Benchmark
III
Ganesha High School
Aurelio Ferrufino
Francisco Angel
Nuclear weapons display the epitome of human
ingenuity, and our capacity for destruction; for decades they have represented
the extent humans are willing to go for power, prestige, and security. They are
complex, stealthy, innovative, and treacherous-having been used only once in
actual warfare- they haunt and frighten the worldÕs citizens. Non-proliferation
has its origins immediately after their use in Japan during World War II by
Robert J. Oppenheimer. Oppenheimer chaired the U.S.
Atomic Energy Commission- opposing proliferation, and the creation of more
powerful bombs- he supervised so that it did not lead to further death and
destruction because he was intuitive enough to know that his research would
lead to an arms race, ÒWe knew the world would not be the same."-
Oppenheimer (ÒJROÓ). So the question remains, Òwhat to do with these weaponsÓ?
Elimination, arms control, and deterrence are sought after solutions- which as
single units- have shown unsatisfying to mediocre results, leaving one viable
action, a hybrid of diplomatic militarism: alliances and diplomacy, deterrence,
and a nuclear weapons free zone.
ÒEliminating nuclear weapons nowÓ is
wishful thinking and down right impossible. Nuclear weapons cannot be
eliminated; they can only be dismantled, leaving their presence to haunt us. If
we were to rely on arms control, this implies diplomacy, and to quote current
United States President Obama, ÒWe can't talk forever; at some
point, steps have to be taken, so that people can see progressÉÓ (ÒObama wants
progressÓ). Alas nuclear weapons will spread; diplomacy only prolongs the
inevitable. Using nuclear weapons as an essential part of national security
will lead to the use of deterrence, which is an unfavorable approach because
bitterness and animosity between nations. If
the 5 delcared nuclear nations that signed the NPT
were to ally themselves through diplomatic means as the leaders of non-proliferation,
it would prevent nuclear pandemonium. In this said alliance all involved will
have equal power, regardless of nuclear might. Of course such a unity is easier
said than done, all nations in the NPT nuclear club have showed signs of
wanting to prevent any more nuclear proliferation, with this in mind and the
environmental and economic rewards of reducing the current stock piles would be
fundamental motives in which to start. The Nuclear club will also dramatically
reduce their nuclear total; Russia and the United States will drop to a flat
10,000(currently the US holds an estimated 10,300 and Russia holds an estimated
16,000) and for assurance the IAEA plus inspectors from the nuclear 5. Whereas China and France will drop to
200 and have similar interaction with inspectors (China has an estimated 410
nuclear weapons, France has an estimated 350, and the United Kingdom has an
estimated 200) ("Nuclear Numbers").
The
option of deterrence is a belligerent take, however, when the safety of
humanity is at stake, deterrence appears to be -along with diplomatic alliances
and a nuclear weapons free zone- a helpful resource for the security of the
human race. The arms race between the United States and Russia was a major
theme during the Cold War; their linear thinking to deter and over power one
another inspired other nations to acquire nuclear weaponry. During the Cold war
nations wanted the power and prestige the superpowers were given; those are
still motivators for aggressive nations currently wanting nuclear weapons.
Nations seeking nuclear weapons, and those that are neoteric to nuclear weapons
will be considered aggressive and a threat to peace and humanity. Nations like
Iran that ÒallegedlyÓ want nuclear weapons; and nations like North Korea who by
allegation have them are aggressors and will be deterred by those in the NPT to
stop further advancement. Deterrence will also put pressure on nations not in the NPT
like Israel and India to decrease the threat they impose, and in addition, halt
their rising nuclear arsenal.
Beyond
diplomacy and deterrence a nuclear free zone (specified regions in which countries
commit themselves not to manufacture, acquire, test, or possess nuclear weapons;
ÒNWFZÓ) needs conception. Current non-NPT
signatories would be forced, through deterrence, to create a nuclear free zone.
Those nations that are suspected but have not set an official statement
declining or admitting, will be searched, if found those with weapons of mass
destruction will be forced to completely dismantle. Though only a handful of
countries are the cause, it will affect two geographical regions: the Middle
East and South Asia.
Diplomatic
militarism, a fusion of: diplomatic alliances, deterrence, and a nuclear weapon
free zone, would ensure mankindÕs safety when applied to nonproliferation. In
order to work efficiently it requires the cooperation of everyone, where they
are united under one goal. It requires differences to be put aside in order to
ally and to fend of any threats. Under this principle people must stop thinking
about themselves and think of the safety of the world.
Bibliography
Crail , Peter and Kimball Daryl. "Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zones (NWFZ) ". Arms Control Association. 5/21/09 <http://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/nwfz>.
"JuliusRobertOppenheimer(JRO)".PhisicistBiographies.5/18/09<http://phisicist.info/oppenheimer.html>.
Krieger, Hilary. "Obama wants progress, says 'we can't talk forever'". The Jerusalem Post . 5/19/09 <http://www.worthynews.com/top/jpost-com-servlet-Satellite-cid-1239710751747-pagename-JPost-JPArticle-Printer/>.
"NuclearFreeZones".NuclearFiles.5/19/09<http://www.nuclearfiles.org/menu/library/treaties/nuclear-free-zones/trty_nuclear-free-zone-index.htm>.
"NuclearNumbers".CarnegieEndowment.5/19/09<http://www.carnegieendowment.org/npp/index.cfm?fa=map&id=19238&prog=zgp&proj=znpp>.