The Bosque School -- Albuquerque, New Mexico

Benchmark Two

Objective 1: Determine who has weapons of mass destruction and what types they have.

Who Has Weapons of Mass Destruction???

State	Nuclear	Chemical	Biological	Missile
Algeria	*
Belarus	*
Chile		*
China	*	*	*	*
Cuba			*
Ethiopia		*
Egypt		*	*	*
France	*	*		*
India	*	*	*	*
Indonesia		*
Iran	*	*	*	*
Iraq	*	*	*	*
Israel	*	*	*	*
Kazakhstan	*
Laos		*	*
Libya	*	*	*	*
Myanmar		*
N. Korea	*	*	*	*
Pakistan	*	*	*	*
Romania			*
Russia	*	*	*	*
Serbia	*	*
S. Africa	*	*	*	*
S. Korea		*	*	*
Sudan		*
Syria		*	*	*
Taiwan		*	*	*
Thailand		*
Ukraine	*
Vietnam		*	*
U.K.	*	*		*
U.S.A.	*	*	*	*
Bulgaria			*

It is indeed impressive and somewhat of a concern that nearly every country on this list has chemical weapons.

Iraqi Victims of Chemical Weapons

These weapons can devastate the lives of so many people yet apparently they are quite common. Some of the smallest countries that exist have advanced weapons of mass destruction. It was also surprising to find that so many countries possess nuclear weapons as well. It is strange to think that many, many countries South Africa possess Nuclear, Biological and Chemical weapons but few have missiles in their possession. One would think that these countries would be more likely to possess the simpler forms of weapons first.

(The Bosque School)

Objective 2: Determine why your chosen region or countries obtained WMD.

Why did India and Pakistan Obtain Weapons of Mass Destruction???

The research that we have done and have given examples of below has helped us to understand why most any country would develop weapons of mass destruction. It all seems to start with the desire that governments and political leaders have to establish their nation as being strong and independent. This leads to money being spent on developing weapons, which means that the economy begins to depend on the weapons. The development and use of weapons of mass destruction has a serious cost to the environment, but this aspect is seems not to be the focus of the majority of nations. As this process continues society is increasingly affected and becomes dependent on the idea of being protected by these weapons and a whole culture of support or dissent for the weapons develops. Apparently people tend to believe that the more deadly the weapon the stronger and safer the nation becomes. Canada seems to have avoided this pitfall, but India, Pakistan and many other nations have not.

(The Bosque School)

Political/Geopolitical Domain

The Associated Press, "Nuclear History In India, Pakistan," New York Times, May 28, 1998

Events in Indian, nuclear development:

§ 1966: India declares it can produce nuclear weapons within 18 months.

§ --1968: Non-Proliferation Treaty completed. India refuses to sign.

§ --1969: France agrees to help India develop breeder reactors.

§ --1974: India tests a device of up to 15 kilotons and calls the test a ``peaceful nuclear explosion.'' Canada suspends nuclear cooperation. The United States allows continued supply of nuclear fuel, but later cuts it off.

§ --1976: Soviet Union assumes role of India's main supplier of heavy water. Canada formally halts nuclear cooperation.

§ --Early 1980s: India acquires and develops centrifuge technology, builds uranium enrichment plants at Trombay and Mysore.

§ --1991: India enters agreement with Pakistan prohibiting attacks on each other's nuclear installations, a measure to ease tensions.

§ --1992: Rare Metals Plant at Mysore begins producing enriched uranium. Nuclear Suppliers Group, organization of nations with nuclear materials, stops supplying India.

§ --1997: India announces development of supercomputer technology that can be used to test nuclear-weapon designs. Fuel reprocessing plant at Kalpakkam, a large-scale plutonium separation facility, completes ``cold commissioning'' in last phase of pre-operating trials.

§ --1998: India announces plans to sign deal with Russia for two 1,000 megawatt nuclear reactors.

§ May 11-13: India conducts five underground nuclear tests, declares itself a nuclear state.

