The international community lead by United States has been trying incessantly to contain nuclear proliferation and keep it within the 5 veto countries. But slowly and steadily several other countries have been acquiring nuclear capability. Is the nuclear genie out of the bottle and can't be controlled? Is it that, the spread of nuclear capability can at best be slowed and can't be totally contained?
Initially there were 5 nuclear countries and they were joined by India, Pakistan & Israel. Now, North Korea has announced that they have joined the nuclear club. Besides these countries, there few other countries like Japan, Brazil, South Africa & Iran that have varying capability in the nuclear front. While Brazil & South Africa & Japan have voluntarily restrained themselves, Iran has been talking nuclear for a while now.
In 1963, Nuclear 'haves' created Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and wanted the world to sign up. India, Pakistan & Israel never joined NPT eventually became nuclear. North Korea didn't care much for the treaty to start with and has gone nuclear now. Slowly but steadily NPT has been eroded and it is now at a point where the NPT diplomacy needs serious reconsideration.
In this 'flat world' is it possible to contain the nuclear spread ? What is the locus-standi of the nuclear haves to demand others to desist from having? (It is interesting to see that even India has joined the bandwagon to condemn North Korea). What is the 'leverage' nuclear haves have over the have nots? Obviously diplomacy hasn't worked nor have the empty threats and economic sanctions.
While President Bush has issued threats like axis of evil speech to economic sanctions, they have heard no effort on North Korea and likely have no impact on Iran either. It is likely that Iran will take the cue from North Korea and become nuclear in the not too distant future.
Can Nuclear Proliferation be really controlled? What's your take on North Korea and Iran (very soon) going nuclear? How will the world be if there are 20 nuclear countries instead of 9 today? Would it be any less safer than today? Barring empty threats, will any country really use nuclear weapons?
India news media and intelligence has been keeping up with US Nuclear activity. In fact SunTV news highlighted the fact as of 10/11/06 US has done Nuclear test 1030 times in the last 40 years. Such being the case, US has no credibility in non-proliferation effort even if it gets the support of other nations such as UK, France, China, Russia or any one possessing nuclear energy. It is like obese individual talking about diet.ReplyDelete
It is very disturbing to note that hypocrisy is being practiced as state policy by the US and UK in their quest to dominate the world and make the world a better place for their own citizens. Bush and his ragtag bunch of necon goons in the US have consistently been flouting international norms and regulations all along and now, when it is convenient for them, they choose to invoke the help of the international community to brutalize the "Axis countries" into submission. They did not need or heed the UN when they went into Iraq based on a bunch of lies. Now, when their military and propaganda machine is depleted after battle with insurgency in Iraq, they seem to "need" diplomacy again. This is international "goonda raj" at its worst.
NPT be damned. Everyone should become a nuclear power. It should be distributed to every single nation on earth. Then, the world will be a peaceful place as it will deter anyone from making an arrogant move.
Humankind has always fought since time immemorial.. just that the tools of the trade has changed and has become potent now..ReplyDelete
Whether is so called smart bombs or shot guns they still kill people..
The concern with nuclear weapons is that if more people have it then chance of accidental usage also increases.. why not the entire world go nuclear free..? It is possible..Yes.. but will never happen..