Advocacy on Nuclear Weapons - Essay Example

Advocacy on Nuclear Weapons Nuclear issues have been in the world for a long time. After scientific experiments killed those conducting research in nuclear substances, there has been a lot of knowledge accumulated since then. Nuclear substances became critical issues when technologies emerged that converted them to weapons of mass destruction. The growth of the nuclear era has been maturing up especially in countries versed with nuclear expertise such as United States and Russia. Knowledge keeps on evolving, and it cannot be confined to one region or country (Edwards 20). For this reason, nuclear technologies have spread throughout the world to the extent that their proliferation has raised inquiries regarding the security of the world. With various regions of the world always in unending rivalry, combined with the existence of nuclear weapons in these countries, the future of world peace remains uncertain. The issue of control of the world is a rivalry issue between the former Soviet Union and United states. Other countries join in to either support United States or the former Soviet Union to increase the proponents’ influence. The Middle East conflict presents a playground where these two world powers are battling over the control of this oil rich region. Their continued struggle to fight for influence and bearing their high ownership of nuclear weapons raises the question of whether a peace deal will be cracked. The political battle on Middle East is seen by some scholars as the battle of supremacy over control of world nuclear weapons sector. Further, the war of words is also seen as military prowess battle that combines and marries dearly with nuclear weapons endowment (Edwards 21). In addition, the role of biological weapons such as anthrax, besides nuclear weapons has also entered the world politics because it is a hidden issue. It presents more challenges than nuclear weapons such as Uranium-253 because; its infrastructure is not easily identified. The supremacy of biological weapons is yet to take ground on international scale. This raises the vital question of whether these arsenals can lead to stable and peaceful world or its collapse. Consequently, the answer is ‘No’. The reason for their existence is not upheld, but it is disguised behind other reasons such as supremacy. The world peace cannot be placed at the mercy of nuclear weapons and other military interventions. These approaches are not sustainable and disguise other hidden missions. For example since 1998, Iraq remains in anarchy despite military presence. All countries that are in economies, in transition, are rushing and investing in nuclear research. Asian countries are economies, in transition, and are not left behind in pursuing nuclear power. Of late, Iran appears in international media secretly assembling weapons against international nuclear regulations. World powers continue also to strengthen their nuclear capabilities (Edwards 24). With this notion, therefore, it is clear that nuclear weapons and other arsenals are for achieving other missions other than peace. A clear discussion of these missions by various scholars reveals this fact. In the end, nuclear weapons continue to compromise world peace rather than strengthening international relations. The first nation that made nuclear power, that is US and Russia, had the intention of controlling the world, but not to keep the peace. The subsequent countries that followed suit were intending to rival the weapons of the first country. This trend continues till today where the battle is to come with the most advanced version of nuclear weapons. Thus, the initial mission of nuclear was not to keep the peace. The intention does not seem to change even with increasing globalisation and battle to control the world. Thus, the world cannot rely to maintain world peace and integration that is important for world economic growth on weapons (John 9). Palestine state led by Benjamin Netanyahu has appears on world map as a country where weapons and military action from United States cannot foster peace. In another sphere, economic growth that involves poverty alleviation and other form of human suffering can be sustainable ways of fostering peace rather than building weapons of mass destruction. Nuclear weapons are a capital intensive undertaking that consumes large share of a country’s budget. However, the large allocation is disguised under internal security budget allocation and hence cannot be realized by an ordinary citizen. If these allocations were invested in peace talks, poverty alleviation projects and other sustainable dispute resolution mechanisms, the world would be peaceful. In fact such constructive projects takes a short time compared to the time taken in assembling nuclear weapons. Elsewhere, offensive use of nuclear weapons is a cause for their assembly. Soviet Union engaged a portion of their national budget to developed hydrogen bombs and atomic weapons. This measure was needed by the fact that United State intended to have a large influence on “Baruch–Lilienthal” plan. United States contends that the motivation to assemble the weapons was because the host wish to pursue expansionists end against an enemy (Edwards 29). This has brought divisions across the globe on the contentious