ipl-logo

The Pros And Cons Of Nuclear Weapons Proliferation

1032 Words5 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Realism and liberalism compare and contrast

In principle, the treaty aims at achieving a global non-proliferation of nuclear weapons as well as encouraging all participating countries to embrace the safe use of nuclear technology in view of promoting global peace and protecting humanity (UNODA. 2018). But realists and liberals have a different view with this regard and this is what the following sections try to reveal:
Nuclear weapons proliferation from realism theory The leading proponents of the realism theory include Hans Morgenthau, John Herz, and Hennery Kissenge who regarded the international system as a collection of sovereign states that evolved by Thucydides after the treaty in Westphalia was signed. Realists believe that it is crucial that countries have the means to defend …show more content…

Consequently, these beliefs could lead to a preliminary conclusion that the world will turn into anarchy system. According to the study presented by Ahmed (2007), this could be obvious by tracing back the early beginnings of global nuclear war development to the nuclear programs that started by the Soviet Union in response to the achievements made by the United States in the development of nuclear technology. Subsequently, other states such as France and the UK launched similar nuclear projects as a deterrent to potential invasion from the Soviet Union. Other states such as China, Israel, India, and Pakistan have launched nuclear weapon development programs majorly citing the need to protect their international borders and their interests in the region are the main reason for their involvement with the development of nuclear weapons (Rooth, 2015; Ahmed, 2007). Thus, it can be stated from the …show more content…

Peace, therefore, can be achieved through international treaties such as NPT, TBT and international institutions such as the Security Council, the UN, and the International Court of Justice to resolve international disputes. Many states, which hold liberalist views, believe on the role international institutions and aimed at achieving world peace through dialogue and cooperation rather than aggression. The liberalism ideology suggests that there can be sustainable peace and fewer conflicts between democratic states when there are cooperative solutions and all the participating states adhere to the regulations created by relevant international institutions such as the treaties and international safeguard institutions which can be called “democratic peace theory” (Rousseau and Walker, 2012); however, with regards to nuclear non-proliferation, there have been some allegations by liberalists of bias leveled at the international institutions that are seemingly under the influence of the five powerful nuclear states. These allegations have been cited as reasons why countries such as India, Pakistan, and Israel have refused to join the NPT and claim NPT is injustice. The lack of cooperation and equality among participating states to a large extent will hinder the efforts of the international

Show More
Related
1094 Words | 5 Pages

This is a powerful argument, as it appeals to the emotions of the reader by suggesting a devastating and irreversible outcome if nuclear weapons are not abolished. They warn, “Shall we put an end to the human race, or shall mankind renounce war?” This statement is a stark reminder of the potential consequences of our actions and the need to work together to prevent such a catastrophic event. The authors argue that the use of nuclear weapons would result in the destruction of civilization as we know it. They claim that the only way to prevent a nuclear war is to eliminate nuclear weapons altogether.

Read More
688 Words | 3 Pages

The U.S. should not abolish nuclear weapons because it's going to take more than just the U.S to get rid of them, the knowledge of nuclear weapons is out there, and lastly the U.S needs a range of options for their new type of adversaries. As a country of its people and their safety the United States can't get rid of their nuclear weapons. Besides abolishing them would take more than just the United States. As mentioned in Document D, “The United States cannot defeat these threats alone...it needs cooperation from dozens of diverse nations.”

Read More
887 Words | 4 Pages

Before his election to the presidency, Dwight Eisenhower sought to contain the atom’s destructive power (). Yet, in his first speech at the United Nations as President of the United States, Eisenhower argued for the normalization of the international proliferation of nuclear technology (Office of the President, 1953). The motivation behind his now famous “Atoms for Peace” speech illuminates an interesting contradiction between the obvious American nonproliferation objectives and the president’s political calculation. The key to understanding this contradiction is to separate Eisenhower’s contemporary political motivations from the consequences of the president’s choice to pursue international proliferation of peaceful nuclear technology.

Read More
862 Words | 4 Pages

In August, 1945 the Japanese were forced to accept defeat in World War II due to the terrifying bombs known as “Little Boy” and “ Fat Boy.” Harry Truman stepping up to take over the presidential job and making the decision for these bombs to be dropped after the death of president Franklin D. Roosevelt will forever be known as one of the biggest decisions in American history. Over the years Americans have accumulated questions such as why President Truman made this decision, if there were any alternative options for peace, and if President Roosevelt would have made the same decision. Regardless of any decision that Truman made, most people would agree that he was making decisions that were in the best interest for our country.

Read More
700 Words | 3 Pages

Should the U.S. have dropped the atomic bombs on Japan? Some people believe that the U.S. should not have dropped the atomic bombs on Japan, while others believe that the U.S. did the right thing by dropping the bombs. One thing both sides should agree upon is that the atomic bombs dropped on Japan ended the war faster than it would have if the U.S. did not drop the bombs. The atomic bombing on Japan was necessary for the war to end because it stopped the fighting and additional casualties that would have occurred if the war had not ended. The U.S. did the right thing by dropping the atomic bombs because they prevented the additional casualties that would have occurred.

