Nuclear Proliferation, Global Insecurity, and the Rise and Fall of the A.Q. Khan Network - Essay Example

? Final 2 Final 2 The advancement in technology allows scientists to make the progression of nuclear weapons easier, and faster. Many countries are involved in making these nuclear weapons knowing fully well of the devastation a single one of these weapons can do to a city, country, and the environment. However, this knowledge does not make them cease the proliferation of nuclear weapons in the world. Developed nations are guilty of involving themselves in the proliferation process, but are quick to point fingers at other nations. During the World War, the use of these nuclear weapons caused massive damages, which are felt to this day (Corera, 2006). That was then. So what about today? The world is at a risk of obliterating itself with the use of such energy to create dangerous weapons. This paper will examine some of the issues brought about by the use of nuclear energy in making nuclear weapons, and what this means to the world, in the foreseeable future. Question 1 One aspect of nuclear proliferation is the disregard for human life in the world. This is a risk to world peace because; many countries are involved in making nuclear weapons available thinking other countries are also doing so. Nuclear proliferation is enabling nuclear weapons to be available, the knowledge on nuclear energy, and the materials used to make them available. Countries are quick to find material that is likely to assist in making these weapons, but the sad part of all this is that, nobody is doing anything about it (Corera, 2006). Vast amounts of capital are used in the research and study of nuclear energy meant for building weapons, and yet, many countries elsewhere are battling with diseases and hunger. Moreover, nuclear proliferation is rampant because of mistrust among nations. Two nations known for battling openly over nuclear weapons are the United States of America, and Iran. Iran is involved in manufacturing nuclear munitions. America is assured of this fact. This thought warranted the invasion of a country in search of these weapons, which to this day, still remains an illusion. It is this mistrust that puts the whole world at risk as this hatred is likely to go global. In such a case, many nations will suffer (Corera, 2006). Claims that Israel is involved in nuclear weapon manufacture have been heard, but nobody is yet to invade the country in search of these weapons. Restrictions must be made to dissuade the use of nuclear material in any way. This may reduce nuclear proliferation over time. Question 2 Nations are likely to use nuclear weapons in the future because these weapons are indiscriminate and inhumane. They have the capability of destroying everything in their wake, and in the case of war, the use of these weapons will be the first option. The rising tensions in many parts of the world have many individuals up in arms over the use of nuclear weapons to remedy the situation. These weapons are capable of eradicating the human race in a frighteningly short time. The problem with such tensions is that, nobody is willing to admit their involvement in such tendencies. This causes more tension, which further increases the chances of the use of nuclear weapons in the future (Corera, 2006). Another reason why countries are likely to turn to nuclear weapons in the future would be double standards between the first world nations. The U.S has policies against the use of nuclear weapons. However, the same country advocates for the use of nuclear energy (Corera, 2006). The use of nuclear energy is just an excuse to experiment on nuclear weapons. The two are tied together, hence; one cannot claim that the signing of a few terms of agreement can avoid the practice of nuclear armaments in the future. This is what has everyone antsy about the current situation in terms of nuclear weapons. Question 3 Western intelligence agencies are incapable of addressing nuclear threats adequately because of lack of jurisdiction (Corera, 2006). The only thing they can do at the moment is carry out surveillance, and voice out against the practice of nuclear arms and material. They are limited in terms of getting into another country and trying to combat the issue of nuclear weapons. These agencies are independent parts of the United States government, and their actions are linked directly to the nation and its leaders. In the short term period, it is impossible for them to act on their own accord without instructions from the head office. Also, the policies in place restrict their operations from adequately addressing nuclear threats. Disarmament policies in place require that the protocol is followed to reduce the threat of nuclear weapons. Going against such protocol is tantamount to breaking the agreement in place, and this ultimately results in mistrust and tension (Corera, 2006). This presents a problem to all agencies ready to address the issue of nuclear weapons in countries thought to engage in the proliferation of nuclear weapons. Policy makers have an obligation to the public they are expected to serve, if they fail to address the short term threats of nuclear weapons, then; the world should be afraid of the long term effects of such threats. Question 4 In the international efforts to prevent nuclear proliferation, the activities of the Pakistani group led by doctor Khan, are considered exceedingly dangerous. Considered the head of Pakistan’s nuclear munitions, Abdul Qadeer Khan and other associates encouraged the sale and purchase of nuclear capabilities for a period of more than two decades. All the while evading intelligence agencies and maiming the operations of non-proliferation of nuclear weapons. Such actions act as a hindrance to the methods of trying to reduce or eradicate the proliferation of nuclear weapons (Corera, 2006). These activities and the existence of such a group are thought to be extremely dangerous because they create the avenue for many extreme groups to advance their personal agendas. Non-proliferation institutions are working day and night to avert any looming crisis that may arise from such activities. It is only after ceasing cargo bound for Libya that intelligence agencies looking for Khan captured him, and most of his associates. These activities threatened international stability and peace that makes the group particularly daring (Corera, 2006). Question 5 A Radiological Dispersion Device is likely to take the place of a fission or fusion bomb because it creates more panic. In densely populated areas, the RDD is likely to ensure there are a minimal number of casualties after explosion. Fission and fusion nuclear bombs are catastrophic (Corera, 2006). They tend to devastate everything in their path. This makes the device an exceptional choice in the event of an attack. Terrorists or any group with the intentions of harming a group of people is likely to use this device. It sends a clear message of what their intentions are, in the long run. The fatality level of such a device is thousands of people in a populous area, but not total destruction as in the case of fission or fusion bombs (Corera, 2006). Question 6 The employment of the RDD is likely to render properties in the area of detonation useless for a long time. Through the release of the radioactive material, the levels of dangerous material exposed in the buildings and environment may still be extraordinary. Also, the radioactive material, though may cause little damage, is likely to spread fear and panic (Corera, 2006). People are always afraid of the effects of radioactive material. If there is panic, there is the chance of an eruption of chaos. This prevents normal operations in any region. Moreover, the economic and moral damage caused by a RDD is likely to be the objective of employing its use. The source of radiology in the RDD will vastly affect the impact of the device making it more or less destructive. The radiation and energy of the radiological weapon are factors that will determine the results on the surroundings it may be released (Corera, 2006). In conclusion, all the talk on nuclear munitions is crucial in modern times. Prevention is better than cure. The world needs to eradicate the use of nuclear energy. This is to prevent nations from suspecting each other, and monitoring each other’s movements with the aim of finding out if one is plotting against the other. This will go a long way in fostering and promoting world peace, and cooperation between nations (Corera, 2006). Reference Corera, G. (2006). Shopping for bombs: Nuclear proliferation, global insecurity, and the rise and fall of the A.Q. Khan network. New York: Oxford University Press. Read More