Film on Nuclear Threats Screened

A small group of New London residents braved the cold weather to talk about the Cold War, among other things, at a screening of the documentary Countdown to Zero, presented by the Southeastern Connecticut Peace and Justice Network at the Provenance Center Tuesday night.

The film focuses primarily on the threats of terrorists acquiring nuclear weapons and states setting them off accidentally. Director Lucy Walker combines time-lapse photography of container ships, slick overhead shots of city lights at night, vaguely ominous images of city maps, and almost comedic footage of planes going down and missiles going awry. There are also interviews with political figures, scientists and mostly clueless international men, women and children on the street.

There's an element of absurdity to the facts presented. A grapefruit-sized ball of plutonium is enough for a bomb, and enriched uranium is easily smuggled in kitty litter. The moon and flocks of geese have been interpreted as incoming bombs, and mishaps involving a mistakenly inserted military training tape and a computer part malfunction have nearly resulted in catastrophe. In 1995 the US and Norway launched a rocket as part of a scientific experiment. It triggered an alert that went all the way up the Russian chain of command. Boris Yeltsin, who "fortunately wasn't drunk," didn't push the button.

But mostly Countdown to Zero wants to make you nervous. Its experts talk about the instability in Pakistan. They note that making a bomb is easy, the parts are relatively cheap, and even a badly made, inefficient bomb could destroy a city. It would take two minutes to start launching the missiles still pointed at Russia decades after the end of the Cold War and fifteen minutes for all the American and Russian bombs to be airborne. There are far fewer nuclear weapons in the world than there were at one time, but 23,000 remain. In the former Soviet Union, "potatoes are guarded better" than some of them. The movie winds down with happy images of Times Square on New Year's Eve accompanied by voice-over descriptions of exactly how, in the event of a nuclear strike, the city would be destroyed and the people would die.

Janet Minella-Didier of the Southeastern Connecticut Peace and Justice Network said that the film, which ends with its "on the street" interviewees agreeing that the optimal number of nuclear bombs is the "zero" of the title, offers no advice on what to do about it. She provided information to counter that.

Then the discussion began, led by Frida Berrigan, peace activist and former Senior Program Associate at the New America Foundation's Arms and Security Initiative. Attendees criticized the film for not explicitly mentioning the bombing of Hiroshima and for the distinction it makes between terrorists and state actors. Some felt the movie had a fear-mongering, "right-wing propaganda" tone. Audience members also pointed out that the documentary makes assumptions about the viewer's familiarity with the subject, picturing Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, for example, without identifying him. They questioned the usefulness of screening it for students.

Berrigan spoke about the new START treaty, which President Obama signed alongside President Medvedev of Russia last April, and which the Senate may begin debating today. She said that to secure Republican support for the treaty, the administration is offering $80 billion for nuclear research and development, and that providing this "blank check" in exchange for ratification was "not worth it." Real nuclear disarmament, she said, would mean giving up nuclear power of all kinds.

The discussion ended on a note heard frequently around New London in recent weeks: the need to educate and involve young people, hear their thoughts on the matter, and help them believe in their future.