A Proposal for the International Elimination of Nuclear Weapons

Two main theorists of international relations, Kenneth Waltz and Scott Sagan have been debating on the issue of nuclear weapons and the proliferation of nuclear weapons in the 21st century. In their book The Spread of Nuclear Weapons: An Enduring Debate, they both discuss their various theories, assumptions and beliefs on nuclear proliferation and nuclear weapons. To examine why states would want to attain/develop a nuclear weapon and if increasing nuclear states is a good or bad thing. In my paper, I will discuss both of their theories and use a case study to illustrate which theory I agree with and then come up with possible solutions of preventing a nuclear war from occurring.

Since the invention of nuclear weapons, they have presented the world with a significant danger, one that was shown in reality during the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. However, nuclear weapons have not only served in combat, but they have also played a role in keeping the world peaceful by the concept of deterrence. The usage of nuclear weapons would lead to mutual destruction and during the Cold War, nuclear weapons were necessary to maintain international security, as a means of deterrence. However, by the end of the Cold War, reliance on nuclear weapons for maintaining peace became increasingly difficult and less effective (Shultz, et. al, 2007). The development of technology has also provided increasing opportunities for states

Whatever danger proliferators pose today would be far greater in a disarmed world, even though the previously nuclear states would eventually be able to rebuild nuclear weapons, they would be unwilling to accept a period during which a proliferator enjoyed a nuclear monopoly.”

Nuclear weapons have been used twice in war – on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945. More than 210,000 civilians died, while many more suffered small injuries. Even if a nuclear weapon were never again exploded over a city, there are horrible effects from the production, testing and deployment of nuclear weapons that are experienced as a personal and community catastrophe by lots of people around the world. This must inform and motivate efforts to get rid of these weapons.

The third and final proposal is taking greater action on the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty to confirm all nations are on the same playing field to dismantle nuclear weaponry. I plan on providing updated analysis in these issues as well. The Seventh Decade was written in 2007 and a lot has gone on since then in regards to nuclear activity and I plan on making it clear to the reader where the U.S. and the rest of the world stands.

Given the progress of globalization, international security has become an entailment that all countries must work on in order to guarantee the perennity of world peace. However, this quietude is threatened by the growing menace of nuclear proliferation. Canada, as a party to the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) since 1969, leads anti-proliferation campaigns to ensure global disarmament.

The Cold War was the greatest example of Nuclear Deterrence in history. The U.S. and Russia, had threatened nuclear war as a deterrence for almost fifty years. Next, we will evaluate logical fallacies, inform what it means to be a Strategic Airmen as well as how this course maintains my strategic focus in the conclusion.

The tensions during the cold war would have only escalated if there was no restriction on what could be used during a state of war. Despite the growing hostility toward the situation, the Allied powers came up with the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, which eventually received signatures from 191 nations since it was introduced in 1968 by the United Nations. The preamble highlights the ideology behind the treaty and its attempt to destabilize tensions during and after the 20th century, but may have failed or succeed by allowing loopholes to exist. It is a possibility that the attention was to allow nations to take advantage of nuclear weapons, in that case, this treaty has succeeded. If that is not the case, the treaty has failed its objective. The first error seen in the preamble is the statement that " affirming the principle that the benefits of a peaceful application of nuclear technology by-products which may be derived by nuclear-weapon states from the development of nuclear explosive devices, should be available for peaceful purposes to all parties to the treaty whether nuclear-weapon or non-nuclear weapon states"(Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty). In essence, nuclear reactors use the same materials found in nuclear weapons but the material is nowhere nearly as powerful. Giving away the means needed to make the weapon stronger is dangerous.

