Treaty for the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons in Latin America and the Caribbean - Assignment Example

Treaty for the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons in Latin America and the Caribbean Introduction Security is something necessary for safeguarding the welfare of a nation, and especially with our homeland security and ensuring that there has been a winning fight against terrorism. In order to have a clear understanding of domestic violence, it is important to define the theory accordingly. Domestic violence entails actions that engage acts perilous to people life. This is explicitly a defiance of the illegal laws of any given state projected to threaten a civilian populace; to manipulate the rule of a regime through assassination, destruction, and kidnapping; and happen in the territorial authority of the United States. Then again, a domestic terrorist defines a group or person located and operating inside the United States devoid of foreign direction. Security agreements are the best ways to improve international security by reducing various acts of terrorism. The rapid growth in technology has significantly promoted the use of nuclear weapons, which cause deaths and destruction of property. In order to promote world peace against nuclear weapons, various treaties have been implemented accordingly. This paper critically examines Treaty for the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons in Latin America and the Caribbean (Treaty of Tlatelolco) from a broad point of view. Treaty for the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons in Latin America and the Caribbean (Treaty of Tlatelolco) The Treaty for the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons in Latin America is also commonly known as the Treaty of Tlatelolco. As the name suggests, the treaty was founded in order to forbid the use of nuclear weapons, especially in Latin American nations. Research has it clear that over the past years there has been increased misuse of nuclear power among Latin American States. The rapid use of nuclear weapons resulted to insecurity and ultimately loss of lives and destruction of property. In order to curb the occurrence of such incidents, the Treaty of Tlatelolco was launched. The terms of the treaty coerces Latin American parties not to purchase or possess nuclear weapons, nor to allow the storage or operation of nuclear weapons on their states by other nations (Books Lic, 2010). Besides the accord among the Latin American nations themselves, there are extra codes of behavior contending with issues that relate to non-Latin American nations. The first code of behavior entails a responsibility by non Latin American nations that have territories within the nuclear free zone. The second code of behavior engages a role by such authorities which possess nuclear weapons. It is worth noting that the U.S is a party to the above codes of behavior. History of the Treaty The U.S has favored the institution of nuclear weapon free territories everywhere, inter alia, they would restrict the distribution of nuclear weapons; they would not agitate existing security preparations; requirements exist for satisfactory verification; the initiative of such regions originates in the geographical location concerned; and all nations significant to the denucleariazation of the region participate (Bellany, 2005). With reference to the fact that the Soviet suggestions for the denucleariazation of Central Europe and other regions have not met such decisive factors; the U.S has be in opposition to them. Despite the above perception, it is worth contemplating that the U.S supported and promoted Latin American nations in such undertaking. In the year 1972, the Brazilian commissioner to the United Nation General Assembly made a proposal making Latin America a nuclear weapon free zone. On the 17th regular session of the General Assembly, at some stage in the October Cuban missile disaster, a draft declaration calling for such a territory was put forward by Brazil and supported by Chile, Bolivia, and Ecuador (Howard, Sawyer & Bajema, 2009). At the same time as declaring support for the code, Cuba specified some conditions, counting the obligation that Puerto Rico and the Panama Canal Zone be incorporated in the zone. What is more, Cuba stipulated that foreign military bases, particularly Guantanamo Naval Base, be done away with. Noteworthy, the draft declaration was not put to a election at the General Assembly during that time. In the year 1963, at the scheme of the President of Mexico, the leaders of five Latin American nations; Brazil, Ecuador, Bolivia, Chile, and Mexico, proclaimed that they were ready to sign a multiparty accord that would make Latin America a nuclear weapon free region (Permata, 2008). Building on this point if view, the year 1963 defined a period when such announcement obtained the support of the UN General Assembly, with the U.S selection in the confirmatory. The Latin American countries adhered to this proposal by wide-ranging and detailed discussions among themselves. The year 1964 marked a period when a Preparatory Commission for the Denuclearization of Latin America was launched with information to set up a draft treaty at the Mexico City Conference. Significant differences among the Latin American nations appeared over queries of classfying the boundaries of the nuclera weapon free zone, transportation guarantees, and protections on peaceful nuclear operations. In the year 1967, the treaty was signed at a provincial conference of Latin American nations at Tlatelolco, a sector of Mexico city. During the same year, the UN General Assembly authorized the treaty by a vote of 82-0 with 28 absentions, the U.S voting in support of the terms of the Treaty (Bellany, 2005). From 1989, the Treaty had entered into power for 23 Latin Amrican nations. Guyana and Belize were not requested to come to the Treaty for the reason that a special system is forecasted for such political entities whose zones are completely the subject of claims by an extracontinental nation. When all entitled nations approve the Treaty, it will get into force for all of them, as indicated in Article 28. On the other hand, under that article, any Latin American nation may bring the Treaty into power for itself during any time through relinquishing that stipulation. Conditions, Elements, and