Read More
1290 Words | 6 Pages

The United States dropped atomic bombs on the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, on August 6th and August 9th of 1945, respectively. This event resulted in the death of an estimated 200,000 Japanese people, a lot of which were civilians, and it remains as one of the most controversial topics in world history. People are divided on the belief that it was necessary or that it was unnecessary, each with their own valid points to back up their reasoning, yet, the bombing of Japan had more pros than cons and therefore was most definitely a necessary action in World War II. Most view the attack on Pearl Harbor by the Japanese as the reason for the bombing of Japan, there are a multitude of overlooked factors that were also partially the cause of the

Read More
653 Words | 3 Pages

In this book, Waltz present his neorealist arguments that nuclear weapon will enhance global stability and prevent war cause the more state that possess nuclear weapon will make the world more safer. In this issue, Waltz take a Cold War as an example to show how fear of mutual assured destruction (MAD) reduced conflict between United State and Soviet Union. In the past third of a century, conflict

Read More
502 Words | 3 Pages

The US is always in a threat as we have picked up many enemies whether it is North Korea, ISIS, or Russia. In 1942 during World War 2, the US launched the Manhattan Project, which was the project to produce the first US nuclear weapon. We completed the nuclear bombs and destroyed the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in Japan. Over 300,000 people died from these bombs essentially ending the war. These numbers demonstrate the amount people that were killed from 2 bombs.

Read More
262 Words | 2 Pages

The art of fear is essential in nuclear deterrence. Using the film Dr. Strangelove (Stanley Kubrick, 1964) I will argue that nuclear deterrence is hard to achieve when communication of nuclear capabilities is not well established amongst states. In this paper, I will use the film Dr. Strangelove (1964) to argue how theories such as deterrence theory, realist theory, security dilemma, preventative war, pre-emptive war as well as relative gains and zero sum game led to a failure to achieve nuclear deterrence between the United States and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. To make my argument on how more nuclear weapons may hinder deterrence, this essay will proceed as follows; I will firstly discuss the how nuclear deterrence and mutually

Read More
861 Words | 4 Pages

On December 8, 1953, President Eisenhower had a meeting with the United Nations General Assembly where he delivered his “Atoms for Peace” speech. This speech started the world on studying nuclear energy. According to an article by Ariana Rowberry, President Eisenhower said in his speech “…if a danger exists in the world, it is a danger shared by all; and equally, that if hope exists in the mind of one nation, that hope should be shared by all” (1). The Atoms for Peace provided technology and education for countries wanting a civilian nuclear program. What has led Iran from the ability to poses nuclear energy for civilian use to wanting to acquire an atomic

Read More
1718 Words | 7 Pages

Coming back to recruitment-related negotiations, today we were assigned the “Computron Pharmaceuticals” case. The assignment did not aim to help students get familiar with some basic concepts and tactics required in negotiation as in the “Salary Negotiation”. In fact, it focused more on job offer and what should be discussed as well as how to discuss them in the most effective way. I found this assignment really helpful for my job offer interviews as well as salary review in the future. Different from the role we had taken in the fist class (the candidate), in this case, we played the role of the recruiter.

Read More
862 Words | 4 Pages

NWS are defined as "those that have manufactured and tested their nuclear weaponry before January 1, 1967. " The NWS are United States, Russia, The United Kingdom, France and China. Every other country that is a member to the treaty is categorized as NNWS. It was established under the belief that the proliferation of nuclear weapons would increase the risks of a nuclear war. Thus, the treaty required the NNWS not to acquire, manufacture or seek assistance in the manufacturing of nuclear weapons or explosive devices,88(88 S. Paul Kapur, Dangerous Deterrent (2007), p.3.)while the NWS were to disarm and subsequently eliminate nuclear weapons.

Read More
932 Words | 4 Pages

Distributive justice ideologists attest that if physical collateral is a right, the conditions that contribute towards its development like shelter and food should also be basic rights. Through these premise, all Mexicans are therefore accredited toward specific set of negligible energy services that allow them to appreciate their well-being. People are obliged to have access to safe and clean environment; including energy that offers them a healthy a happy life. One of the major sources of energy across the globe is nuclear power which creates an unbreakable dedication whereby communities gain from development of electricity for many years. However, they are also expected to be ready to withstand the expenses of controlling those wastes,

Read More
862 Words | 4 Pages

Proliferation groups are trying to get the US to lead the way and destroying and disarming their atomic bombs in hopes that other countries will follow. Forster proposes these ideas in his own words. "The goal of the treaty is to "prevent the spread of nuclear weapons and weapons technology, to promote co-operation in the peaceful uses of nuclear energy and to further the goal of achieving nuclear disarmament and general and complete disarmament."(Forster). The US cannot just say disarm your weapons and not do the same themselves. The US needs to take charge and start things themselves.

Read More
1172 Words | 5 Pages

Most nations equipped with nuclear weapons claim that they rely on them for strategic defense, and they are vulnerable to various attacks without these destructive weapons. Even with the high risk of destruction and devastation, they would prefer to keep nuclear bombs active and ready to go when necessary. Scrapping nuclear weapons would work to a nation’s disadvantage because various hostile states are covertly acquiring nuclear weapons in large number. If they dismantle nuclear bombs, they will be vulnerable to attacks (Matsui). The United States has many pacts that say if countries get rid of some of their weapons they will get rid of some of there

Read More

More about The Pros And Cons Of Nuclear Weapons Proliferation

Related Topics

Open Document