matter of nuclear proliferation. The need to have the weapons is not to compete among those with the weapons, but it is all over the world because everyday nations seek to expand their weapons. The current scenario that the Soviet Union and people’s republic of China utilize weapons to extend their influence is not the only fear. Adding to this list of fear is secret assembly of weapons by Iran, Libya and Iraq. Their assembly of weapons is reported not to add any influence because such actions did not benefit Soviet Union or China. The two countries intended to achieve their goals by initiating military assaults or blackmailing of world powers. States such as Iran, Iraq and also North Korea are secretly assembling nuclear weapons with the intention of intimidating others. They begin by intimidating their own citizens, which is a form of influence. Nuclear weapons have contributed to the security of the United States because the country uses them as a fear factor to enemies who aspire to attack. The weapons serve as psychological tortures because they country is known to have large arsenal. Radical Muslims from Pakistan and other Middle East countries are aware that attack United State is an impossible mission. This is because the revenge mission by United State would not be a good one. The Muslims who hold the notion that non-Muslims should be killed use nuclear terrorism to kill innocent people (John 9). Therefore, the role of nuclear terrorism has been to harm innocent people. It is usually referred to as Jihad. For example, in Iraq, radical Muslims constantly attack other Muslim sects who support western world democratic norms. The Muslims are sharia law compliant, and thus attack those who use democratic approach of governance. These countries, especially Iran, are also engaged with other unending rivalry with Israel on lines of religion and control. They are all endowed with a large arsenal of weapons, and they continue to compete among themselves. However, the world community is concerned about the growing rivalry because one of the countries might begin nuclear attack on Israel. This will in turn cause revenge attacks from Israel. This would cause the world worse catastrophe because of the geographic distribution of citizens in these countries. In Egypt, majority of the people inhabit heavily in cities. These cities are Cairo, El-Giza, Alexandria and “Shoubra el-Kheima”. In Syria majority of the citizens live in Damascus, Homs and Aleppo, thus causing death as compared to other countries. Thus, with this proliferation of nuclear weapons and increasing rivalry, Arab countries might not be peaceful anytime soon because they fear each other’s weapons. Countries also assemble nuclear weapons to balance the level of development. For example, if India and China acquire nuclear weapons, Pakistan would feel inferior and start to assemble its own arsenal. This beats the initial intention of assembling weapons because they served to protect host country from external attacks (Edwards 45). After assembly, competition then shift to coming up with the most advanced version. At this level, there is unplanned use of resources because the neighbouring country is seen as a threat. This is the scenario that has prevailed in the Israel and Palestine crushes because there is continued assembly of weapons for fear of the neighbouring country. Building a nuclear arsenal enhances the country’s position on the international standing. This notion is the motivating factor that has highly influenced United State and Russia to put up their weapons after the cold war. It is also both a purpose for and a result of mounting nuclear weapons in other economies, in transition. Citizens enjoy the pride that is associated with nuclear weapons prowess (John, 20). They also find pride from the security that the country enjoys. Though they developed their weapons illegally, North Korea is internationally recognized because it has a military equipped with nuclear capability. With the continued technological advances, biological weapons are becoming more common. Just as chemical or nuclear weapons, biological weapons are easy to assemble or make but are difficult to use during attacks. In addition, they are expensive to store and transport to the enemies’ destination. They are known to cause many casualties and thus more effective than nuclear weapons. Anthrax is a common biological weapon in use today ((Jeffrey 15). This is because it is ideal in numerous forms such as aerosols and sprays. The aerosol is used to attack by delivering it to a location with mass population. Urban centres fall victims of biological weapon attacks because of their dense population. Biological weapons are considered hard to use during attacks because of a number of reasons. They are made in a secret location as compared to nuclear weapons that are assembled in a known location. Thus, they come with an extra expense at the assembly stage because of hiding from the enemy. The biological agent used must also be lethal for the weapon to be effective and achieve its mission. Failure or long lag time on development of the biological agent compromises the initial intention of putting up the weapon. The lethal substance such as anthrax is of appropriate particulate size for the target to inhale it unknowingly and