MONTEREY INSTITUTE OF INTERNATIONAL STUDIES

CENTER FOR NONPROLIFERATION STUDIES

Critical Issues Forum (CIF)

Spring 2006 Project

“Nuclear Weapons and Nonproliferation”

Benchmark II

Presented by:

Orinda, California

United States of America

Benchmark II

Contributors

Student Writers:

Sarah Anthony

Galen Borson

Marie Etheridge

Alex Friedman

Alex Helt

Ben Ivory

Keoni Gist

Abe Harder-Cattell

Steven Kastenbaum

Ji Eun Kim

Sarah Jimison

Monte Melnick

Semir Muratovic

Marc Poore

Jane Quigley

Lake Raymond

Dustin Slack

Kevin Varela-O’Hara

Sam Woodruff

Student Editors:

Marie Etheridge

Monte Melnick

Semir Muratovic

Jane Quigley

Teacher Advisors:

Bob Shayler

Starfire

How do you become a nuclear state?

It is not difficult for a country to transform its nuclear power program into a nuclear weapons program. The cycle creating nuclear power requires the enrichment of naturally occurring uranium to increase the isotope U-235. This can be done several ways, but one of the most common is through a gas centrifuge. For civilian nuclear power reactors, uranium is only required to be enriched 2-3%, resulting in low- enriched uranium (LEU). However, this same enrichment technology can be used to produce weapons grade uranium, which is enriched to 90% U-235, and known as high-enriched uranium (HEU).

In addition, in the process of creating nuclear energy in a nuclear reactor, 1% of the byproduct is plutonium. While this plutonium can be extracted and re-used for fuel for civilian purposes, but it can also be used for nuclear weapons. Only 8 kilograms of plutonium are necessary for one nuclear weapon.

Iran is an example of a country that developed a nuclear power industry, while using that same technology to make nuclear weapons production feasible. While Iran has stated that it is trying to establish the entire nuclear fuel cycle, with resulting uranium enrichment and plutonium production entirely for a peaceful civilian energy program, the same fuel cycle would be applicable to nuclear weapons development. And in fact, dual use technology that could be used both for nuclear power generation and weapons development has been sold to Iran by at least 9 Western companies during the 1990s.

 Verification plays an important role in providing a method of testing the compliance of international treaties. There are a number of technical verification methods, sometimes called National Technical Means (NTM) such as satellite imagery, on site inspections, remote cameras and seismic graph equipment. However, the reliability and effectiveness of NTM's affected its role in international nuclear treaties. Seismic equipment often picks up activity that cannot clearly be interpreted as an earthquake or a nuclear blast. On August 16, 1997, the U.S picked up seismic activity near Russia's Artic Nuclear Test sight near Novaya Zemlya, which it was sure was a nuclear test, and the Washington Times sub sequentially declared that Russia was suspected of cheating on its agreements to the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT). An international array of seismic experts has since determined that the seismic activity was most likely due to an earthquake. On-site inspections are only reliable enough to catch something illegal going on at the site if they have the element of surprise and the inspectors catch something illegal going on while its happening. Remote security cameras are reliable to catch illegal activity wherever they are, however they can't be everywhere at once. While Satellite imagery is reliable it can't catch everything, and has only become commercially available to everyone recently. Because of its questionable reliability, verification plays a role of supplying information rather than answers as to whether compliance is being met in international treaties.
 
If there must be war there are certain conditions under which it must be carried out.

• Within the Christian religion it is God who ultimately controls the outcomes of all wars. Christians live by the bible, which states that God has the “real power” an ultimately rules our lives. And even though mankind has the freedom to choose, God already knows all that we will do. But we still have the freedom to do wrong (fight, lie, steal, etc.).
• But it seems war is necessary to defend the city of God and his people, against his enemies. The logic is as follows: “warfare is both a learning experience and a divine control mechanism: it simultaneously chastens and teaches, and thus operates positively and negatively. If one dies in battle, that bestows the reward of instant access to a better world. Survival on the other hand means that God retains one for further training and ‘service’.

