Essay on Nuclear Terrorism Not Likely

, and lone actors inspired by terror propaganda. Unconventional threats, although difficult to obtain and employ, potentially provide a large payoff to any terror organization when utilized and thus are attractive to those seeking to instill fear, degrade an economy, or attempt to influence policy. A subset of the terrorism threat is the realm of chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear (CBRN) hazards. Within this particular subset, there are innumerable methods a terror cell may use to accomplish their goals and a careful analysis of available materials, capabilities, desired effects, and costs versus benefits helps narrow the most likely forms

No action taken by the regime has been more dangerous than its pursuit of nuclear weapons — and the means of delivering them.

Weapons of mass destruction and terrorism have become the two major focuses on the international stage in today’s world. The ultimate fear of the United States is the possibility that nuclear weapons might be placed in the hands of terrorist organizations and states, which might use such weapons to attack other countries. Iran and North Korea possess large scale nuclear proliferation programs, which have recently become much larger threats to the world. North Korea, which was previously bound by a non-proliferation treaty with the United States, recently broke the treaty by resuming its nuclear programs. The United States has been unsuccessful in persuading North Korea to resume compliance with the agreement. Iran, on the other hand, is much more deceptive in its nuclear programs. When nuclear proliferation was recently discovered to have resumed in Iran, Iranian officials explained that they were producing uranium (the “main ingredient” in nuclear weapons) for national energy resources. Thomas Omestad of U.S. News and World Report states that “Iran intends to convert 37 tons of ‘yellowcake’ uranium oxide into uranium hexafluoride, a gas that in turn could be used to produce enough highly enriched uranium for five nuclear bombs” (Omestad 38). Richard Russell of Parameters quotes Iranian President

Islamic terrorist organizations such as Al Qaeda have expressed interest in the acquisition of nuclear weapons and their deployment against western countries (Bergen 2010, 1). A small “suitcase” type bomb qualifies as both a CBRN weapon, because of its nuclear components, and a Weapon of Mass Destruction (WMD) because of its potential to injure or kill a large number of people at one time. The acquisition and deployment of a nuclear device by a non-state actor, like terrorist organizations, is an unlikely but worst case scenario. Although it is unlikely to occur in the near future the potential does exist and the catastrophic consequences associated with an attack of this nature merits study and the implementation of deterrent measures (Asal 2010, 249).

The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea has an operating nuclear weapons program and demonstrates the capability of enriching uranium and producing weapons-grade plutonium. The DPRK possesses seven dominant missiles; each has different target ranges and ceaselessly threatens the international community. By conducting nuclear tests periodically, the DPRK’s nuclear program foists as a constant threat to establishing world peace. One prominent example is the DPRK challenging the new leader, President Moon.

This week’s articles presented a well-balanced discussion on the prospect of nuclear terrorism. Some may say that the threat of a nuclear device being acquired or otherwise constructed for use in a terrorist attack is high and others would dissent and say the probability is low, each offering valid arguments. My assessment is that the seriousness of the current threat is extreme, however the risk is relatively low.

Almost everyone knows it’s highly volatile, and in the hands of the wrong person can cause enormous amounts of damage, but how much is considered a significant amount of uranium. The IAEA considers 25 kilograms to be a significant amount of uranium. While looking back at Hiroshima, we see what 50 kg of uranium did, so we are still talking a considerable amount of damage with 25kg of it. The main characteristic of uranium is not its destruction, that most see as a concern, but rather how to safely dispose of it so that we don’t have 1400 tons of it lying around the world ready to be stolen and used as a WMD. The easiest way to go about disposing of the Highly Enriched Uranium (HEU) is actually just converting it to Low Enriched Uranium (LEU) where it is less volatile. While many individuals fear the day a nuclear device falls into the hands of terrorists, I would argue it is quite some time away. Especially considering the required resources and manpower that it takes to develop and successfully use one of these