infect fast enough to cause the desired health effect. The manufacturer of biological weapon takes caution to avoid coagulation of the particles together in the air. This will prevent suspicion of any poisoning by the targeted population. Thus, the particles must disperse in the air yet be concentrated to cause enough poisoning (Edwards 48). This implies both the quality and quantity of particles must be sufficient. The nature of biological weapons is such a way that they easily get spoilt while in transit. The trick for the scientists is to find an efficient way of storing the agents before the attack. Good handling of this process ensures success of the mission. Usually, scientists administering the attack must not be victims of their own work. Thus, the appropriate clothing is used when attacking the enemy. The scientist also uses an effective aerosol system to disperse the spray (Jeffrey 13). Ineffective machinery sprays the particles in a limited area reducing the effectiveness of the biological agent. The altitude in which the spray is delivered to the enemy is also an important factor to consider. It should be elevated for it to spread easily and cover the whole target area within a short period. Commonly, helicopters are used to disperse the harmful agent and yet remain unnoticed by the people on the ground. Nuclear weapons and other weapon technologies have contributed little efforts towards peace. For example, United State has for a long time intimidated Iran and Iraq that it would attack the country with nuclear weapons. This will apply if the President Ahmed does not cease assembling nuclear weapons. The United State sentiments have contributed to instability in Iraq because United State attacked Iraq for claims of assembly of nuclear weapons illegally. MEMORANDUM To: President of the United States From: [ ] Subject: Support of Nuclear Weapons for Purposes of Peace Date: 22 / 03 / 2014 There has been massive proliferation of weapons of mass destruction in the wrong hands throughout the world. These weapons are chemical and biological weapons that have the capability to cause property and loss of life. However, they are not bad only that they sometimes get to the wrong hands. Therefore, there is need to continue strengthening nuclear and biological arsenal to ensure that it protects the rest of the world from attacks from weapons held in wrong hands. United States can be trusted with this responsibility because it has demonstrated to be neutral in the past. United State should also continue to strengthen its weapons because enemies are doing the same. Terrorists are good in strengthening their weapons compared to other states because they know the whole world is against their actions. Thus, united State is doing the right thing by strengthening nuclear and biological weapons. United State is wrong by strengthening its nuclear weapons because an enemy attack on them would kill many Americans. Thus, the country should strengthen the weapons, and at the same time boost their security. This move is good because United State will be sure of external and internal security. United State citizens value their security, and the government has to take the necessary measures to ensure it is guaranteed at all cost. United State influences the world economy, and thus important to protect it from internal and external attacks. United States should further invest in biological weapons to protect the world peace. With recent attacks on citizens in Syria with biological weapons, United State should invest in biological weapons to attack such militants. The weapons should be strong than those of enemies for United State to have command over militants. In addition, NATO should consider using nuclear and biological weapons to fight some of radical Muslims in Syria. This is because they are attacking citizens using chemical weapons, thus they should attack them with similar weapons. The country’s policy is very clear when and where nuclear weapons can be used. The government has adhered to this policy strictly and continues to gain trust from the rest of the world that it cannot misuse this privilege. With the continued struggle in the Middle East, US is a key player in the direction the conflict is going to take. The countries in conflict are not moving ahead with talks due to nuclear power equities. Therefore, a powerful store of nuclear weapons needs to come in between before making a peace deal. Thus, United States should strengthen its weapons to counteract those of Israeli and Palestine. In addition, it should take account of weapons of the supporting countries allied to the two parties. Conclusion In conclusion, there United Nations are responsible for the world peace and stability. The league should come up with new world orders to regulate nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction. The league should focus on areas that are in rivalry over boarders and other resources. Work Cited Top of Form Edwards, Goldberg. Nuclear Weapons: The balance of terror, the quest for peace. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1986. Print. Jeffrey Goldberg. “The Point of No Return.” The Atlantic December 2013: pages 1-27. Print. John J. Mearsheimer. “Why We Will Soon Miss the Cold War.” The Atlantic Monthly August 1990: pages 35-50. Print. Read More