The minute hand of the Doomsday Clock stands at nine minutes to midnight. It symbolises how close we are to nuclear disaster. The clock is set by the board of directors of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists who, flushed with optimism at the ending of the Cold War, set it at 17 minutes to midnight in 1991. But faced with the acquisition of nuclear weapons by India and Pakistan, the scientists decided to move the clock to its current setting three years ago.
In the current climate of growing controversy over "Son of Star Wars", as the US-sponsored National Missile Defence (NMD) system has been called, it would not be surprising if the hand was moved forward another few minutes. The clock has been operating since 1947 and its most alarming setting was 11.58 p.m. in 1953, the year of Stalin's death.
Ireland has traditionally taken a strong position against the arms race, in the forefront of those countries pressing for the elimination of nuclear weapons. The longstanding objectives of Irish foreign policy are to achieve a world free of weapons of mass destruction, with effective bans on such weapons.
These aims are pursued through (a) participation in international arrangements designed to halt the further spread of weapons of mass destruction; (b) working to strengthen the international nuclear non-proliferation regime and advocating the early abolition of nuclear weapons.
Ireland proposed the treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) in 1958. The treaty finally came into force in 1970 and almost every state in the world is now a party to it. Ireland was also one of the first states to sign the Comprehensive Test-Ban Treaty in 1996. Three years ago, in an effort to revitalise the debate on nuclear disarmament, Ireland came together with some like-minded states to launch a joint declaration entitled Towards a Nuclear Weapons Free World - The Need for a New Agenda. The other members of the so-called New Agenda Coalition are Brazil, Egypt, Mexico, New Zealand, South Africa and Sweden.
Head-on criticism of US policy in any sphere by Irish governments is relatively rare, but there was an implicit rebuke from the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Mr Cowen, when he told the Dail last year in response to a question on NMD: "Attempts by one or other nuclear weapons state to achieve invulnerability would be counterproductive and could lead to a new arms race."
There was a clear demarcation between Ireland and most other Western countries, including members of the European Union, in a vote at the UN General Assembly on November 20th last. The resolution was seen as rejecting NMD: co-sponsored by Belarus, China and Russia, the text recognised the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty between the US and the then Soviet Union as "a cornerstone for maintaining global peace and security" and called for "full and strict compliance" with the treaty's provisions.
The strongest section of the resolution called upon the parties to the treaty "to refrain from the deployment of anti-ballistic missile systems for the defence of the territory of their country". The resolution also welcomed the decision by then President Clinton, two months before, to postpone establishment of NMD as "a positive step for the preservation of strategic stability and security".
The US and Israel were among those voting against, and member-states abstaining included 13 of the 15 EU member-states. Ireland and France were the only EU members to support the resolution. Nevertheless, there is nervousness also in other parts of Europe about NMD and fears that it will intensify the arms race.
Reacting to comments by President Bush suggesting that the ABM Treaty was outdated and unduly restrictive, Mr Cowen told the Dail last month: "I would be extremely concerned if this could lead to the ending of the ABM Treaty and the consequential destabilisation of the present nuclear balance."
NMD is seen by its critics as a major threat to the ABM Treaty and they believe it will undermine the delicate arrangement between the US and Russia. However, the apparent beginnings of a rapprochement on the issue between Presidents Bush and Putin at the G8 Summit in Genoa last weekend have inspired hope that the difficulties can be overcome by some new strategic arrangement.
While there may be a US view that the ABM Treaty is outdated, the Irish position is that it provides an essential foundation in for moves towards total disarmament. The worry is that if NMD makes the US invulnerable, then what incentive will there be for the Americans to disarm? There would also be pressure on the Russians to increase their stock of warheads. As one observer said: "NMD is the enemy of progress on disarmament."
The New Agenda Coalition is the main official focus of Irish energy on the nuclear issue. In May last year, the New Agenda group secured an "unequivocal commitment" from the five officially recognised nuclear weapons states - the US, Russia, Britain, China and France - to the total elimination of their nuclear arsenals. Although there was no timetable, there was a detailed programme of action. In his address to the UN General Assembly last September, Mr Cowen pledged the Government to "work vigorously for the achievement of this goal". A spokesman for the Minister said this week: "We would approach the whole NMD issue in the context of non-proliferation and disarmament."
The original New Agenda declaration of 1998 expressed deep concern at: "the persistent reluctance of the nuclear-weapons states to approach their treaty obligations as an urgent commitment to the total elimination of their nuclear weapons". It recalled the unanimous advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice in 1996 that nuclear disarmament was an obligation for states in possession of such weapons. At the next review of the NPT treaty in 2005, the nuclear states will be asked what progress they have made towards fulfilling their unequivocal commitment.
Commenting on NMD, the Fine Gael spokesman on Foreign Affairs, Jim O'Keeffe, said he would not condemn the US for taking steps to defend itself against attacks from rogue states. "If the result is the unilateral abrogation of existing international treaties, then there is cause for concern and a genuine reason for us to question what they are doing."
The Labour spokesman on Foreign Affairs, Michael D. Higgins, says he believes the Government should take the bull by the horns and organise an international conference on the whole question of armaments. "We should clearly come out against NMD and be canvassing Europe against it. What are we waiting for?" Mr Higgins asks.
David Andrews, a former foreign minister, wonders from where the threat to the Americans is coming. He does not see Iran or Iraq as potential nuclear dangers to the US and says he believes instead that NMD is a "warm-up" for militarism and the arms industry. Ireland should take a strong stance: "We should be seen to be leading on all these things."
With the end of the Cold War it was widely believed nuclear weapons would gradually disappear because there was no longer any apparent rationale for their existence. A decade later, this has proven an unrealistic hope. While supporters of NMD see it as merely a common-sense shield against the actions of so-called "pariah" states, its opponents fear it will bring us back to the days of worrying about nuclear annihilation and constantly watching the Doomsday Clock.
Deaglan de Breadun is Foreign Affairs Correspondent of The Irish Times
Tomorrow: Christoph Schwennickem, a defence analyst with Suddeutsche Zeitung newspaper, gives a central European perspective