Future of the Treaty Common sense tells us that every treaty comes with its terms and conditions. In essense, such terms and conditions are always helpful, especially during times when differences appear among the members or stakeholders. To the large part, the terms of the Treaty of Tlatelolco persuades Latin American States to stop the purchase of nuclear weapons. What is more, the terms go against the possession of nuclear weapons and as well as the storage of such weapons. The Treaty of Tlatelolco was initially amended on a special general meeting in the year 1990 in order to attach the expression “and the Caribbean” to the title. Afterwards, the Treaty was amended again in the year 1991 so as to substitute paragraph 2 of Article 25. The initial Treaty paragraph had disqualified political bodies “part or all of which whose territory” is in difference of opinion with “ an extra continental country and one or more Latin American States” preceding to the opening of signature of the Treaty (Howard, Sawyer & Bajema, 2009). Such clause efficiently expelled Belize and Guyana from attachment. With reference to research, Belize gained its self-government from the UK in the year 1981 whilst Guyana attained freedom from Britain in the year 1966. Based on this perspective, it is worth understanding that Guyana has continuing territoral disagreements with Suriname and Venezula. The amendment restored the initial text with the following: “The Condition of State Party to the Treaty of Tlatelolco shall be restricted to independent states which are situated within the zone of application of the Treaty in accordance with Article 4 of same, and with Paragraph 1 of the present Article, and which were members of the United Nations as of December 10, 1985, as well as the nonautonomous territories mentioned in Document OAS/CER.P, AG/DOC. 1939/85 of November 5, 1985, once they attain their independence." In the name of their individuals and loyally understanding their aspirations and desires, the government of the states, which sign the Treaty for the Prohibition of nuclear weapon in Latin America. According to the conditions of the treaty, it is clear that ending the armaments race, particularly in the section of nuclear weapons is the key priority (Books Lic, 2010). Then again, another condition of the treaty is to strengthen global peace, based on the sovereign impartiality of States, common respect, and excellent neighbourliness. Other conditions of the treaty include the following: bringing to mind that military denuclearized regions are not a conclusion in themselves but to some extent a way for attaining general and complete disarmament at a later stage, that the UN General Assembly Resolution, which founded that the dealings that should be accepted upon for denuclearization of Latin America should be taken "in the light of the principles of the Charter of the United Nations and of regional agreements" (Bellany, 2005). What is more, recollecting that the Charter of the Organization of America States asserts that it is a fundamental intention of the corporation to toughen the peace and security of the world. Mantaining world peace through eliminating all sorts of terrorism is another major condition of the treaty. With reference to statistics, it is cler that domestic violence has a lengthy record in various nations such as the United States. Ever since the foundation of the state, several groups and terrorists have wreaked harm and fear in the name of their basis. Ever since 1950, domestic violence in the United States is as a result, seen as a product of countless populations, problems and differences that co-exist inside the state’s borders (Permata, 2008). The United States is almost distinctive among countries for its capability to hold a massive amount in harmony. Evidently through examination, it is undeniable that a large sum of terrorism in the U.S history is aggravated by a tremendous disbelieve of the American principle of the democratic system. This is where individuals of different backgrounds can all assert devotion to and the advantages of the democracy. In simple terms, in spite of vast disparity in terrorism’s appearance since 1950, domestic terrorism in the country can be described as a brutal allege over who or what is genuinely American (Howard, Sawyer & Bajema, 2009). This mistrust has had a variety of expressions by varied groups in different times as we shall see in the context of discussion. Reflecting on this standpoint, the terms of the treaty are implemented to promote peace in the state. That the U.S government appreciates the reference within Article 3 of the Treaty to the legislation of the nation. This is in order for the State to recount only to such legislation seeing that it is companionable with the regulations of international law. Then again, as engages an exercise of sovereignty reliable with such regulations, and consequently that endorsement of extra protocol by the U.S government could not be considered as implying acknowledgment. This is for the purpose of the treaty and its protocols or for any other reason, of any legislation which did not, in the view of the U.S, act in accordance with the pertinent rules of the law. That the U.S regime pays attention to the Preparatory Commissions interpretation of the Treaty. That with reference to the commission in Article 3 of Protocol II not to use or intimidate to make use of nuclear weapons in opposition to contracting groups, the U.S would have to reflect on the fact that an armed attack by a contracting group, in which it was helped by a nuclear weapon state, would be unable to get along with the contracting matching responsibilities under Article 1 of the Treaty. That the U.S regime considers that the technology of manufacturing nuclear volatile devices for nonviolent functions is impossible to differentiate from the technology of developing nuclear weapons. That nuclear explosice devices and nuclear weapons for peaceful functions are all competent of releasing nuclear energy in an uncontrolled way and have the common group of traits of large quantities of energy produced immediately from a compacted source (Bellany, 2005). In that sense, the U.S government recognizes the meaning contained in Article 5 of the Treaty as unavoidably surrounding all nuclear explosive devices. That the U.S regime recognizes the paragraph 4 of Article 18 of the