in their busy lives,
-
Not Synced
and they'd much prefer to think
about something over which
-
Not Synced
they feel they have
some semblance of control,
-
Not Synced
and they assume that other people,
smarter than they on this topic,
-
Not Synced
are working away to keep us all safe.
-
Not Synced
And then, there are other reasons
people don't talk about this,
-
Not Synced
and one is because we, as nuclear experts,
-
Not Synced
use a whole lot of convoluted
jargon and terminology
-
Not Synced
to talk about these issues:
-
Not Synced
CVID, ICBM, JCPOA.
-
Not Synced
It's really inaccessible
for a lot of people.
-
Not Synced
And, in reality, it actually sometimes
I think makes us number
-
Not Synced
to what we're really talking about here.
-
Not Synced
And what we are really talking about here
-
Not Synced
is the fact that,
-
Not Synced
while we've made dramatic reductions
in the number of nuclear weapons
-
Not Synced
since the Cold War,
-
Not Synced
right now there are almost 15,000
in the world today.
-
Not Synced
15,000.
-
Not Synced
The United States and Russia have
over 90 percent of these nuclear weapons.
-
Not Synced
If you're wondering, these are
the countries that have the rest.
-
Not Synced
[China, France, India, Israel,
North Korea, Pakistan, United Kingdom.]
-
Not Synced
But they have far fewer,
-
Not Synced
ranging in the sort of
300-ish range and below.
-
Not Synced
Adding to this situation is the fact
that we have new technologies
-
Not Synced
that potentially bring us new challenges.
-
Not Synced
Could you imagine one day
-
Not Synced
countries like ours and others
-
Not Synced
potentially ceding decisions
about a nuclear strike to a robot
-
Not Synced
based on algorithms?
-
Not Synced
And what data do they use
to inform those algorithms?
-
Not Synced
This is pretty terrifying.
-
Not Synced
So adding to this
are terrorism, potentially,
-
Not Synced
cyberattacks, miscalculation,
misunderstanding.
-
Not Synced
The list of nuclear nightmares
tends to grow longer by the day.
-
Not Synced
And there are a number of former officials
-
Not Synced
as well as experts
-
Not Synced
who worry that right now
we're in greater danger
-
Not Synced
than we were in various points
in the Cold War.
-
Not Synced
So this is scary.
-
Not Synced
What can we do?
-
Not Synced
Well, thankfully,
-
Not Synced
we don't have to rely on
the advice from the 1950s.
-
Not Synced
We can take some control,
-
Not Synced
and the way we do that
-
Not Synced
is by starting to ask
some fundamental questions
-
Not Synced
about the status quo
-
Not Synced
and whether we are happy
with the way it is.
-
Not Synced
We need to begin asking
questions of ourselves
-
Not Synced
and of our elected officials,
-
Not Synced
and I'd like to share
three with you today.
-
Not Synced
The first one,
-
Not Synced
it's how much nuclear risk
are you willing to take or tolerate?
-
Not Synced
Right now, nuclear policy
depends on deterrence theory.
-
Not Synced
Developed in the 1950s, the idea
is that one country's nuclear weapons
-
Not Synced
prevents another country
from using theirs.
-
Not Synced
So you nuke me, I nuke you,
-
Not Synced
and we both lose.
-
Not Synced
So, in a way, there's a stalemate.
-
Not Synced
No one uses their weapons
and we're all safe.
-
Not Synced
But this theory has real questions.
-
Not Synced
There are experts
who challenge this theory
-
Not Synced
and wonder, does it really work
this way in practice?
-
Not Synced
It certainly doesn't allow
for mistakes or miscalculations.
-
Not Synced
Now, I don't know about you,
-
Not Synced
but I feel pretty uncomfortable
-
Not Synced
gambling my future survival,
-
Not Synced
yours, and our future generations,
-
Not Synced
on a theory that is questionable
-
Not Synced
and doesn't allow any room for a mistake.
-
Not Synced
It makes me even more uncomfortable
-
Not Synced
to be threatening the evaporation
-
Not Synced
of millions of people
on the other side of the Earth.
-
Not Synced
Surely we can do better for ourselves,
-
Not Synced
drawing on our ingenuity
-
Not Synced
to solve complex problems
-
Not Synced
as we have in the past.
-
Not Synced
After all, this is a man-made,
-
Not Synced
human-made --
-
Not Synced
I shouldn't say man,
because women were involved --
-
Not Synced
a human-made problem.
-
Not Synced
We have human solutions
that should be possible.
-
Not Synced
So next question: who do you think
should make nuclear decisions?
-
Not Synced
Right now, in this democracy,
-
Not Synced
in the United States,
-
Not Synced
one person
-
Not Synced
gets to decide whether or not
to launch a nuclear strike.
-
Not Synced
They don't have to consult with anybody.
-
Not Synced
So that's the president.
-
Not Synced
He or she can decide,
-
Not Synced
within a very limited amount of time,
-
Not Synced
under great pressure, potentially,
depending on the scenario,
-
Not Synced
maybe based on a miscalculation
or a misunderstanding,
-
Not Synced
they can decide the fate
of millions of lives:
-
Not Synced
yours, mine, our communities.
