The political climate is favorable to a new attempt to eliminate nuclear weapons scientists can increase their likelihood of success. Earlier this year, U.S. satellites detected the first column of steam from a nuclear reactor built in Pakistan to produce nuclear bomb fuel, confirming the country's desire to strengthen its status as a nuclear power .
observation - which came shortly before this month's review conference of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) in New York - is further evidence that the unregulated spread of nuclear technology is closely linked to the dangers of nuclear conflict.
The good news is that United States President Barack Obama seems determined to make the elimination of nuclear weapons a top priority. In fact, last month invited 47 heads of state at a landmark summit in Washington to promote disarmament and agree on strategies to prevent nuclear terrorism and safeguard nuclear material.
But the news of Pakistan, along with continuing disagreement on how best to address other emerging nuclear states such as Iran and North Korea, illustrate how much has to go - and the political obstacles that remain to be overcome - before this goal is reached.
New hope
There is still a sense of optimism for the review conference of this year, which was missed at the last meeting of 2005. Then, the aggressive stance taken by the Bush administration - describing North Korea as part of an "axis of evil", for example - to be condemned threads in a deadlock.
This time, the prospects for agreement are significantly higher. Obama has not only adopted a more moderate attitude toward international affairs in general, but has already made significant progress on the nuclear front.
last month For example, Russia and the United States announced an arms control agreement under which both significantly reduced their nuclear arsenals. And since then, Obama has revised its nuclear policy to establish, for the first time that non-nuclear states that have signed the NPT never be target of U.S. nuclear weapons
Both agreements could have gone further. Some in the Obama administration wanted him to take a step further by prohibiting the use of nuclear weapons against any threat or attack non-nuclear. And despite the new cuts, both Russia and the United States will still have enough nuclear weapons to destroy humanity many times.
Recent moves, however, have created a political climate in which a significant agreement, at least among the states with nuclear weapons seems more realistic view of what happened five years ago. There are even signs that the United States may finally ratify the Treaty for the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test, the next big step toward global nuclear disarmament.
Need for monitoring
The reasons for optimism are not restricted to the change in U.S. position. Equally influential has been the growing awareness within the developed and developing worlds on threats of nuclear terrorism and the need to improve the protection of nuclear materials.
18 months ago, for example, an armed group was captured entering nuclear facilities in South Africa, in an apparent attempt to steal weapons-grade uranium has been stored there since the early 1990, under international supervision.
The incident provides a stark reminder of the need for continued vigilance and effective. This need will increase as more developing countries to migrate to nuclear power as an energy source available, a trend that is reinforced by international efforts promote renewable energy as a strategy to tackle climate change.
But the danger is that the U.S. led initiatives will be seen, with some justification, as little more than attempts to defend American interests, influenced both by political relationships and a genuine desire for nuclear disarmament.
For example, the nuclear cooperation treaty between the United States and India, which came into force in 2008 was cited by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace as an example of diplomatic and commercial interests placed ahead of non-proliferation responsibilities , and was criticized for exacerbating tensions Nuclear South Asia.
"Scientists, diplomats or both?
The only solution for the developing world is to accept that you are interested in the international nuclear nonproliferation, the only way to prevent regional conflicts escalate into nuclear exchanges.
The scientific community has had to play an important role in this process to explain the threat posed by even relatively small nuclear weapons, and advising on how to develop safeguards without overly restricting the peaceful uses of nuclear energy.
Scientists have already shown their worth to maintain open communication channels between the U.S. and the Soviet Union during the Cold War. Pugwash Conferences on Science and World Affairs were instrumental to that "science diplomacy" and can not be coincidence that the approach is still favored in Washington, where John Holdren, who once headed Pugwash is the science adviser to Obama and technology.
David Dickson Director, SciDev.Net
0 comments:
Post a Comment