Viewing Indo-Pak tensions as "one of the greatest challenges" in South Asia, the US has said ending cross-border infiltration into Jammu and Kashmir "remains a key goal" and advocated dialogue between New Delhi and Islamabad on the issue. (PIB )

Events in, Pakistani nuclear development:

§ --1972: Following its third war with India, Pakistan secretly decides to start nuclear weapons program to match India's developing capability. Canada supplies reactor for the Karachi Nuclear Power Plant, heavy water and heavy-water production facility.

§ --1974: Western suppliers embargo nuclear exports to Pakistan after India's first test of a nuclear device.

§ --1975: Purchasing of components and technology for Kahuta uranium-enrichment centrifuge facility begins after return of Dr. Abdul Qadeer Khan, German-trained metallurgist who takes over nuclear program.

§ --1976: Canada stops supplying nuclear fuel for Karachi.

§ --1977: German seller provides vacuum pumps, equipment for uranium enrichment. Britain sells Pakistan 30 high-frequency inverters for controlling centrifuge speeds. United States halts economic and military aid over Pakistan's nuclear-weapons program.

§ --1978: France cancels deal to supply plutonium reprocessing plant at Chasma.

§ --1979: United States imposes economic sanctions after Pakistan is caught importing equipment for uranium enrichment plant at Kahuta.

§ --1981: Smuggler arrested at U.S. airport while attempting to ship two tons of zirconium to Pakistan. Nevertheless, Reagan administration lifts sanctions and begins generous military and financial aid because of Pakistani help to Afghan rebels battling Soviets.

§ --1983: China reportedly supplies Pakistan with bomb design. U.S. intelligence believes Pakistani centrifuge program intended to produce material for nuclear weapons.

§ --1985: Congress passes Pressler amendment, requiring economic sanctions unless White House certifies that Pakistan is not embarked on nuclear weapons program. Islamabad is certified every year until 1990.

§ --1987: Pakistan acquires tritium purification and production facility from West Germany.

§ --1989: A 27-kilowatt research reactor is built with Chinese help and comes under international monitoring.

§ --1990: Fearing new war with India, Pakistan makes cores for several nuclear weapons. Bush administration, under Pressler amendment, imposes economic, military sanctions against Pakistan.

§ --1991: Pakistan puts ceiling on size of its weapons-grade uranium stockpile. It enters into agreement with India, prohibiting the two states from attacking each other's nuclear installations.

§ --1996: Pakistan buys 5,000 ring magnets from China to be used in gas centrifuges for uranium enrichment. China tells U.S. government it will stop helping Pakistan's unsafeguarded nuclear facilities. Islamabad completes 40-megawatt heavy-water reactor that, once operational, could provide the first source of plutonium-bearing spent fuel free from international inspections.

§ --1998: Reacting to fresh nuclear testing by India, Pakistan conducts its own atomic explosions.

Source:

Center for Nonproliferation Studies at the Monterey Institute of International Studies, Calif.; Carnegie Endowment for International Peace; Non-Proliferation Policy Education Center.

http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/nuchist.htm

Social/Cultural Domain

Nuclear Weapons and Nuclear Weapons Free Zones 2001

http://www.ploughshares.ca/imagesarticles/ACR02/NW&NWFZ.02.pdf

The map found at the above link was created by an ecumenical peace center of the Canadian Council of Churches.

Project Ploughshares was formed to contribute to this disturbing, reconciling, serving and deliberating presence of the churches, and to give concrete expression to their hope that international relations can be ordered in ways that contribute to a just and non-violent world.

"In furtherance of our mission to seek peace and pursue it, Project Ploughshares is mandated by Canadian churches to work in cooperation with churches and related religious organizations, as well as governments and non-governmental organizations,

v in developing and implementing peacemaking and peace-building programs based on our biblical understanding of the call to pursue peace; and

v in carrying out research, policy analysis, and public discussion in developing and communicating our biblical understanding of the causes, prevention, management, and resolution of national and international conflicts, alternatives to armed conflicts, and the circumstances necessary to achieve and sustain national and international reconciliation and peace."