-
Not Synced
And they can do this
-
Not Synced
and launch a nuclear strike,
-
Not Synced
potentially setting in motion
-
Not Synced
the annihilation of the human race.
-
Not Synced
Wow.
-
Not Synced
This doesn't have to be
our reality, though,
-
Not Synced
and in fact in a number of other countries
that have nuclear weapons, it's not,
-
Not Synced
including countries
that are not democracies.
-
Not Synced
We created this system. We can change it.
-
Not Synced
And there's actually a movement
underway to do so.
-
Not Synced
So this leads me to my third question:
-
Not Synced
what do your elected officials
know about nuclear weapons,
-
Not Synced
and what types of decisions
are they likely to take on your behalf?
-
Not Synced
Well, Congress has a very important
role to play in oversight
-
Not Synced
and interrogating
US nuclear weapons policy.
-
Not Synced
They can decide what to fund,
what not to fund,
-
Not Synced
and they represent you.
-
Not Synced
Now, unfortunately,
-
Not Synced
since the end of the Cold War,
-
Not Synced
we've seen a real decline
in the level of understanding
-
Not Synced
on Capitol Hill about these issues.
-
Not Synced
While we are starting to see
some terrific new champions emerge,
-
Not Synced
the reality is that the general
lack of awareness
-
Not Synced
is highly concerning,
-
Not Synced
given that these people need to make
critically important decisions.
-
Not Synced
To make matters worse,
the political partisanship
-
Not Synced
that currently grips Washington
-
Not Synced
also affects this issue.
-
Not Synced
This wasn't always the case, though.
-
Not Synced
At the end of the Cold War,
members from both sides of the aisle
-
Not Synced
had a really good understanding about
the nuclear challenges we were facing,
-
Not Synced
and worked together
on cooperative programs.
-
Not Synced
They recognized
that nuclear risk reduction
-
Not Synced
was far too important to allow it
to succumb to political partisanship.
-
Not Synced
They created programs
-
Not Synced
such as the Nunn-Lugar Cooperative
Threat Reduction Program,
-
Not Synced
which sought to lock down and eliminate
-
Not Synced
vulnerable nuclear material
in the former Soviet Union.
-
Not Synced
So we need to return to this era
of bipartisanship,
-
Not Synced
mutual problem-solving,
-
Not Synced
that's based on understanding
and awareness about the challenges we face
-
Not Synced
and the real nuclear dangers.
-
Not Synced
And that's where you come in.
-
Not Synced
Public pressure is important.
-
Not Synced
Leaders need a constituent base to act.
-
Not Synced
So create that constituent base
-
Not Synced
by asking them some simple questions.
-
Not Synced
Ask them, what do you know
about nuclear weapons?
-
Not Synced
Do you have a nuclear expert
-
Not Synced
on your staff?
-
Not Synced
Or, if not, do you know
somebody you could refer to
-
Not Synced
if you need to make an important decision?
-
Not Synced
Start to find out what they believe
-
Not Synced
and whether it aligns
with your own views and values?
-
Not Synced
Ask them, how would you choose
to spend US national treasure?
-
Not Synced
On a new nuclear arms race,
-
Not Synced
or another national security priority
-
Not Synced
such as cybersecurity or climate change?
-
Not Synced
Ask them, are you willing
to put aside partisanship
-
Not Synced
to address this existential threat
-
Not Synced
that affects my survival
-
Not Synced
and your constituents' survival.
-
Not Synced
Now, people will tell you nuclear policy
is far too difficult to understand
-
Not Synced
and complexed and nuanced
for the general public to understand,
-
Not Synced
let alone debate.
-
Not Synced
After all, this is national security.
-
Not Synced
There needs to be secrets.
-
Not Synced
Don't let that put you off.
-
Not Synced
We debate all sorts of issues that are
critically important to our lives.
-
Not Synced
Why should nuclear weapons
be any different?
-
Not Synced
We debate health care,
education, the environment.
-
Not Synced
Surely Congressional oversight,
-
Not Synced
civic participation that are
such hallmarks of US democracy,
-
Not Synced
surely they apply here.
-
Not Synced
After all, these are cases of life
and death that we're talking about.
-
Not Synced
And we won't all agree,
-
Not Synced
but whether or not you believe
nuclear weapons keep us safe
-
Not Synced
or that nuclear weapons are a liability,
-
Not Synced
I urge you to put aside
partisan, ideological issues
-
Not Synced
and listen to each other.
-
Not Synced
So I'll tell you now what I didn't have
the guts to tell my friends at the time.
-
Not Synced
No, you're not safe,
-
Not Synced
not just because of North Korea.
-
Not Synced
But, there is something
you can do about it.
-
Not Synced
Demand that your elected representatives
-
Not Synced
give you answers to your questions
-
Not Synced
and answers that you can live with
-
Not Synced
and that billions of others
can live with too.
-
Not Synced
And if they can't,
-
Not Synced
stay on them until they can.
-
Not Synced
And if that doesn't work,
-
Not Synced
find others who are able
to represent your views,
-
Not Synced
because, by doing so, we can begin
to change the answer to the question,
-
Not Synced
"Am I safe?"
-
Not Synced
(Applause)