Nuclear Proliferation In Canada

Canada currently does not, nor have they ever indicated at creating a nuclear weapons program, this is due to their status as a non-nuclear weapon state by the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, as well as the reliance on the United States for nuclear defense. The following paper will detail Canadian nuclear energy and weapons policy, beginning with a description of their nuclear program. The next section will discuss the reasons for Canada’s avoidance of a nuclear weapons program and the current policy behind the nuclear program. Following will be a discussion of Canada’s nuclear weapons program and the policy on nuclear weapons. The paper will conclude with Canadian concerns over the current nuclear program of Iran.

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.

Canada, like most countries, has a unique approach to the formulation of its foreign policy. Because of the dynamic and ever-changing nature of Canadian foreign policy, a number of theories and perspectives have been formulated in order to properly engage and study this area of governmental policy. Perhaps the most dominant of these theories is the Liberal Internationalist perspective. The Liberal Internationalist, or LI, perspective sees Canada as a middle tier power at the international level (Kirton 2007, 29). This perspective recognizes that although Canada is an active, valuable member of the global community, it does not have the same power capabilities relative to those of major power, or principal states (Kirton 2007, 54).

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.

The Government of Canada should focus on foreign policy as many issues involving foreign policy directly affect many Canadians and the interests of Canada. In the past, Canada was seen as a generous contributor to the economic and social development of poorer countries, but more recent cutbacks to aid budgets and the lack of involvement in UN peacekeeping operations have brought down Canada’s positive image surrounding the topic of foreign policy. In addition to cutbacks to aid budgets, there have been cutbacks to the budget of the Department of National Defence; a vital part in the protection of

Nuclear complications have recently been on the rise as many countries resort to nuclear power harnessing as forms of obtaining energy. With that being said, nuclear security must be paid close attention to as the containment of nuclear waste is radioactive and causes great harm if not taken care of. Nuclear security architecture and behavioral improvement go hand in hand as one is somewhat dependent on the other. Nuclear power in Canada is provided by 19 commercial reactors producing a total of 95.6 (TWh) of electricity, which accounted for 16.6% of the nation's total electric energy generation in 2015. No nuclear weapons have been based in Canada since 1984, when US Genie air-to-air missiles were returned to the United States from their storage sites at Canadian airbases.

Libya has long been considered a state threatening the interests of the WMD non-proliferation regimes. Though Libya is a non-nuclear-weapon state party to the NPT, "[its] commitment to the accord is suspect because of [its] demonstrated interest in acquiring nuclear arms" (Jones 1995:15). This resolution became more suspicious when Libya joined Bhutan and India in casting a negative vote in the overall 158 to 3 vote in favor of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (Jones 1995:16).

In addition, all the uranium pellets (energy source) that Canada has ever used have totaled up to 1.3 million fuel bundles which are approximately 200 million tonnes of pellets. They are typically about 1 cm in diameter and 1 cm long of Uranium oxide. The pellets are disposed of by being used or being placed in a pool of water until we can find a permanent location. Low-level radioactive waste is disposed of in landfills because they barely cause any harm. High-level radioactive waste is either placed deep underground or also placed in a pool. Many people believe that these methods are improper, but there are many organizations that regulate safety before anything. The Canadian Nuclear Safety Commision is an organization that regulates nuclear energy in a way so it protects health, safety, security and the environment. This organization is under the Nuclear Safety and Control Act, meaning it protects the safety of people and the environment, regulates nuclear substances, and researches scientific and technical information, (eg.transportation). Even though there have been three major accidents with nuclear reactors, Canada has never had any accidents in 40 years and we hope to keep it this

Non-Proliferation policy derives from the Non-Proliferation treaty, “it is an international treaty with the objective to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons and weapons technology, to promote the peaceful uses of nuclear energy, to further the goal of achieving nuclear disarmament and general and complete disarmament”(UNODA) . First signed in 1968, the treaty officially began in 1970. as agreed in the treaty, after 25 years there was a meeting which concluded with the extension of the Non proliferation treat indefinitely. The treaty has open knowledge of 5 states holding nuclear-weapons and of their exact quantities they are; the United States, United Kingdom, Russia, China and France these are also the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council. The Non proliferation treaty is split into two articles. Article 1 with regard to the nuclear positive states and their agreements, Article 2 states the course for the Non nuclear states.

