Critical Issues Forum

Student: Anchutkina Olesya.

Teacher: Liubov Khlystova.

Gymnasium “Didakt”, Zarechniy

Benchmark III

1.Summing up…

2.Scenario 1

3.Scenario 2

4.Summary

5.Sources

Summing up…

After investigation the motivations and resources of some countries, we come to the conclusion:

· On the one hand, the possessing of the nuclear weapons is necessary for the security of the country, in national defense. Certainly, nuclear weapons play a pivotal role in international security. It’s evident that nuclear weapons have some stabilizing effect on superpower relations by making any conflict unacceptably costly.

Some events show it evidently. The factor is the necessity to preserve Russia's Great Power status. Now that the Russian economy is extremely weak, it's impossible to accomplish this task without preserving its nuclear status. Russia cannot back its Great Power ambitions with a mighty economy the way nuclear-free Japan and Germany can. Russia needs this status to influence global developments in the interests of maintaining the comprehensive balance of power and ensuring strategic stability in the world. Russia's decision to rest on nuclear deterrence to provide for national security and defense is transitory in the long-term perspective, although it is tremendously important for present Russian defense system. This conclusion can be taken into consideration not only the future of the Russian-American strategic arms reduction process, which seems to be irreversible, but the increasing pressure on nuclear weapon states on the part of non-nuclear weapon states, participating in the NPT.

· On the other hand, the principle role of nuclear weapons was and continues to be of planning military danger. The samples may be those major categories: major power conflicts, especially those involving China, regional conflicts, including potential nuclear states such as Iran and North Korea, the returning of Japan’s imperial ambition.

Many Third World nations suspect of developing nuclear weapons assert that they should be allowed to obtain them for the same reason the United States and Russia have them: to defend their territories as best they can. But some Arab leaders argue that their nations are victims of a double standard: the West condones the ownership of nuclear weapons technology and materials, but the United Sates, Russia, and others but denies it to Arab states. Arab states assert that they, too, would never use the weapons, but would merely have them to deter their enemies.

The Iran's case may prove to be more difficult as situation in the Middle East is more complicated. Its own confrontation with the United States, and the possession of nuclear weapons by both Israel and Pakistan, it is perhaps hard to persuade Iran, a regional major power, not to keep nuclear capability as an option for its survival as well as for its desire to stay influential in the region. Against the backdrop, it can be argued that Iran will not easily give its nuclear ambition unless all the above listed security concerns of Teheran is properly addressed one way or the other.

North Korea's approach to building the bomb is a case study of how a determined country can evade international controls--and without much outside help, either. The North Koreans have successfully built their own Manhattan project without any international inspection agency finding them out. They have successfully overcome every checkpoint of the International Atomic Energy Agency's inspection and monitoring efforts

China has several nuclear weapons systems in the advanced development stage including a new cruise missile, which presumably can carry a nuclear warhead, and new land-launched and sea-launched ballistic missiles. Road mobile nuclear capable missiles add a degree of survivability to China’s limited nuclear arsenal. The desire to develop an operational ballistic missile submarine is another suggestion that China is concerned about the survivability of its nuclear forces and perhaps is a comment on its future goals of power projection outside of the immediate Pacific area.

Some experts believe Japan could produce a nuclear bomb in a matter of months, but that it would take a couple of years to build a nuclear weapons system.

"Japan has lots of plutonium, the technology to enrich uranium, and missile or rocket technology, so Japan has enough technology to produce nuclear arms," said Toshihiro Inoue, deputy head of the Japan Congress Against A- and H-bombs, a major anti-nuclear group. (Economic News 12 Jun 2005 05).

As The Times wrote, the leader of the Liberal Party, Ichiro Ozawa, claimed last week that Japan was ready to start the production of thousands of nuclear warheads in order to be able to oppose China’s growing military power. Ozawa said that Japan could produce thousands of warheads if it wishes to do so. There is enough plutonium at Japanese nuclear power plants for producing three or four thousand warheads. “If this happens, then no one will be able to overcome us from the point of view of military power,” – Ozawa said. The politician added that his speech was supposed to make China establish closer cooperation with Japan. Nevertheless, as observers say, it will most likely happen vice versa, and Beijing will perceive those words as the return of Japan’s militarism. (Pravda.RU:Top Stories:More in detail. 2005.11.07 )

· Nuclear arsenals remain largely in place. Although international treaties deal with nonproliferation of nuclear weapons, some countries have refused to sign them.

