Connect with us

Society

The invention that won the US the World War

As Einstein put it, “I know not what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones.”

Karthik Vinod

Published

on

INVENTION jpeg

From the archives of EdPublica (Formerly The Education Post)

It was October 11, 1939, and Alexander Sachs knew that it was his turn to enter the President’s office. He was allotted a brief amount of time to meet the President. But what Sachs had in mind to say was no ordinary matter – the World War had begun, with the German invasion of Poland just over a month ago. Franklin D Roosevelt was on an absolutely busy schedule. But this was the only time Sachs was going to get – to alert and advise the President of the United States of a possible nuclear attack from Germany.

Just over a month ago Sachs was contacted by Leo Szilard, an American-Hungarian physicist.  He discussed the potential application of the element uranium, to sustain a nuclear chain reaction, creating vast amounts of energy that could even level whole cities.

Szilard discussed with Albert Einstein the potential use of such nuclear weapons by Germany. Einstein signed a letter drafted by Szilard and requested Sachs to read it out to the President, primarily because of Sachs’ closeness to President Roosevelt and the fact that he would get clearance immediately. Sachs agreed to deliver the message and added his summary of the consequences of nuclear technology.

Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1912
 Franklin D Roosevelt. Image: Wikimedia Commons

In the limited time he conversed with Roosevelt, Sachs was unsure whether he struck a chord with the President over the potential use of nuclear energy as a weapon of mass destruction. Additionally, Sachs mentioned the German move to bar the sales of uranium ore from neighboring Czechoslovakia, and linked it to a possible sign of development in their nuclear ambition.

Nevertheless, Roosevelt invited Sachs again for breakfast the next day at the White House. Sachs paced about his hotel room that night, and even strolled out to meditate, as he planned how to present his argument.

Later that morning over breakfast, Sachs, in his moment of inspiration, remembered Napoleon’s rejection of an offer from Robert Fulton during the Napoleonic Wars (1800-1815) to create steamships that could invade England directly. However, Napoleon thought ships without sails could never be created. This shortsightedness led the British to invent and use steamships to defeat the French in the end of the war.

Roosevelt realized the potential threat the German possession of these nuclear weapons would pose, and was famous to have told his aide, General Edwin “Pa” Watson, immediately “Pa, this needs action!”

Roosevelt had set up the Uranium Committee to research the potential application of uranium to build nuclear weapons. However, the Committee barely scratched the surface for over 2 years, since the US was not at war yet. It was only in December 1941, that the US put effort into the nuclear weapons program. However, concluding that it would take a huge load of a thousand tons to detonate these devices slowed down progress. But the breakthrough arrived, when their British allies, as part of their own MAUD Committee (similarly researching the feasibility of nuclear weapons) discovered the “critical mass” of uranium-235 (the isotope used in nuclear fission chain reactions) is barely 10 kg.

It was an important revelation and the subsequent Quebec Agreement, between the British and the US governments (signed by Winston Churchill and Frank Roosevelt), sealed their special relationship in transferring and cooperating nuclear energies and technologies. And hence the British nuclear program (a.k.a. Tube Alloys), was merged with the US nuclear program (a.k.a. Manhattan Project).

The project progressed over the next 27 months, culminating at the deserts of Jornada del Muerdo, in the state of New Mexico – with the detonation of the first nuclear device – the “Gadget” as part of Trinity (code name for the test). Robert Oppenheimer, who led the nuclear program remarked at the end of the Trinity test, “Now I am become death, the destroyer of worlds,” a quotation from the Bhagavad Gita.

It later dawned on the US in 1945, that the Germans did not possess a nuclear weapon, or did not try to build one – although they had a division researching uranium during the war. With imminent German defeat, the use of a nuclear weapon against them was now unjustified. However, the Japanese became the natural target as they were the only functioning adversary.

It dawned to Leo Szilard that the US may consider using the bomb, especially after the unsuccessful conclusion to the Postdam Conference, where they discussed a policy to coerce the Japanese into surrendering unconditionally.

Before Szilard’s new letter arrived at the White House, asking then President Harry Truman to reconsider the use of nuclear weapons in war, Hiroshima and Nagasaki were both destroyed in nuclear strikes, forcing the Japanese to surrender a week later, thus ending the World War.

ai generated 8358801 1280
 Albert Einstein. Image credit: Pixabay

The use of the bomb has rather been controversial. On one side, people doubted the indiscretion displayed by Truman, calling the killings of thousands of civilians as a war crime. However, Truman said he was convinced that if he did not order the attack, the Japanese would have never surrendered and prolonged the war, adding more death, destruction and misery.

The creation of the atomic bomb heightened the consequences of war. After the Soviet Union, the United Kingdom, France, China, India, Pakistan and North Korea created their own nuclear weapons – some of them thousands of times more powerful than the bomb detonated over Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the world has realized largely that another World War would end in mutual destruction.

As Einstein ominously once said, “I know not what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones.” 

Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

COP30

From 6% to 16%: The Philippines Shows the World How Fast Climate Budgets Can Shift

In just four years, the Philippines has expanded its climate spending from PHP 282 billion to over PHP 1 trillion — one of the fastest fiscal shifts anywhere in the world.

