2025-03-18
A timid assessment of obviously increasing global security risk
By Chris Johansen, Green Issue Co-editor
In 1947 The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists established the concept of the Doomsday Clock. This was an initiative of some of the scientists, including Albert Einstein and Robert Oppenheimer, behind the development of the atomic bomb, unleashed on Hiroshima and Nagasaki two years earlier. Although peace had broken out after World War 2, a cold war was developing between the “West” and the newly established Soviet Union. With the Soviet Union also then developing nuclear weapons the concept of Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) was realized. The Clock was an attempt to depict how close humanity was to MAD.
Although the potential use of nuclear weapons was the original criterion for setting the Clock, other existential threats were later taken into account. These included climate change, global pandemics, meteor strikes and, more recently, rampant AI.
In 2023 and 2024 the clock was set at 90 seconds to midnight, the closest it has ever been. For perspective, at the end of the cold war in 1990 it was as far away as 17 minutes to midnight. The rationale for 90 seconds in recent years was:
- The ongoing Ukraine war, with damage to nuclear power stations and threats of the use of nuclear weapons.
- The Gaza invasion with its increasing risks of expanding into a widespread Middle East conflict, with some of the likely participants having nuclear weapons (Israel and possibly Iran) and the temptation to use them.
- Increasing tensions with China, promoted by the USA.
- The acceleration of climate change.
- The rapid and unrestrained development of AI with its increasing ability to override human control.
- A global shift to authoritarian movements and regimes preferring violent confrontation over diplomatic dialogue.
However, the existential threat to humanity, and much of life on the planet, has noticeably worsened over the previous year. The above-mentioned threats have only intensified. But on top of that Donald Trump was re-elected as president of the USA, despite his extreme right-wing agenda espoused on the campaign trail. But since assuming office in January his executive action is turning out to be even more extreme. To mention a few such actions: withdrawal from the Paris agreement and complete denial of climate change, advocacy of the ethnic cleansing of Gaza, imperial ambitions for Greenland, Canada and Panama, a tariff regime likely to cripple the global economy, imprisonment and expulsion of refugees, an overt desire for revenge against anyone who crosses him, and many more.
US allies, like Australia, are reluctant to speak out against the Trump presidency for fear of damaging long standing defence agreements. But that doesn’t stop Trump tariffing the hell out of them. There appears to be no means of restraint on this loose cannon behaviour, by someone who holds the suitcase trigger to a vast nuclear arsenal.
Yet despite the obvious worsening of the global security situation over the previous year, the Bulletin only moved the minute hand just one second towards midnight, from 90 to 89 seconds. Surely a movement of the order of 20 seconds was warranted.
Why this timidity?
One possible reason is perceived intimidation by Trump, through cutting off funding that might reach the Bulletin or retribution against its members and supporters.
Another is the fear of being too alarmist, thereby causing readers/followers to tune out – overwhelmed and numbed. This is a noticeable phenomenon in the climate movement. Among people concerned about climate change if the portents of catastrophe are too stark they tend to divert their thoughts from that topic, towards more comforting topics thus reducing their potential for climate action.
On the other hand I would think that a realistic assessment of the threat(s) is necessary to be able to formulate effective remedial action.
Header photo: The 2025 Doomsday Clock
[Opinions expressed are those of the author and not official policy of Greens WA]