On January 10, 2003, North Korea notified the IAEA and the UN Security Council that it was pulling out of the nuclear non-proliferation treaty – immediately. A month later, the United States said North Korea had reactivated a reactor at its main nuclear complex. And in October, the North Korean government announced it had finished reprocessing 8,000 spent fuel rods – enough material to make six nuclear bombs.

North Korea's spent nuclear fuel rods kept in a cooling pond are seen at the nuclear facilities in Yongbyon,

North Korea in this 1996 file photo released, from Youhap, Feb.7, 2003. (AP Photo Yonhap File).

Since 2003, the United States, North Korea and South Korea, China, Japan and Russia have held three rounds of talks aimed at persuading the North to abandon nuclear weapons development in return for economic and diplomatic rewards.

North Korean officials continue to insist the country needs nuclear weapons for protection against the United States.

"We ... have manufactured nukes for self-defense to cope with the Bush administration's ever more undisguised policy to isolate and stifle the [North]," the North Korean Foreign Ministry said in a statement Feb. 22, 2005, carried by the state-run Korean Central News Agency.

A month earlier, U.S Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice labelled North Korea one of the "outposts of tyranny," but said the North Koreans shouldn't worry that "anyone wants to attack them."

· The danger of nuclear proliferation seems greater; the weapons may soon be in the hands of reckless leaders of terrorists groups.

Now how comes this new danger of the nuclear terrorism? It comes from a newly emerged role of non-state actors, who seem to be both the new source as well as the potential users of the nuclear material, technology or know-how in proliferation. Thus the international community is facing a new and real danger of a horrible nuclear weapon, or a crude and dirty bomb falling into the hands of non-state actors like international terrorists or even the organized crimes. The scenario of an explosion of such a device in a big city, killing hundreds of thousands of innocent people is simply unacceptable to the world. This is a new threat indeed, as all the international nonproliferation regime had been dealing with only the behavior of states. There had already been discovery of some documents at the Al Qaida caves in Afghanistan to show that these terrorists were studying manufacturing a dirty bomb. Although there was no evidence to prove to what extent they were successful, the discovery of the revealed interest of them was enough to alert the world that the danger is not far-fetched and cannot be ignored.

· Virtually any industrialized nation today has the technical capability, intellectual, knowledge, physical resources to develop nuclear weapons. Nations already possessing substantial nuclear technology and arms industries could do so.

Evidently the rapid spread of science and high technology has played a particular important role in this regard. Many commercial companies or even individuals, who have the access to the nuclear related knowledge or know-how, have become virtually another source of nuclear fuel cycle suppliers, which have the ambition to develop nuclear programs for the military purpose.

Nothing about Iran is easy. Everything about it is complicated. Under current international rules, some activities that may lead to nuclear weapon capabilities are allowed as long as there is no evidence that a state intends to build nuclear weapons. Iran’s potential to break out of the nonproliferation treaty and move full speed to building nuclear weapons would grow greatly once it has mastered enrichment technology. Again, proponents of the pilot-scale fallback recognize this; they just think there is no better alternative.

But the pilot-scale alternative only postpones for a little while the hard dilemmas and dangers posed by Iran’s nuclear ambitions. Iran has behaved according to a very clear logic since its major nonproliferation violations were detected in 2002. Indeed, Iran’s chief nuclear negotiator from 2003 through 2005, Hasan Rowhani, has explained that Iran’s strategy has been to suspend only those activities that it was not ready to undertake. Once the technologists have been prepared to take a new step in acquiring the capability to produce fissile materials, they have taken it and essentially dared the international community to stop them. This happened in 2004, in August 2005 with the re-starting of the uranium conversion facility at Isfahan, and in January 2006 with the end of suspension of uranium enrichment. In the Isfahan case, Iran crossed a redline established by the EU-3 and seems to have managed to erase it from the consciousness of many observers. (Garney Issue. Brief, March, 2006. Premature Capitulation, by George Percovich. mailto:info@carnegieendowment.org)

Iran’s behavior and articulated strategy warn clearly that once it has mastered pilot-scale enrichment it will seek to do more, and will break any agreement to the contrary. A crisis, no less dire than the current one will emerge, only then Iran will be much closer to having the capability to make bomb fuel than it is today. There is no evidence that Iranian leaders are prepared to make a strategic decision not to acquire the capability to make nuclear weapons.