treaty allows, and that U.S devotion to Protocol II will not put a stop to partnership by the U.S with Contracting Parties for the intention of carrying out explosions of nuclear devices for peaceful functions in a way dependable with a policy of not causative to the propagation of nuclear weapons potentials. In that sense, the U.S administration notes “Article V of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, under which it joined in an undertaking to take appropriate measures to ensure that potential benefits of peaceful applications of nuclear explosions would be made available to non-nuclear-weapon states party to that Treaty, and reaffirms its willingness to extend such undertaking, on the same basis, to states precluded by the present Treaty from manufacturing or acquiring any nuclear explosive device”. Elements of the Treaty in Relation to the Future Security of the United States Terrorism has become a big concern in the world today. After the September 11 attacks on United States by terrorists, the attitude of the Americans towards people supporting terrorist activities became worse. They today remain suspicious of Muslims and confused at the same time. Most Americans have very little knowledge about the Islam ideology and its relationship to democratically held concepts (Books Lic, 2010). Because of this understanding and misconception, the two have always been in conflict. The terrorist attacks in the country increased the suspicion and therefore it is impossible for each group to exist in total harmony with the other. The religious, ethnic, and political identity of the nation of Islam sometimes will not tolerate nations whose ideologies differ from theirs. Fundamental Islamists have beliefs and ideologies which strongly influence their behaviours. Different faiths in Islam, however, have different views and ideologies. Some support terrorism while others condone the practice. The beliefs and concepts influencing their behaviour include their perception of their religion and their main purpose is to pursue the word of Allah. Although different individuals have different views when it comes to Islamic faith, terrorism behaviour is not really a major component of Islamists. Terrorism is something unexplainable within the guidelines and beliefs of this religion (Bellany, 2005). However, since terrorism is commonly pioneered by members of this religion, it makes many people believe that it is a major component of Islamists. According to me, I believe that terrorism in the service of religion is a contradiction in terms. Strict Muslims always believe in mercy, peace, and forgiveness. This justifies the need not to get involved in violent activities such as terrorism. The fact that terrorism groups are formed within the religion is not enough justification to label all Muslims as possible terrorists. Therefore, I strongly argue that one’s political or religious ideology should never take precedence over individual rights. If at all an individual Muslim commits any terrorist act, he will be violating the ideologies and laws of the religion and should therefore be punished individually and the group that supports him. That the U.S regime proclaims that, even though not rehatquired by protocol II, the government must act with respect to such territories of Protocol 1. As it has been provided within the codes of operations with the Patriot Act, there has been the need for us to come to the understanding that the Office of Infrastructure Protection is one of the most appropriate Department of Homeland Security division or agency with which to work on preventing an issue such as this from occurring in the future (Wolfe, 2009). For instance, when we are about to fight any kind of terrorism and possible intrusion, there is the great need of coming up with engagements and modalities through which, through the use of infrastructure, the kind of materials entering any kind of a building or apartment has been thoroughly scrutinized to make it safe end free from any kind of contamination so that security has been given the topmost agenda. Whenever we are talking of intelligence systems and infrastructure, there has always been the need of coming up appropriate measures which ensure integrity with all kinds of materials which are being taken into any kind of building. Such should be done appropriately so that it can be easy to detect any form of materials and individuals who are entering any given building, zone or an apartment (Bellany, 2005). The Office of Infrastructure Protection is the major department within the operations of the Homeland Security which should be ready to engage all necessary measures in ensuring that there has been the use of intelligent systems which monitor any kind of materials entering into the country. Such should be done by ensuring the highest level of detection devices and sniper dogs to ensure any kind of suspicious materials ferried into the country has been detected in advance. Due to failed coordination and surveillance with the Office of Infrastructure Protection, it should be necessary to agree that it must have played a major role towards the development of such a weakness in the defense hence leading to the above scenario which is mostly a terrorism attack. Measures of control should be adopted by the Office of Infrastructure Protection so that all materials being ferried into residential building have no harm on the people. This shall also integrate the use of scanning devices through which different individuals shall be scrutinized before entering into any given apartment and also whenever entering into the country (Books Lic, 2010). The employment forensic experts and technocrats by the Office of Infrastructure Protection can as well be an important path towards realization of enough security within the Patriot Act in the war against terrorism. Basically, with appropriate measures such as coordination and proper communication can be effectively adopted as a solution in containing any kind of intrusion as the one noted above (Wolfe, 2009). All the country’s infrastructures such as food, electric supply, drinking water, and other chemical facilities should thus be appropriately managed and kept safeguarded through all measures possible and as well integrate the use of all resources which are at disposal for the security of all people. Recommendations for Changing the Treaty Towards