Economic Domain

"Local people make extensive use of the biological resources in the wild whilst relying on agriculture for vegetable, grain, fruit, forest and livestock products. Recently, reliance on migration and credit is also a part of local livelihood strategies. Access to markets and other institutions (state and civic) are minimal. Livestock, therefore, represents a major source of income and is an essential form of security for the locals. Local farmers often invest surplus income in livestock, which they can sell in times of need. In difficult economic circumstances, local farmers are unconcerned about the survival of Snow Leopards, which are seen as destroying their security base. "

Click Here for full article

http://www.solutions-site.org/cat1_sol115.htm

The Economic Cost of Developing WMD'S

http://www.islandpress.org/eco-compass/war/index.html

§ According to the UNESCO, in 1971 the world spent 7.2% of its gross national product on arms, compared to 5% on education and 2.5% on health.

§ Two days of global military spending (approx. $4.8 billion) is equal to the annual cost of the UN Action Plan to halt Third World desertification over 20 years.

§ The US Department of Defense purchased 2,000 billion barrels of oil for military use in 1989, enough to run all of the US public transport system for 22 years.

§ West German spending on military procurement and R&D was $10.75 billion in 1985, the same as the estimated cost of cleaning up the West German sector of the North Sea.

§ In the 1980s, the Ethiopian government spent an annual average of $275 million on waging war in Eritrea & Tigre. An annual expenditure of $50 million a year on tree planting and soil conservation would have reversed desertification in the country and thereby helped to prevent the million plus deaths in the 1985 famine.

What is the Purpose of Pieces of Biased Historical Material Produced in India and Pakistan???

Political Cartoons

Bush wants the Pakistanis and the Indians to stop focusing on one another and the issue of who has a greater claim on Kashmir and help him attack the ‘terrorists’. At the same time, since Bush is underground, he can’t see the big picture that the Pakis and Indians can see, he is sheltered from reality.

India and Pakistan are completely focused on themselves and the issues between them and are aiming their missiles only across their common boarder, nowhere else. They are not interested in any other issues.

The ‘lurking’ tiger is of course weapons of mass destruction and their possible use.

India and Pakistan were asking one another to ‘trust’ each other. When India got the weapons, Pakistan felt threatened and got their own. Then they signed a treaty that said basically that we have them but we won’t use them. So it is like the William Tell fable because they both have apples on their heads, and their heads are uncomfortably near the supposed target.

(The Bosque School)

Objective 3: Describe the regional and global impact these WMD have now or may have in the future.

How Has the Development and Use of Weapons of Mass Destruction Impacted India and Pakistan???

Scientific / Environmental

From

The Environmental Impacts of War

http://www.islandpress.org/eco-compass/war/index.html

For centuries, war has involved not only human conflict but also environmental destruction in the forms of both 'collateral damage' and deliberate destruction of environments. Environmental destruction has been used as a war-winning strategy and as a punishment for defeated opponents. The Romans routinely destroyed the crops of their enemies to ensure their future dependence on Rome and the Russians have twice destroyed their own crops and homes in a "scorched earth" policy to prevent those resources from being useful to either Napoleon or Hitler. The near extinction of America's once vast herds of buffalo was, in part, linked to an assault against Indian tribes through their resource base.

As war has become increasingly technologically advanced so its impacts on the environment have become more severe and longer-lasting. In the case of the American war in Vietnam, the destruction of forest ecosystems with broad-leaf herbicides has directly impacted not only the ecosystems in which they were used, but also has had long-term effects on human health.

The environmental impacts of modern war can be grouped into three areas:

1) The consequences of preparing for war.

The environmental repercussions of preparing for war include: indirect impacts made through the diversion of resources from ecological protection to military spending, and through the pollution caused by arms production; and direct impacts through weapons testing and military training.

2) The immediate effects of war.
3) The aftermath of war.

§ In East Germany in 1992, 1.5 million tonnes of ammunition was destroyed by burning, without filters, in releasing nitrogen oxides, highly toxic chemical dioxides, and heavy metals (e.g., mercury) into the atmosphere

§ Military airfields, require large areas of land leading to the destruction of any fauna perceived as hindering such activity (such as birds congregating on runways). The construction of military bases tends to destroy these environments irretrievably, especially in the case of island bases.