· The threat posed by the spread of nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons and ballistic missiles poses one of the central security challenges of the 21st Century. Non-proliferation program seeks to provide balanced and objective assessments of the proliferation threat, promote development of a comprehensive non-proliferation strategy.

.

The NPT is truly one of the most important treaties of all time. The NPT has kept the number of nuclear powers far lower than initially forecast. It has given the parties confidence in the nuclear intentions of other nations. It has reduced the risk of nuclear conflict. It has advanced nuclear disarmament. It has bolstered regional security. It has promoted the safe and peaceful use of nuclear energy. And it has undergirded the international community's efforts to halt the spread of all weapons of mass destruction."

Can the NPT continue to be the cornerstone of the nuclear non-proliferation regime? Absolutely. But the bottom line is that it will have to continue to meet the perceived security needs of its member states. That necessitates change from the current situation, but is certainly possible provided the will to do so is there.

Scenario 1

This scenario maintains the non-proliferation efforts. Nowadays a tendency in «nuclear civilization» is to produce nuclear weapons but not nuclear energy. As you guess the aim is not peaceful but military. Such problems as air or water pollution, animal termination and other global ecological ones seem not so danger in comparesing with military purpose of nuclear weapons. That's why my task in my Scenario 1 «Warrior Nuclear» is to sum up and suggest possible efforts that can help us to solve «Nuclear Apocalypse».

1.Nowadays non-proliferation treaties have their power, they solve pointed problems, but they can’t regulate all processes in our Nuclear Civilization (just recollect recent Iran issue). That’s why my first suggestion is to conclude new treaty putting nuclear and not yet nuclear states in rigid frameworks. In case of breaking of treaty provisions it should be taken economic and political measures to the state-breaker. It is necessary to create such conditions for the state-breakers, which will not allow them to reject fixed rules and duties, pointed in the New Non-proliferation Treaty.

2. Some countries start to produce nuclear weapon for protection. Another guarantor of safety can be counted the protection of strong nuclear states. I mean that «old-nuclear» states should make a friendly and trustful atmosphere in the international nuclear arena. Only in this case there won't be a necessity to produce nuclear weapon for non-nuclear states to provide a safe existence.

3. But we must keep in our mind another idea. I mean religion. As for Islamic people, they are very religious. As the Koran proclaims the war against no-Muslims, we can expect this war. Nuclear war... And I can say the same about the terrorist groups. The laws and policy won’t stop these people. The key for these people is in their mind. If you are afraid of the aggressive behaviour of these people towards to you, you should try to think like them, you should understand the causes of their acts and then imagine, what can stop you and also them? Anyway the methods of struggle against these groups of people should be delicate and very cautious. I consider that rude and strict struggle usually leads more aggressive behavior of religion fans and terrorists than expect. That’s why ideological and psychological methods operate on such people the most effectively.

4. Just imagine: all people are equal, they all live in peace, they all live in one state: World United State. In fact citizens of one country do not use the nuclear weapon against each other. But to build such society there should be humanity aspiring to nuclear-freeworld, it should realize necessity of association of people to cope this problem. We all understand that it is extremely unreal. But it's often used to be the most unbelievable solving is the only one. This is Utopia, I agree. But actually if you just take this seriously you will see that there won't be a reason for constructing and elaborating new types of nuclear weapon or producing ones that we have now.

But the science is growing and developing. Nuclear reactions aren't investigated enough. It's really huge sphere to research for nowadays science. We can only guess what achievements will be done and what meaning in our lives they will take place.

I'll speak about Nuclear Energy for peace in my Scenario 2.

Scenario 2

This scenario assumes that nuclear energy can be used only for peace purposes. The quality of our air, water, soil, and food are rapidly deteriorating. Animal extinctions and loss of plant life escalate, while cancer rates and other immune system related diseases soar. Many scientists believe that there is a strong correlation between these anomalies and the increasing levels of radiation in the environment. Now, more then ever, it is important that we fully examine the appalling state of nuclear power and weapons so that we can make better decisions effecting the lives of those who will follow us. For fusion reactions to occur at sufficiently high rates to produce useful energy, light elements must be confined at sufficiently high density and temperature for a sufficiently long time. In the sun, gravitational forces provide this confinement, while on earth either magnetic or inertial forces must be used. Researchers now actively study both magnetic confinement fusion and inertial confinement fusion. Because discussion of the magnetic approach can be found elsewhere, these notes focus on the inertial route to fusion energy.

