A World without Nukes

Kim Jongun, has mentioned before that he wants the world to look up to his strong country as a nuclear power, rather than just a mere country with multiple sanctions shouting big words. This in the past has led to various consequences from hegemonies all around the world who feel threatened by the implications of a young tyrant in charge of ICBMs. This is a clear example of the security dilemma in which the entire world, the anarchy that it is, has to control minor nations that strive for hegemony at the expense of the larger nations’ security and loss of leverage. Unfortunately, it seems that despite the clear warnings from the superior nations, the North Korean dictator has no interest in abiding by international rules and is far more fascinated with realist ideologies of projections of power.

The beginnings of the Nuclear Age started when Albert Einstein wrote to President Franklin Roosevelt warning him of a dangerous weapon the Nazis had begun researching, known as the atomic bomb. (1) Though, when President Roosevelt first read this letter, he was too preoccupied with events in Europe to be bothered with such ideas. He at the time did not take the creation of such weapon to seriously, nor did he believe America had the resources for such a task. (2) Finally, on October 19, 1939 President Roosevelt wrote back to Einstein stating that the United States had begun to research the power of uranium. (2) With the help of the British, whom reluctantly gave the United States leadership on this project, in June of 1942 the Manhattan Project had begun, though most of the world had no idea that this was even happening, not even Vice President Truman. (2)

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.

Additionally, it also presents perspectives on important policies and strategies of Iran and North Korea, in regard to the development of their armory of nuclear weapons.

Even before the outbreak of War, the United States was concerned with a fascist regime in Europe researching in nuclear weapons. In retaliation, the United States began to fund an atomic weapon development program which became known as “The Manhattan Project” led by J. Robert Oppenheimer. Over the next several years, the Manhattan project started obtaining key materials such as Uranium-235 and Plutonium and testing prototypes until they reached a working model (Coroner).

By September, 1944, before Roosevelt’s death, the threat of a nuclear arms race and possible retaliation for the use of this weapon is already a point of concern. The Office of Scientific Research and Development’s memorandum to Secretary of War Henry Stimson outlines some of the dangers the United States and Great Britain face in continuing the secret development of this “art”. Realizing this technology in the hands of the Soviet Union or other countries, especially defeated enemies, would make highly populated cities especially vulnerable. They also concluded that there was a high possibility of a “major power, or former major power undertaking this development.” The threat of the Soviet Union or Germany developing this weapon was a

As noted by them, after the successful creation of an invention, it is common to see it be easily replicated at a far lesser cost. The world becomes more dangerous as countries continue to develop their nuclear arms in secret. The country who first brings its nuclear arms into the light will gain the upper hand, even if only temporary. It is best that the information on nuclear arms is exposed in order for every country to be aware of the weapons their neighboring countries hold. The reports that have arrived have also painted a dire picture with their large number of

The choice to use an atomic bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were two of the biggest decisions that were made in the twentieth century and the effects were felt all around the world. Andrew J. Rotter, the author, “Hiroshima: The World’s Bomb” is a Professor of History at Colgate University who specialized in recent US history and the Vietnam War. He has also written on United State-Asian relations during the twentieth century, including the books, “The Path to Vietnam” and “Comrades at Odds: India and the United States.” Rotter writes this book to make the argument that the creations of the atomic bomb was not just an America inventions, but rather a world wide effort that developed over decades, even if many people did not know what their discoveries and hard work would be used for. This book was written in a very clear and concise manner that allowed for someone, like myself, who does not have a background in nuclear physics, to understand how the making of the atomic bomb was an international effort.

The first use of nuclear weaponry in warfare occurred on the morning of August 6, 1945 when the United States dropped the atomic bomb known as “Little Boy” on Hiroshima, Japan. The result was devastating, demonstrating the true power of nuclear warfare. Since the incident, the world has been left fearing the possible calamity of another nuclear war. Joseph Siracusa’s Nuclear Weapons: A Very Short Introduction explains aspects of nuclear weaponry from simply what a nuclear weapon is, to the growing fear from nuclear warfare advancements in an age of terrorism. The book furthered my education on nuclear weapons and the effect they place on society, physically and mentally.

Nuclear weapons have only ever been used once in human history, and that was during World War II when The United States deployed missiles on Japanese territory, in Nagasaki and Hiroshima. At the time of bombing in 1945 only the USA had developed nuclear weapons, whilst today the pool of states consisting of nuclear weapons is still extremely small, with only nine states laying claim to nuclear technology and weaponry. This nuclear proliferation is explained by Darryl Howlett who explains this as the worldwide spread of nuclear weapons. For Howlett states are nuclear driven because of the ‘strategic, political and prestige benefits’ attached to nuclear weapons[1]. In the

Understanding how North Korea as a country defines itself in a changing world. Where do they derive their customs and practices, political standings and military power? Define North Korea’s history leading into the modern age and define its culture and characteristics and how they interact with the world today. Understanding a subject as broad as the term culture begins where the culture began with the birth of civilization and the people that influenced it. There are many factors that play a role in the shaping of a nation none so much as turmoil and conflict and the Korean peninsula saw its fair share for the better part of a millennia. A complete statistical breakdown of North Korea shows a struggling nation that strongly depends on

I selected Illegal immigration in Greece because, it relates to my story in a way for instance these illegal immigrates are living in a war fought battle ground in Syria they just want freedom and a place for their family, but Greece is going through a finical crisis so they are doing whatever they can to hold back the illegal immigrates, this story relates to mine because they are both fighting for freedom and they both have someone standing in the way of that for Ender it seemed like it was the Buggars. For these immigrates it is Greece.

North Korea appears on the international stage as a country existing beyond the world we all know. It isolates its citizens from the rest of international community and does not obey any rules determined by international law, but requires respect and recognition. Moreover, North Korea is one of the countries that remains aggressive towards its neighbors and applies various terrorist techniques, i.e. illegal contraband, political terror and mass abductions of other countries’ citizens in its foreign policy. The reasons for which the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) behaves so unpredictably and irrationally are diversified. First of all, the DPRK as a country is managed very irrationally – regimes of Kim Il-sung and

The theory of Realism provides reasons why North Korea has positioned the nuclear weapon debate at the centre of its policy. One of the fundamental assumptions of Realism is in fact that each state, embedded in an international order characterized by a condition of antagonism, attempt to pursue its

The U.K and Paris built nuclear weapons due to the impending Soviet military threat and the reduction in the credibility of the U.S guarantee to NATO alliances after the Soviet Union threatened retaliation. China on the other hand developed the bomb because of the U.S’s threat to bomb Beijing at the end of the Korean War. Furthermore the emergence of hostility in Sino-Soviet relations in the 1960s further inspired the “robust and affordable security” of nuclear weapons since without it, China’s deterrence was thought to be inadequate compared to nuclear states. (Goldstein, 1992) Following the development of the bomb in China in 1964, India who had just fought a war with China in 1962 felt compelled to follow in its footsteps. Then following India’s nuclear test explosion, Pakistan felt it needed to step up its nuclear program facing a recently hostile neighbor with both nuclear weapons and conventional military security. Ultimately as a result of this domino effect, there have been no conflicts between these previous hostile states due to the generation of nuclear weapons; further emphasizing the key role nuclear weapons plays in the stability of international politics.