Why Latin America cannot have nuclear weapons and what would happen to the region if an atomic war breaks out

The doctrine, which replaces the one enacted in 2020, will consider the aggression of a country that lacks atomic weapons, but that has the support – whether or not it involves its direct participation – of a nuclear power, to be a “joint attack”. Ukraine does not have nuclear weapons, but the United States, its ally, does.

The escalation set off alarm bells among kyiv’s Western allies, who described the update in Russian nuclear doctrine as “irresponsible.” Although Latin America is not a key actor in the war in Ukraine, the context is conducive to remembering the reasons why our region is considered a nuclear weapons-free zone, as well as to analyze how it could be affected in the event of a nuclear conflict. .

Latin America renounced nuclear weapons with the Treaty of Tlatelolco, of a regional nature, and with the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, a global pact. The first was negotiated in 1967 and entered into force in 1969 and the second was negotiated in 1969 and entered into force in 1970. Under both treaties, countries that wanted or had aspirations to be nuclear weapons countries, as they were in At the time, Brazil and Argentina gave up their nuclear programs and decided to focus on another way of relating to the world.

“The Treaty of Tlatelolco makes all of Latin America and the Caribbean a nuclear weapons-free zone. In fact, until today it is the largest nuclear weapons-free zone in the world and a pioneering zone as it is the first inhabited nuclear weapons-free zone,” Carlos Umaña, member of the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons, tells El Comercio. Nuclear Weapons (ICAN) and the International Association of Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War.

Why was this agreement adopted? Although the world had already experienced the horrors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, in Latin America it was the Cuban missile crisis in 1962 that fostered the political will for the treaty. Previously, in the 1950s, there had been a desire to generate a similar treaty in the region, but it was not until the 1960s, when the whole world felt the risk of a large-scale nuclear war, that Latin American countries began to mobilize. against this possibility.

Román Ortiz, a Spanish analyst and expert in international security, details that only two countries in the region managed to develop the capacity to enrich uranium, which is the key to having nuclear weapons.

“Brazil and Argentina did it during military dictatorships and as part of their aspirations to become a great power. However, the two countries signed an agreement between them to abandon that proposal for two reasons, the first was the end of the dictatorships and the second was the strong pressure from the United States,” he tells this newspaper.

The expert points out that although Argentina has abandoned any idea of ​​this type, as proven by the reduction of its military capabilities and its defense budget, the case of Brazil is different because this country is building a nuclear-powered submarine, which, Although it is not a ship with nuclear weapons, it uses a nuclear reactor to propel itself, which gives it very particular capabilities because it can remain submerged for a long time, it does not need to pass through port for a long time, etc.

Although from time to time some politician brings up the nuclear issue in the region, until now the tone has been more of rejection of this possibility. “The closest thing there has been is the development of nuclear-fueled submarines by Brazil, which are not nuclear weapons per se, but rather weapons that are propelled by nuclear fuel, but that is something else,” adds Umaña.

The region facing a possible nuclear conflict

Nuclear weapons are so powerful and can have such devastating effects that, even if their use is small, it is inevitable that everyone will pay, in one way or another, for their use. How would the region be affected?

First of all, Umaña emphasizes that Latin America and the Caribbean does not constitute an area that is prone to a direct attack with a nuclear weapon. However, the region would definitely suffer the effects of a full-scale nuclear war. It is not about geographical distance, but rather the entire planet is vulnerable to a conflict of this type.

“When we talk about a nuclear war, we cannot think about world wars that lasted for years. A nuclear war would not last years, not even months or weeks, it would last minutes. Of the global nuclear arsenal, which is about 12,000 weapons, there are approximately 4,000 deployed, and of those 4,000 deployed there are 2,000 that are in a state of maximum alert, that is, they are ready to be detonated in minutes and that already have their targets. Now, those targets are hardly in Latin America and the Caribbean because Latin America and the Caribbean precisely do not have nuclear weapons,” says Umaña.

That is to say, the expert defends that, by not having nuclear weapons, the region will not be the target of a nuclear weapon, because nuclear weapons are aimed at attacking another country that has nuclear weapons to destroy those arsenals. “Fortunately, we do not have nuclear weapons in this scenario, and fortunately there is also no country that harbors nuclear weapons, because that would also make them a probable target,” he points out.

“It is not a question of distance, it is a question of strategic target. Currently, intercontinental ballistic missiles can cross the entire world in just over 26 minutes. It is not a question that we are very far from nuclear war, what happens is that the exchange would take place between countries that are not in Latin America and the Caribbean,” he adds.

In fact, in the southern hemisphere as a whole there are no possible military targets, because even Australia, which is part of a military alliance, does not have a host of American nuclear weapons. For this reason, the expert affirms that the problem would be mainly in the northern hemisphere, which is where attacks of this type would be exchanged and where populations would suffer the main consequences.

Now, not being a direct target of nuclear weapons does not exempt us from the global consequences that would occur, such as the destruction of the ozone layer, the radiation that would spread globally or the nuclear winter that would seriously affect the rest of the world.

Ortiz raises another consequence of the use of nuclear weapons in war. Remember that, in global terms, many countries gave up developing their own nuclear arsenals for legal reasons when signing agreements, but also for strategic reasons, considering that the United States was going to guarantee their security, as is the case of Germany. , Japan or South Korea.

“But if the United States rejects the possibility of guaranteeing the security of these countries, it is very likely that many of these nations will choose to develop their own nuclear weapons. If we have such a rapid increase in countries with nuclear capabilities, obviously the incentives for Brazil to change its policy will grow. This does not mean that they will do it automatically or that they will even do it, but once the dam containing the nuclear ambitions of most countries has been broken, many may be forced to have to develop a nuclear weapon,” he warns.