Published

on

Magazine 8
Flooded Street with Jeepney in Malabon, Philippines. Image credit: Tear Cordez/Pexels

Governments across the world are beginning to rethink the way national budgets are designed, moving away from traditional fiscal planning and toward systems that integrate climate considerations directly into spending decisions. A new comparative review of global green-budgeting practices reveals a trend that is gathering momentum: more countries are using their budgets as climate-governance tools. But the pace of progress varies sharply between advanced economies and emerging markets.

The Rise of Climate-Conscious Budgets

Countries such as France, Ireland, Mexico and the Philippines provide some of the clearest examples of how climate priorities are reshaping national expenditure. France has increased its identified climate-positive budget from €38.1 billion in 2021 to €42.6 billion in 2025, while Ireland expanded its environmental allocations from €2 billion (2020) to €7 billion (2025). Mexico’s transformation has been even more rapid: climate-related expenditures rose from MXN 70 billion (2021) to MXN 466 billion (2025) — a six-fold increase.

A Sudden Surge in the Philippines

Nowhere is the shift more dramatic than the Philippines. After embedding climate budget tagging across its ministries, the country’s climate budget expanded from PHP 282 billion in 2021 to more than PHP 1 trillion in 2025, raising its share of the national budget from 6% to 16%. The reform forced ministries to assess thousands of programmes through a climate lens, resulting in a shift toward resilient infrastructure, sustainable energy, water security, and climate-smart industries.

Advanced Economies Move Beyond Tagging

While emerging economies are scaling up climate allocations, advanced economies are integrating climate metrics deeper into fiscal systems. Canada’s “climate lens” requires greenhouse-gas and resilience assessments for major infrastructure projects before funding is approved. Norway links its annual budget to its Climate Change Act and long-term low-emission strategies. Germany uses sustainability indicators to guide fiscal decisions, embedding climate considerations into macroeconomic planning.

These tools go beyond transparency. They force ministries to justify public spending not only in economic terms, but in climate terms — shifting budgets from accounting documents to steering instruments.

Despite this momentum, the analysis notes a persistent gap: many countries stop at tagging climate-related expenditures without linking them to outcomes or performance indicators. Tagging improves transparency, but on its own does not change investment decisions. Without climate-based appraisal and monitoring, high-emission infrastructure can still slip through national budgets unchallenged.

The Financing Challenge

For lower-income countries, the largest barriers are financial. High capital costs, limited fiscal room, and weaker public financial management systems restrict the scale of green budgeting reforms. Even when climate spending rises, sustaining these increases requires integrating climate metrics into medium-term fiscal frameworks — something only a handful of emerging economies have attempted.

Innovations Show What’s Possible

Some models offer a blueprint. Indonesia’s climate-tagging system feeds directly into its sovereign green sukuk framework, giving investors clear visibility over the use of proceeds. This loop — tagging, reporting, financing — demonstrates how governments can leverage green budgeting to unlock larger pools of private capital.

Still in Progress

The report concludes that the next frontier for green budgeting is integration: linking budget tagging, climate-lens project appraisal, performance-based reporting, and climate-aligned fiscal strategies. Done together, these tools allow budgets to become climate-governance instruments capable of guiding national transitions.

But the pace remains uneven. Some countries are racing ahead, while others are taking incremental steps. What is clear, however, is that climate-aligned public finance is no longer optional. As climate impacts intensify, the alignment of the world’s budgets will determine who adapts — and who is left behind.

Continue Reading

COP30

Corporate Capture: Fossil Fuel Lobbyists at COP30 Hit Record High, Outnumbering Delegates from Climate-Vulnerable Nations

COP30 sees over 1,600 fossil fuel lobbyists inside climate talks, surpassing delegations of climate-vulnerable nations. Experts warn of corporate capture.

Published

on

cop jpeg
Illustrated image

COP30 was billed as the “Implementation COP,” a summit where governments would finally convert years of climate promises into concrete action. Instead, the year’s most striking headline comes from the corridors, not the negotiation rooms: more than 1,600 fossil fuel lobbyists have entered the talks — the highest in the history of the UN climate process.

A new analysis by the Kick Big Polluters Out (KBPO) coalition reveals that one in every 25 participants in Belém is linked to the oil, gas, or coal industry. The number surpasses the total delegations of many climate-vulnerable nations and even outnumbers the combined negotiating teams of the 10 most climate-impacted countries.

For many observers, the surge represents not just a statistic but a symptom of a deeper structural crisis.

“It’s common sense that you cannot solve a problem by giving power to those who caused it,” said Jax Bonbon of IBON International in a statement. “Yet three decades and 30 COPs later, more than 1,500 fossil fuel lobbyists are roaming the climate talks as if they belong here.”

A Climate Summit Outnumbered by Industry

The analysis shows 599 industry-linked representatives entered COP30 through Party overflow badges — a route typically reserved for government delegates. This method bypasses new transparency rules that require non-government participants to disclose their affiliations.

