A wasted chance on nuclear arms?<\/p>\n
This morning (Tuesday), members of the United Nations begin a
\nmonth of meetings on nuclear arms. Officially, it is the five-
\nyear review of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
\nUnofficially, it is the greatest meeting ever held to discuss the
\nstate of nuclear arms. It comes at a time of tension and some
\ndanger. India and Pakistan are increasingly unfriendly to each
\nother, and to nuclear disarmament of any kind. The United States
\nand Russia are at technical odds over carrying out details of
\ntheir disarmament agreement known as START II.<\/p>\n
No nation has had the temerity to test a nuclear device since
\nIndia and Pakistan tested each other's nerve. The major nuclear
\npowers have done all their testing in laboratories. That leaves
\ntwo serious problems for the UN conference to consider. The first
\nis the abject failure of the world to stop the development and
\nstockpiling of fissile materials -- the processed plutonium and
\nenriched uranium that power nuclear weapons. Diplomats call the
\nproposed treaty to stop stockpiling a \"fissban\". A cut-off treaty
\nis feared by China, whose nuclear arsenal is still relatively
\nsmall. India and Pakistan are completely silent, frantically
\nbuilding their stores of fissile material against the day they
\nare legally banned from doing so.<\/p>\n
The second is the refusal of many countries to consider
\nnuclear disarmament. Many non-nuclear countries -- and India --
\nopenly threaten to discredit efforts at non-proliferation. It is
\nunfair to ban the ownership of nuclear weapons, such nations
\nclaim, unless those who already own them agree to start
\ndestroying them. In fact, nuclear weapons have been destroyed by
\nthe hundreds by the U.S. and the former Soviet Union in recent
\nyears. But many countries still resent the idea that the big
\nnuclear powers make all the rules on who can own, control and
\ntransfer nuclear technology. Such rules, they claim, should come
\nunder an international treaty with all nations having a say in
\nhow it is implemented.<\/p>\n
This is not necessarily a valid point. It is certainly
\nnecessary for the nuclear powers to show they are willing to
\ndispose of their terrible weapons. And it is unrealistic for
\nthose powerful countries to expect everyone else to follow their
\nrules. But it is enough that the U.S. and Russia destroy their
\nnuclear weapons, and when Britain and France offer to participate
\nin disarmament.<\/p>\n
-- The Bangkok Post<\/p>", "url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/a-wasted-chance-on-nuclear-arms-1447893297", "image": "" }, "sponsor": "Okusi Associates", "sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com" }