On the the biggest issues during the cold war and so inevitably when establishing the Détente was the nuclear arms

During the Cold War people had been living in fear thinking that one day their country might be bombed with a nuclear weapon. With the détente the nuclear anxieties were eased a bit. In 1972 a discussion known as Strategic Arms Limitation Talks or SALT was held. United States President Richard Nixon and Soviet President Leonid Brezhnev agreed to “freeze a number of strategic ballistic missile launches as well as reduce spending on nuclear weapons.” The two countries also agreed to limit their number of nuclear weapons. A second Strategic Arms Limitation Talk was held in 1979 this time between United States President Jimmy Carter and Leonid Brezhnev. This time more “controls were put in place on strategic nuclear weapons and new missile programs were banned, however this deal was not ratified by the U.S congress.” The reason why this treaty was never ratified was because President Carter was angry that the USSR had decided to invade Afghanistan. This goes to show that there was a period of relaxation between the United States and the USSR; however tensions did start to rise again when Afghanistan was invaded.

After World War II, The United States and the Soviet Union were amidst a nuclear arms

This means that there can not be any bombs tested or dropped at the time that the treaty was signed. In 1991 president bush signed a arms reduction treaty meaning that they have to carry less weapons or bombs or anything That is considered a weapon so anything over the limit they can get into some trouble. Also bush signed anouther treaty missile defence treaty witch this means that they have to have a missile defence of some sort i have know idea what would happen if they didnt have one.In the early 2000s russia and the netherlands sign a cooperative agreement for disarming any nuclear warheads5 this means all of them and the same things happens if you dont follow what you signed then you can really get into big trouble like could possibly get killed.And in are current time we have not been in a nuclear war we have been close but nothing has happend north korea was claiming they were going to but never did we were going to fire one if they did but we were waiting on them but they never did so 5

During the Cold War there was a great deal of tension between the United States and the USSR. Both sides competed in arms race that is, equipping their arsenal of nuclear weaponry. Both sides realized how big of a danger these weapons possess and what destruction they might cause. People on both sides lived in a constant fear of nuclear war. For example, North Korea has developed an unpredictable character by testing and launching nuclear weapons. The same fear which was common during the Cold War is present today but on a bigger. Thus, in 1963 the Kennedy administration was able to pass the Limited Test Ban Treaty “which stopped above-ground nuclear tests” (Sagan, p.23). The 1968 Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT) that countries agree to disarmament and arms limitation (Sagan, p.23). Without implementing these treatiesthe number of nuclear weapons would be very

Part of arms control is the decommissioning of nuclear weapons. The first step to decommissioning is to remove the warhead from the delivery system. From there the warhead will go to a special treatment (Or in the United States the pantex plant in Texas) and the cover of the warhead will come off. Then there are many safety checks and inspections. After passing inspection the warhead goes through a disassembly process which takes about a week. Afterwards, the material is either buried,burned or stored until there is no radioactivity. Everything else is recycled. All countries with a certain amount of weapons should disassemble them. Every country should have a close amount of nuclear weapons. This will help prevent over spending and arms races. If everyone has a similar amount of weapons then each country is just as powerful. If one country is too powerful it can result in war. If the amount of weapons is balanced equally and monitored then terrorists will have a harder time getting weapons. It is important for there to be a balance of power because it will ensure world peace. Arms control can also relieve tensions caused by nuclear weapons between two or more countries because it will set them equal and reduce possible

Nuclear weapons are the most dangerous weapons on earth. One can demolish a whole city, potentially killing millions, and exposed the natural environment and lives of future generations through its long-term catastrophic effects. According to the UNODA- United Nations Office for Disarmament Affairs (2011), “Although nuclear weapons have only been used twice in warfare- in the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945-about 22,000 reportedly remains in our world today and there have been over 2,000 nuclear tests conducted to date.” Nuclear weapons have been viewed as a threat to peace by world leaders. There have been debates of whether to let Iran and North Korea acquire nuclear weapons, leaders all around the world along with Liberals believe that it is a threat to peace and should limit the spread whereas neo realist have another belief that nuclear weapon can make the world a peaceful place. Because states would fear to attack each other. For example the Cuban missile crisis in 1962 and cold war- there were only threats and war did not happen because of nuclear deterrence. The Cuban missile crisis has frequently been portrayed as the only time where the world stood in the point of nuclear war between the superpowers. This is an example of how nuclear weapons were used to threaten the rival. Another examples would be that of India and Pakistan before they acquire nuclear weapon , they fought three bloody wars after having their independence but since 1998, after acquiring