provision of the best of security as per the Homeland Security as outlined in the Patriot Act, there should be the best adoption of ways through which different departments in the country can be able to effectively come up with ways of coordination so that any form of possible threat on the country’s major infrastructures have been kept at bay and by so doing be able to provide the people with the very best practices and security as well. With more and more enemies being pronounced against the country, it should be the high time when the best of measures have been put in place towards appropriate development and realization of security for all (Howard, Sawyer & Bajema, 2009). The trick therefore lies in the manner through which an appropriate coordination shall be conducted both nationally and locally through partnerships with both government and private sector entities that share information and resources. Through application of modern state of art technologies, there can be modifications through which communication shall be made absolutely possible, and this shall be done by engaging different departments within the country such as research institutions, the state and federal police departments, the government wings dealing with security, the private sector organizations, and the pentagon as well (Permata, 2008). This shall be a very appropriate approach which is capable of ensuring delivery of information quickly once a possible threat has been detected. Since modern technologies has diversified the possible threats which can be faced currently, the involvement of different entities through efficient communication devices and Emergency Response Systems can be a good approach towards addressing such problems which might be faced in the country (Wolfe, 2009). Appropriate training can be done and also come up with drills which shall be used to test the effectiveness of the systems which shall be applied in fighting crime within the major infrastructures of the country. The most appropriate system which should have been adopted as a response against such a disaster is through the adoption of IRT, also known as Incident Response Techniques which have the capability of employing all partners in coming up with measures of rescue once a suspected threat has been pronounced (Bellany, 2005). The use of appropriate scanning devices can be appropriate in such a scenario and be fitted within all areas of the infrastructure in the country. If such an approach had been done, then it is quite true that the same kind of scenario would not have occurred. Such use of technology shall ensure that any kind of material within the close perimeters of the infrastructures has been detected in advance (Hunt, 2009). As well, the use of readiness and incident response techniques is importance to give quick response after the success of a threat and be able to contain it within the shortest possible time. The country has a well developed CIKR which ranges from the nation's electric power, food, and drinking water to its national monuments, telecommunications and transportation systems, chemical facilities, and much more. These are infrastructures which can be easily compromised whenever a possibility occurs. For instance, the above scenario is one of the examples through which the water system can be compromised in order to affect people consuming the water. Food substances delivered from one place to another can be poisoned through the use of biologically engineered substances, and hence the reason why proper screening should be done (Chang, 2002). As well, the infrastructure such as electric supply system can be tampered into the country thus causing the greatest damage on the people who use the grid system. The national monuments and surrounding infrastructures have been seeing the largest groups of people paying a visit, and this means that the terrorists may decide to take advantage of the same and in the very end cause the greatest damage through bombing incidences and so on (Wolfe, 2009). Basically, all the major infrastructures in the country have the capability of being threatened by terrorists and thus there would be the necessity of coming up with adequate measures through which such possible threats should be taken care of. The telecommunication and the transport systems within the country are quite dynamic and thus any possible threat can result in the greatest damage on the largest number of people (Howard, Sawyer & Bajema, 2009). This has been the major reason why the Homeland Security has been tightened up within all these infrastructures after the attacks of September eleven in the country in the year 2001. Conclusion It is quite clear that domestic terrorism has turn out to be a big concern in the global point of view. Reflecting on the discussion, several terrorist groups have ended whilst other remain inactive. Several individuals of some groups remain, which ended remain wanted by the government for their actions. Several changes for instance, public policy, economic effect, and human toll have resulted following domestic terrorism. Different laws have been implemented with the intention to protect the rights of humans and the occurrence of such acts in the society. In one way or the other, the Treaty of Tlatelolco forms a benchmark from where peaceful negotiations among different states have been arrived at accordingly. Most remarkably, this has resulted to increased peace over the global perspective. References Bellany, I. (2005). Curbing the Spread of Nuclear Weapons. New York: McGraw-Hil Books Lic. (2010). Treaties of Haiti: Treaty of Tlatelolco, Treaty of Chaguaramas, Inter-American Treaty of Reciprocal Assistance, General Books. Howard, H., Sawyer, R. & Bajema, E. (2009). Terrorism and counterterrorism: Understanding the new security environment, readings, and interpretations (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hil. Hunt, D. (2009). On the Hunt: How to wake up Washington and Win the War on Terror. New York: New Press. Permata, A. (2008). ‘Ideology, Institutions, Political Actions: Prosperous Justice Party (PKS) in Indonesia.’ Asien Journal, 1(9), 22-36. Pollock, T. (2008). Ethical Dilemmas and Decisions in Criminal Justice. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Wolfe, M. (2009). Homeland Security: 9/11 Victim Relief Funds. Retrieved from University School of Law Web site: Read More