The Department of Energy, more specifically the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), has a responsibility to ensure the integrity and safety of the nation’s nuclear weapons and advancing nuclear nonproliferation, promoting international nuclear safety (energy.gov). Nuclear testing and production of new warheads were discontinued at the end of the Cold War. The NNSA uses and oversees simulations to keep existing warheads reliable, secure and safe (nnsa). To maintain the quantity and quality of weapons necessary for national security needs, the NNSA must work with

In very oversimplified terms fission works by splitting an atom, in this case a uranium atom, as the atom is split the heat and radiation are then harnessed to create steam which powers the wheels of generators. The uranium atom is used in the nuclear fission process for two main reason. One is that it is extremely abundant with world production rates being around 60,000 tonnes per year, says the World Nuclear Association. And on top of that considerable yield even more uranium is flooding in from a secondhand market. The second reason is the fact that the amount of heat given off by nuclear fission is vastly superior the amount of heat given off by something like coal or oil. Uranium is a valuable part of nuclear energy being the most used atom in the fission process. A quite startling drawback is the fact that fission of the uranium atom gives off a considerable amount of nuclear waste, which is highly radioactive and quite dangerous. A silver lining is that around 97% of the waste is able to be re-purposed and used for other processes with the other 3% being stored underground until permanent solution can be hammered

Radioactivity has been around for as long as this earth has been in existence, and it’s not going away anytime soon. It’s been 228 long years since the discovery of Uranium, and in that time period we have learned how to enrich it, how to manipulate, and to use it for strategic purposes (Hardy 1). Of course, I’m talking about nuclear weapons. The destruction, the aftershock, and the necessity that they are to the world. These weapons of mass destruction aren’t being built in silos to collect dust, and make the world seem unsteady, they serve defined purposes. Nuclear Weapons go hand-in-hand with nuclear power, Nuclear weapons gives the United States populous a feeling of security, and Nuclear weapons have been, and are continuing to be, the number one deterrent of war. There is no denying the role that nuclear capabilities will play in the near future, and where this world goes. This is important to get right, and until we can, as a world dismiss the destructive capabilities of this power, we, as a nation, must be prepared for anything.

The struggle for nuclear power has been a problem since the dawn of the nuclear age. Governments continue to use the threat of a nuclear attack as a deterrent. However, small terrorist groups may not feel threatened by a nuclear attack due to their mobility. Thus, the question remains; are nuclear weapons a necessary safety, or a danger. The solution is therefore to observe the pros and cons of nuclear capabilities, and to look at some precautions that can be taken to help protect people.

Out of all the dangerous powers and authority our government wields, possibly the most threatening powers are nuclear weapons. People tend to be frightened by things they do not understand, which make nuclear weapons a perfect catalyst for fear. These weapons have the most overwhelming and destructive power known to man; although, nuclear weapons are only safe in countries that try to maintain harmony and stability. Nuclear weapons are defined as “explosive devices whose destructive potential derives from the release of energy that accompanies the splitting or combining of atomic nuclei.” This power is both dangerous and unstable in the hands of small erratic countries.

The creation of the nuclear weapons has caused major concern towards national security worldwide since the 1940’s when the US sets up the Manhattan Project to develop the first nuclear weapon. After the weapons were created we find that more then five nations and counting have been developing their own weapons besides our very own USA. These other nations include but not limited to Russia, United Kingdom, France, India, China, North Korea, Pakistan and Israel. Throughout this paper we are going to take a look at the history of nuclear weapons, mechanical make up, magnitude of destruction, how many nuclear weapon each country has and the future of a possible nuclear war.

However, despite the emergence of the treaty of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation having been in existence for almost fifty years, the worldwide threat of the nuclear weapons remains. In this dissertation, the role of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty in the contemporary global system and the effectiveness of the prevention of the spread of the nuclear weapons is examined. There is also discussion about the comparison and contrast of two interpretations of the NPT.

Nuclear weapons play a significant role in our understanding of international relations. They are the weapons that shape the most powerful governments in the world. These weapons act both defensively and offensively because they