§ some countries reserve large areas for chemical and biological warfare exercises, which may also be used for testing missiles, chemical and biological warfare products, and nuclear weapons.

§ Vast amounts of toxic pollution left from the production, storage, and testing of chemical, biological, nuclear, and conventional weapons contaminate millions of acres awaiting redevelopment.

§ Officials have estimated that the 4% of East German territory that was occupied by former Soviet bases and facilities is severely polluted.

§ Over 30,000 tons of deadly chemical weapons await destruction. Estimated costs of addressing these problems run as high as $65 billion.

§ When a heavy bomb goes off, it creates temperatures of approximately 3,000 degrees Celsius; this not only annihilates all flora and fauna but also destroys the lower layers of soil, which can take anywhere from 1,500 to 7,400 years to regenerate.

How Might Pakistan and India Use Their Weapons of Mass Destruction?

Since Pakistan and India both have weapons of mass destruction it is clear from the information that we have read that they are both willing to use them, but they seem to understand that this would not be the best course of action for the people on both sides. This type of interaction has been occurring in countries such as the United States and Russia during the Cold War. If the weapons of mass destruction are used it would be most likely that chemical weapons would be used first, simply because more countries have them and the devastating effects nuclear weapons had on both Nagasaki and Hiroshima makes people realize how serious a step this is.

(The Bosque School)

The quotes below exemplifies why a country might use such weapons but points out the flaw in that method.

"Never, never, never believe any war will be smooth and easy, or that anyone who embarks on the strange voyage can measure the tides and hurricanes he will encounter. The statesman who yields to war fever must realize that once the signal is given, he is no longer the master of policy but the slave of unforeseeable and uncontrollable events." —Winston Churchill

Jack Kemp (back to story), September 24, 2002, Questions to ponder (townhall.com)

"…Deteriorating relations between the Muslim world and the west, plus environmental degradation, were as devastating in their potential impact as terrorism and weapons of mass destruction…" – Tony Blair http://politics.guardian.co.uk/Print/0,3858,4612832,00.html

Inevitably, with the use of nuclear weapons or other types of weapon of mass destruction, not only will the human race be affected, but many species of animals and their surrounding environment. Due to the actions of terrorists or others, the deterioration of the environment will begin when the use of WMD is initiated.

(The Bosque School)

A scion of one of Pakistan's most illustrious families, the 61-year-old Kasuri sat down to breakfast with Washington Post editors and reporters Monday.

Kasuri bristled when questioned about Pakistan's nuclear and missile programs, declaring that they were "India-specific" and holding the United States partially responsible for the nuclear race in South Asia, saying U.S. administrations hadn't stood by Pakistan sufficiently in its confrontation with India.

On Kashmir, he challenged India to allow international monitors and human rights investigators into the zone it controls in the region. "India does not want United Nations observers. What is it that India wants to avoid? . . . This movement is largely indigenous," he said, speaking of the Muslim insurgents fighting Indian control in Kashmir. He rejected criticism that Pakistan had not done enough to reduce infiltration across the Line of Control dividing the region.

Click Here for full article

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A58124-2003Jan28&notFound=true

Bibliography

Canadian Association for Security & Intelligence Studies

http://www.sfu.ca/igs/CASIS/links/intel_threats_global.html

ClipArt - Angel Picture

http://free-stock-photos.com/president/george-bush-pictures.html

Pakistani's Tough Talk: Not Just for India

Struggle for Kashmir - photo gallery

Nora Boustany. Wednesday, January 29, 2003; Page A14. 2003 The Washington Post Company

"Nuclear History In India, Pakistan"

The Associated Press, New York Times, May 28, 1998. Center for Nonproliferation Studies at the Monterey Institute of International Studies, Calif.; Carnegie Endowment for International Peace; Non-Proliferation Policy Education Center.

Questions to Ponder

Jack Kemp (back to story), September 24, 2002, (townhall.com). 2002 Copley News Service

"Risk to environment poses same dangers as terror, warns Blair"

US calls for ending infiltration in Kashmir Press Trust of India

World News Network – photo gallery