Abstract This paper reviews the book "The Spread of NuclearWeapons" through comparing and contrasting the viewpoints of its authors, Kenneth Waltz and Scott Sagan. The claims of both Waltz and Sagan are examined as well as the larger arguments from realists and liberals regarding the spread of nuclearweapons. Waltz's realist arguments are contrasted with the more international liberalism of Sagan's protests against adding nuclearweapons in nations which have not traditionally had such programs. The current situation in North Korea is highlighted as an example for each perspective.
From the Paper "Nuclear weapons have become the most powerful bargaining tool in the world today, evidenced by the situations in North Korea and Iran and the considerable international unrest they have caused. Nuclear powers fear the addition of new nuclear nations, and nations which do not possess such capabilities see them as potential bargaining chips and defense mechanisms against the more powerful nations. In their joint project The Spread of Nuclear Weapons, Kenneth Waltz and Scott Sagan each defend their view regarding the spread of nuclear weapons. Waltz's realist viewpoint sees the increase in the number of nuclear nations as a potentially stabilizing factor in international relations and strongly believes that more nuclear weapons can contribute to stability in highly volatile areas, similar to the detente achieved between India and Pakistan after each of those traditionally antagonistic nations established nuclear capability."
Tags:nuclear, weapons, Kenneth, Waltz, Scott, Sagan, detente, North, Korea
This well-researched paper examines not only whether Japan has the capability to create nuclearweapons but whether or not Japan already has these actual weapons.
Abstract This in-depth paper explores the sometimes fragile alliance between Japan and the U.S. and ponders whether or not Japan is capable, from a technical standpoint, of creating nuclearweapons. This paper delves into the possibility that Japan may already have nuclearweapons in its possession. A large number of Japanese citizens and successive governments have favored continuing the alliance with the U. S. which involves enormous reliance on American security and military power to protect Japan from attack. This paper defines article 9, the renunciation of war, of Japan's Peace Constitution. The writer also discusses the economic benefits in developing and maintaining nuclearweapons. This well-researched and informative paper considers some of the means Japan could employ to gain greater military autonomy which includes completing the development and production of advanced weapons such as the FSX fighter. This paper also discusses the various groups and parties that oppose nuclearweapons including the Japan Council against Atomic and Hydrogen Bombs.
From the Paper "Considering that the huge military-industrial complex of United States is an often-criticized force in the American economy and that maintaining a similarly high level of expenditures on weapons was a critical factor leading to the economic and political failure of the former Soviet Union, many in Japan are understandably content not to have a defense industry of a comparable magnitude. But there are some Japanese willing, and even eager, to duplicate or surpass American state-of-the-art military technology. Those who wish to see Japan more independent of reliance on the American power, who believe Japan's future is dependent on an autonomous defense establishment, favor the concept of Kokusanka or, indigenization of defense production."
Abstract This paper details the four threats of nuclear annihilation that the Russian nuclear program has created: accidental launch due to a malfunction, failure of the Russian early warning system, a launch of a nuclearweapon because of a rogue commander, the detonating of a stolen nuclear warhead that has been smuggled out of Russia, and the detonation of a nuclearweapon that was built with Russian fissile material. The paper also describes the meager steps that Russia and the United States have taken to prevent a nuclear catastrophe. Most importantly the paper stresses that public awareness of this critical situation is imperative to prevention of such a disaster.
Abstract Since 2000, much attention has been given to Iran's nuclear aspirations. Many nations, including the United States, have accused Iran of developing nuclearweapons. Despite denials and promises of only seeking nuclear power for peaceful purposes, Iran is still under suspicion. This paper examines the factors that, in the opinion of the paper's author, influenced the present situation and the effects that even the suspicion that Iran was developing nuclearweapons capability could have on the Middle East and the rest of the world.