1. New Technology for Improved Nuclear Energy Systems - Improvements and advances are needed for reactor systems and component technologies that would be ultimately used in the design, construction, or operation of existing and future nuclear power plants and Generation IV nuclear power systems. Grant applications are sought to (1) improve and optimize nuclear power plant, systems, and component instrumentation and control, by developing advanced instrumentation, sensors, controls, and more accurate measurement of key reactor and plant parameters; (2) improve monitoring of plant equipment performance and aging, using improved diagnostic techniques for in-service and non-destructive examinations; and (3) improve corrosion resistance for light water reactor coolant system components, secondary side equipment, and balance of plant systems, by exploring advancements in materials and chemistry control systems. Grant applications that address concepts for complete or partial reactor plant design are not of interest and will be declined.

2. Advanced Reactor Computer Simulation and Modeling Applications - Advanced computational techniques are needed for the design, development, testing, monitoring, and safety evaluation of currently existing nuclear power plants as well as advanced reactor designs and Generation IV nuclear power systems. Grant applications are sought for new computer simulation software and modeling applications, including those that use parallel processing techniques, to support one or more of following areas: (1) design, development, safety evaluation methods, and engineering calculations for new and existing nuclear reactors, major reactor components, and reactor core and fuel assemblies; and (2) assessment, measurement, instrumentation, and control of nuclear reactor plant performance and operations. Grant applications that address concepts for complete or partial reactor plant design are not of interest and will be declined.

3. Nuclear space.

"I will say, categorically, we cannot effectively explore space without nuclear power and, in the longer run, nuclear propulsion."

-NASA Administrator Mike Griffin

The main aim of nuclear space movement is to develop a better, more efficient and proliferation-resistant nuclear fuel cycle. There are some research and development programs focusing on methods to reduce the volume and long-term toxicity of high-level waste from spent nuclear fuel, reduce the long-term proliferation threat posed by civilian inventories of plutonium in spent fuel, and provide for proliferation-resistant technologies to recover the energy content in spent nuclear fuel. The nuclear fuel faces a variety of possible accidents during a space mission. Launch and re-entry pose many types of risks to the spacecraft and its components. Other nuclear generator technologies for space applications have been under investigation. These technologies involve more efficient conversion of heat into electricity. Safety and reliability are key factors in determining the possible value of each technology in space missions. Nuclear fuel has proven to be an ideal source of energy in space because of its high power, acceptable weight and volume, and excellent reliability and safety. Because of its many advantages, it seems likely that nuclear energy will continue to provide power on space missions into the next century. But actual development of space nuclear systems seem to lag. Professionals in space science see great potential for nuclear space science to service future human and robotic missions. I wish that space movement would become the nations’ duty. And new space policy will offer to re-energize the World public’s desire to explore the cosmos for evidence of life. With this bold vision comes the prerequisite for the country to develop technologies that enable humanity to explore the depths of the universe safely and more reliably.

To sum up what I have said in Scenario 2 I came to the conclusion that nuclear energy can be used in peaceful area of economics and can bring benefits to our present and future generations.

Summary

In Benchmark 3 we analyze the motivations and recourses of some countries due to non-proliferation efforts. In suggested scenarios we showed 2 ways of development of nuclear power and energy. The first one is about the using of nuclear power for military purpose. Nowadays tendency in our “Nuclear Civilization” is to produce nuclear weapons for different purposes: safety and military. That’s why non-proliferation treaties should contain stricter rules for every country in spite of their nuclear status. Also there should be very cautious and delicate methods of struggle against religious fans and terrorist groups. The cruel leads to cruel. The second scenario assumes the peaceful application of nuclear energy such as in nuclear plants, in safety components of nuclear power systems, in space nuclear movement. Research investments have brought enormous benefits to our present generation, in fields ranging from medicine to electronics to space communications.

Sources

1. www.nuc.umr.edu/nuclear_facts/ spacepower/spacepower.html

2. www.nuclearspace.com/

3. www.ne.doe.gov/space/space-desc.html

4. www.epa.gov/radiation/ docs/risksandrealities/rrpage4.html

5. www.fas.org/nuke/guide/taiwan/nuke/index.html

6. www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/03/060306090838.htm

7. www.britannica.com/ebi/article-205781

8. www.world-nuclear.org/portal/nuclear_societies.htm

9. www.hinduonnet.com/fline/ fl2206/stories/20050325002212000.htm

10. www.iaea.org/Publications/ Factsheets/English/manradwa.html