Mongolia is a strong supporter and signatory of the Conference of Disarmament, which focuses on our common goal for non-proliferation of all nuclear weapons, chemical weapons, and all other WMD’s, along with all conventional weapons, reduction of military budgets, reduction of armed forces, disarmament and development, and disarmament and international security. Furthermore, Mongolia strongly believes that the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (1996) is a catalyst for all weapon disarmament and is a strong instrument for non-proliferation. It is a measure where progress can be seen in a relatively short time and should be brought into force at an immediate date. We call upon those states that have not ratified it to do so immediately for the sake of our international community. Mongolia also believes that the adoption of the Arms Trade Treaty will also be a powerful tool for the prevention of human rights abuses and violations of international humanitarian law. We are pleased to be the 113th signatory of the ATT, which will foster international and human security, giving way for positive development of our regions.

Nowadays, in international relations, there are many norms and sets of rules set by the major global power. Some rules are followed, and some are not likely to be followed by states across the globe. Typically, rules such as the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons are contested by a number of states. For instance, this particular treaty aims to reduce the further spread of nuclear weapons and to maintain peaceful cooperation between countries who currently possess nuclear weapons. In fact, several states do not comply with this treaty and numerous other rules. This list of countries includes North Korea, South Sudan, Israel and some other states. Therefore, in this paper, I aim to examine under what degree these states decide not to comply with global norms particularly, the nuclear weapons treaty. Furthermore, I also seek an answer to under what condition the North Korea pursues nuclear power and focuses extensively on their military strength. I will use the Realism, Constructivism, and finally Individualism theories to explain this argument. These three international relations theories will provide three different perspectives which will certainly explain why North Korean military spending over-performs their GDP and what objectives they hope to achieve as a result of this action. Moreover, I will also compare another states’ similar cases to North Korea in order to further develop my argument. The comparative perspective is salient because they will likely

A NPT Review Conference was held in 2000 to strengthen the provisions put in place by the NPT in 1968, and multiple proposals for further nuclear non-proliferation were made. One proposal was the development of a Model Additional Protocol, which would empower the International Atomic Energy Agency to conduct more widespread inspections, including unannounced and short notice inspections. This would increase the effectiveness of verification efforts and better ensure that a state is not violating its NPT obligations.

Nuclear power has the potential of being used for weapons of mass destruction that can wipe out an entire civilization with one shot. This is why making sure no country; especially Iran, has enough nuclear material to where they pose a threat on other countries is very important. Countries throughout the world have expressed concern about the amount of nuclear power Iran is in possession of. The Iran nuclear program has been a real worry for many years because enriched uranium might be used to create weapons of mass destruction. Over the last few years, many steps have been made to restrict the amount of nuclear material that Iran has in their possession. The P5+1 countries, made up of the United Nations’ most robust countries: United States, Russia, France, United Kingdom, and China, as well as Germany, came together to resolve the issues involving the Iranian nuclear program. The P5+1 and Iran came to agreement with the Iran nuclear deal in 2015, which would limit the amount of nuclear material Iran would be allowed to have at any given time. The expansion and development of Iran’s nuclear program and its unpredictable government are perceived as threats by other countries around the world, which has led them to place limitations on Iran’s supplies of nuclear material.

This is why more nuclear weapon-free states from all regions of the world than ever have expressed interest in a new path to nuclear disarmament within the framework of humanitarian discourse, writes NTI. Contrarily to

In 1970, Indonesia signed the Treaty on the Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), and in 1996, acceded to the Additional Protocol. This treaty is about nuclear disarmament, nonproliferation, and peaceful uses of nuclear technoogy. In 1996, Indonesia signed the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty (CTBT), which was ratified in Feb. 2012. The CTBT prohibits all nuclear weapon testing by countries that have signed it. In 1997, Indonesia became a member of the Treaty on the Southeast Asian Nuclear Weapon-free Zone (the Bangkok Treaty). This treaty bans the development, manufacture, aquisition, or testing of nuclear weapons within the region (“Indonesia”). In 1999, Indonesia signed the