· Christians have their own thoughts about how war can be justified. Christians believe that the church has its own role to play in the pursuit of peace. Christians believe that war should help protect moral and human values, "...Conviction that peace must be pursued and rights defended within moral restraints and the context of defining other basic human rights..." (Page 3, AmericanCatholic.org). Christians believe that war should have a good cause, that war should be used for justice, and that every resort should be use before war can happen. Christians believe that they should help protect faith, "Peacemaking is not an optional commitment. It is a requirement of our faith," (Page 6, AmericanCatholic.org). Christians believe that they have an obligation to God to protect peace.
 
 
Islamic Views on War

Every society has its own codes on how, when, and why war is to be conducted, and the culture of Islam is no exception. Most of Western civilization believes that Islamic society justifies war for any reason it sees fit, which is not entirely true. Islam views war as a means to solve social problems when obstacles stand in the way of justice, but there is a lot of interpretation involved in defining justice. It is used to advance the Muslim society and religion at different times, though this was a not a religious command, but a decision of Muslim leaders at the time.

The Islamic culture, much like the other Western religions (Christianity, Judaism, etc), has a duty to all of its followers that they must spread the word of God as well as defend the word of God. In extreme cases defending His word must be dealt with in battle. The Koran (Koran if you will) justifies this battling for God with the passage “You shall strive for the cause of GOD as you should strive for His cause” (22:78). Fighting in the name of God is any fight that defends the freedom and justice of the religion or repels oppression towards the religion. Again this is very interpretable. War in Islam is not meant to oppress those who oppose them, as some Westerners might believe.

In fact, the Koran has specific passages meant to prevent war over religion; however, extremists can overlook these passages. One of the passages is blatantly clear: “There is no coercion in matters of faith.” Islam also recognizes that it believes in the same God as Jews and Christians, they are just slightly misguided. This is another reason why there is no religious reason for Muslims to hate Jews and Christians for their religion.

One of the most widely spread misconceptions about Islam surrounds the term Jihad, which is an Arabic word meaning to struggle. Most westerners believe it means holy war, because of its use in the names of many Islamic extremist groups such as “Islamic Jihad.” The real meaning of Jihad in the Islamic context is a constant struggle to keep religion present in all aspects of life. However one aspect where it appeared several times in the Koran was in the context of wars lead by Muhammad. This usage makes it easy for westerners and Muslims alike to misconstrue it as Holy War.

Much of the above rules of war hinge upon how justice is defined by Muslim culture. Many of the things we westerners take as rights like freedom of speech are not guaranteed by, and in some cases offend Islam. Depending on our actions, it is easy to interpret things that are allowed in the Koran, like Jihad, as a means to fight for whatever the “injured” Muslim party wants to, if that is what they see as justice. Other texts in the Koran show harsh punishment as an option. A man has the option to beat his wife for disloyalty if verbal punishment proves ineffective. This same philosophy could be applied to America as the country that should have listened and now has to be beaten. It also does not tolerate people who convert from Islam. It would be easy to say all children are born Islamic and that they have strayed from the path and must be punished. Any number of meanings can be derived from the Koran, to fit any number of purposes. Although Islam itself does not promote war, especially over religion, its religious text, the Koran, does lend itself to any interpretation the reader intends.

 
Can Treaties be trusted? Why?

Treaties can be trusted. By ratifying treaties, countries regulate each other to check the others follow rules. The Non-Proliferation Treaty of Nuclear Weapons is a cornerstone of global security. It aims to ensure that countries use peaceful technology under international safeguards and to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons. (The Treaty establishes a safeguards system under the responsibility of the IAEA, International Atomic Energy Agency.) If treaties are not trusted and countries do not keep their promise, there will be conflicts among countries to develop nuclear weapons for their own benefits.

Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty is an example of reliable treaties. In order to strengthen Non-Proliferation Treaty, Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty is opened for signature in 1996. The Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty has been signed by hundred seventy five countries and ratified by hundred twenty countries. It is signed to ban all nuclear tests everywhere. It was negotiated in the Conference on disarmament between 1994 and 1996, and established a worldwide monitoring system to check air, water and soil for signals of a nuclear explosion. Restrictions on nuclear testing decrease the development and slow the spread of nuclear weapons.

The Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty is trusted because countries check one another. Presidents and many congressional leaders have worked to reduce other countries’ possibilities and reasons for developing nuclear weapons. While the United States and other nuclear weapon states decide how far to go with nuclear reductions, The Test Ban Treaty slows the advancement of nuclear weapon capabilities. A ban on nuclear explosions would give technical constraints on countries that have nuclear weapon capabilities. Russia and the United States have a wide range of nuclear capabilities and knowledge, but the Test Ban Treaty limits a renewal of the nuclear arms.

The Test Ban Treaty does not provide new monitoring system. Instead, it adds new sources of information and creates greater political clout for suspected violations. The Test Ban Treaty responses with a stronger restraint to states that fail to cooperate with requests from the Conference because states are tempted to violate the treaty, jeopardize the nuclear restraint regime, and threaten international peace and security for pursuing their interests and benefits.

What does it take to make an arms control treaty successful?

Trust, reason, understanding, and the will of nations are needed in the establishment of a well-functioning arms control treaty.

To make an arms control treaty successful you must follow two of the rules Mr. McNamara stated in “Fog of War”:

Empathize with your enemy.

Be prepared to reexamine your reasoning.

In respect to the treaty/ process: Be prepared to reexamine your reasoning.

The reason for the acquisition of such arms must be understood by the nation leading the treaty process. Nations acquire nuclear weapons for two reasons: to better protect themselves or to attack other nations. A nuclear arms treaty can only successfully be struck with a nation not intending to use nuclear force as a means of aggression. Such treaties are made for one purpose – to enhance the national security of all parties involved. Require all the signatories to not aid any country in the acquisition of nuclear weapons or allow their weapons to proliferate. Have countries, which have no nuclear ambitions, be part of the treaty – as a show of good faith.

The treaty should to require the weapons be dismantled till the nations’ stockpiles are at the lowest possible set levels. Several neutral or leading nations should be held responsible for supervising the stockpiling of the nuclear material from the excess weapons.

In respect to how the treaty is enforced: Empathize with your enemy.

Every nation involved will have the free and unrestricted visitation rights to the nuclear weapon facilities of other signers, because as in any transaction, trust is necessary. The signatories may want to withdraw from the treaty on the grounds that their national security is at stake. In this case, the leading government(s) must be willing to provide for the defense of the signatories.

In reference to nations new to or not part of the treaty:

Not only should a treaty gather nations under a common word of law, but also ought to unite them against nations showing the will to acquire nuclear weapons. A joining nation will be given economic incentives by the other nations taking part in the treaty. Although some nations will not sign the treaty they will receive bullying, such as sanctions, from other nations

The treaty could be promoted from the concept that:

a.) Only pansy nations use nuclear weapons.

b.) Mutually Assured Destruction is indeed MAD

c.) the fact that the bombs are too lethal, powerful, and immoral for any military or civilian use.

d.) The United States has the capability to make threats to states which do not comply if the situation isn’t good at all.

Sources

 
● Desutter, Paula A. "The New U.S. Approach to Verification."
● U.S.Department of State, 27 Feb. 2006 <http://www.state.gov/>.
●  
● Sykes, Lynn R. "Earthquake or Nuclear Test?" Journal of the
● Federation of American Scientists 6th ser. 50 (1997). 27 Feb. 2006
● <http://fas.org>.
● AmericanCatholic.org. "The Challenge of Peace"
● http://www.americancatholic.org/Newsletters/CU/ac0883.asp
● http://www.nti.org