Untitled design 23
Illustration: S James/EdPublica

Several countries also included fossil fuel representatives directly within their official delegations. According to the report, France, Japan, and Norway brought senior industry figures, including those from TotalEnergies, Japan Petroleum Exploration, and Equinor.

“Until we Kick Big Polluters Out, we can expect the outcomes of COP30 — and every COP after — to be written by the world’s largest polluters,” said Pascoe Sabido of Corporate Europe Observatory. “It’s profit over people and the planet.”

The contrast between industry presence and the representation of climate-impacted nations is stark. The Philippines’ delegation is outnumbered by nearly 50 to 1. Jamaica sent fewer than 40 delegates — as it deals with the aftermath of Hurricane Melissa — while hundreds of industry lobbyists move freely inside the venue.

‘A Flood of Influence’

Civil society groups warn that the negotiations risk being shaped by the very actors accelerating the climate crisis.

“The COP is massively flooded with around 1,500 representatives of the fossil fuel industry — like a river bursting its banks and sweeping everything away,” said Susann Scherbarth of Friends of the Earth Germany.

The criticism echoes growing frustration among scientists and youth groups over the widening gap between climate science and political outcomes. Despite repeated warnings from the IPCC about the need for rapid fossil fuel phase-down, nearly $250 billion worth of new oil and gas projects have been approved since COP29.

Youth delegations expressed alarm that the negotiation space is becoming increasingly inaccessible to those most affected by the climate crisis.

“The UNFCCC is in need of rehabilitation,” said Pim Sullivan-Tailyour from the UK Youth Climate Coalition. “My generation deserves Just Transition policies shaped by what people and the planet need — not what polluters’ profits demand.”

Demands for Integrity and Accountability

Transparency and governance experts argue that the situation has reached a defining moment. “If COP30 is indeed the COP of truth, the Presidency and the UNFCCC Secretariat must strengthen participant disclosure rules,” said Brice Böhmer of Transparency International. “It is time to ensure integrity and restore trust.”

Civil society groups are urging governments to adopt formal conflict-of-interest rules, a step the UNFCCC has so far resisted. They argue that genuine climate progress requires insulating negotiations from actors whose core business models rely on continued fossil fuel extraction.

A Crossroads Moment for the UN Climate Process

COP30 was expected to accelerate global action toward limiting warming to 1.5°C. Instead, it has reopened a fundamental question: Can a climate summit deliver meaningful outcomes when the world’s largest polluters enjoy unprecedented access inside the process?

The KBPO coalition says the answer depends on whether the UNFCCC is willing to adopt structural reforms that prioritise vulnerable communities over powerful corporations.

As the talks continue in Belém, the tension between ambition and influence remains at the heart of COP30 — raising critical questions about transparency, accountability, and the future of global climate governance.

Continue Reading

Society

Guterres to WMO: ‘No Country Is Safe Without Early Warnings’

At WMO’s 75th anniversary, UN Chief António Guterres warned that no nation is safe from extreme weather — urging governments to fast-track early warning systems by 2027.

Joe Jacob

Published

on

UN CHIEF jpeg
Image credit: UN/Evan Schneider

Declaring that “no country is safe from the devastating impacts of extreme weather,” UN Secretary-General António Guterres called for a global surge in early warning systems to protect lives, economies, and ecosystems from climate-fuelled disasters.​

Speaking at the 75th anniversary of the World Meteorological Organization (WMO), Guterres hailed the agency as “a barometer of truth” and “a shining example of science supporting humanity.” It was his first address to the WMO, reflecting the agency’s central role in turning climate science into life-saving action.

“Without your rigorous modelling and forecasting, we would not know what lies ahead — or how to prepare for it,” he told delegates gathered at WMO headquarters in Geneva.

The occasion doubled as the midway checkpoint for the Early Warnings for All (EW4All) initiative, launched by Guterres in 2022 to ensure every person on Earth is protected by life-saving warning systems by 2027.

WMO Secretary-General Celeste Saulo issued a “Call to Action,” urging all countries to close early warning gaps through expanded observation networks, strengthened hydrological services, and community-level outreach. “Every dollar invested in early warning saves up to fifteen in disaster losses,” she said.​

Saulo cautioned that despite major progress—108 countries now operate multi-hazard warning systems—the world’s poorest remain the least protected. Disaster mortality rates are six times higher in countries with limited early warning coverage.​

A 75-Year Legacy of Science for Action

Marking 75 years since it became a UN specialized agency, WMO used its Extraordinary Congress to reaffirm global cooperation in weather, water, and climate monitoring.​

President Abdulla al Mandous praised Guterres for embedding early warning systems into the international climate agenda: “Early warnings are now recognized at the highest levels as cost-effective, life-saving, and cross-cutting solutions that reduce risk and advance development,” he said.

Guterres urged three urgent priorities to achieve universal coverage: integrating early warnings across governance structures, boosting finance and debt relief for vulnerable nations, and aligning national climate plans to limit temperature rise to 1.5°C.

“Every life lost to disaster is one too many,” he said. “With science, solidarity, and political resolve, we can ensure a safer planet for all.”

Continue Reading

Trending