From the Paper "Due to the critical risk involved with this potential crisis, it is imperative that we first examine how the present situation came to be. After September 11th it was clear that "Iran was no friend of the Taleban regime, and [even] offered American forces operating in Afghanistan assistance", but with the United States assertion on the "War on Terrorism" Iran soon was seen as a threat by the Bush administration (Dunn 22). In fact the Bush administration has gone so far as to claim ,in the latest version of The National Security Strategy of the United States of America, that "We may face no greater challenge from a single country than from Iran" (20). The allegations however did not stop there; in 2002 the United States accused Iran of efforts to assemble weapons of mass destruction. Shortly after, a very tightly connected chain of events followed which only created more tensions in the situation. June 2003, the director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency declared that "Iran failed to report certain nuclear materials and activities" (ElBaradei par.1). Despite latter reports from ElBaradei stating that Iran had not breached any part of the Non-Proliferation Treaty, and no evidence was found of build nuclear weapons the United States in early 2004 once again claimed that Iran's intentions were to produce weapons-grade uranium. After months of firing back and forth between the United States and Iran, the UN finally stepped back in releasing a report indicating that "All the declared nuclear material in Iran has been accounted for, and therefore such material is not diverted to prohibited activities" (UN probe par 5). After resuming converting uranium in some facilities, Iran issued a fatwa or "holy order" forbidding production of nuclear weapons. Questioning the genuineness of such an order the United States still doubts the need for nuclear energy by Iran and its true motivations. As a result of basically not trusting the Iranian government, the United States "Argues that because of its past deceptions Iran no longer has any right to such a civil nuclear program" (Dunn 26). The United States skepticism is truly justified due to the enormous impacts a nuclear armed Iran would have on not only the Middle East but the entire world."
Tags: cold war, nuclearweapons, weapons, mass destruction, israel ahmadinejad terrorism, arms race, aggressive hamas hizbullah iraq afghanistan
This paper explores in detail the behavior of the U.S. towards Iran regarding the issue of nuclearweapons while examining America's methods of sustaining its hegemonic presence in the world.
Abstract This paper examines both sides of the nuclear issue by stating Iran has concerns regarding the attainment of nuclear technology but wishes to appear to the world as an advanced and well-developed nation. With nuclearweapons, Iran's influence in the Middle East could be increased which could entail an alliance with Iraq that would promote anti-U.S. sentiment resulting in undermining U.S. efforts in the Middle East in general. The writer of this paper focuses on the behavior of the U.S. towards Iran on the matter of nuclear non-proliferation and explains in-depth how the U.S. is using a web of approaches to maintain its world wide hegemonic presence.
From the Paper "The behavior of the United States towards Iran regarding the issue of nuclear non-proliferation could be viewed through a number of theories, but the most proficient analysis of this situation is achieved through regime theory. Foremost, we must understand the issues surrounding why the U.S. wants to halt Iran's desire for nuclear technology. Since Iran does not currently have nuclear capabilities, it would be nearly impossible for them to launch a trans-Atlantic attack for a period of 5-10 years. Although that possibility seems unlikely, the U.S. is promoting the prevention of such a future assault. Another possibility is that if Iran was able to hone nuclear technology, other Arab states such as Egypt and Syria would feel threatened by this considering the negative relations of Iran and Israel, and would not want to be caught in the middle."
Tags: U.S., nuclear, weapons, politics, middle, east
Abstract The paper intersperses facts about nuclearweapons with a narrative from the perspective of Bob and Loretta Lehman and Laura Fermi. The writer describes what it is like to be caught in a nuclear attack. The paper explains that before the nuclearweapons were used on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, there was very little testing done on the effects that a nuclearweapon would have. The writer describes the two different bombs used, one being a gun-type nuclearweapon and the other an implosion-type nuclearweapon. In conclusion, the writer expresses the feeling that it was not necessary to drop the bomb on Japan.
From the Paper "I was sitting at home, when Charles, (her son) ,came running came into the room screaming, we blew up all of Japan - this is how Loretta Lehman learned of the United States newfound power, the nuclear weapon. At first I was scared, because bob was still in Germany, but I then went and talked to my neighbors and they said that Japan was going to surrender, and the u.s. would win, that is when all my worries went away.
"Loretta's husband, Bob, was stationed in France, but was back on the U.S. side when the bombs were dropped, he had this to say. Back then, I felt that dropping the bomb was a good idea, but as time has gone on, and I have thought about it more, I am realizing some fault that could have gone along with it. After the war in Europe had ended, we were shipped to the U.S. and were going to be re-stationed somewhere in the pacific, but then [the nuclear weapon] was dropped, and the war ended. I asked Bob why he felt the U.S. felt the bomb needed to be dropped. [My company] felt that by dropping the bomb, the war would end sooner, quicker, and with less loss of life."
Abstract This paper examines the Treaty on Non-Proliferation of NuclearWeapons, which was signed in 1968 by 189 countries and which places limits on the amounts and types of nuclearweapons that a country can own. The paper discusses the goal of the Non-Proliferation Treaty and its limitations. The focus of the paper concerns whether total disarmament can be a reality and the United States' position on the issue.
Table of Contents:
Can Total Disarmament Be A Reality?
Shifting the Balance of Power
The Politics of Proliferation
Article X and General War Withdrawal
What is next for US Non-Proliferation Policy?
From the Paper "The US needs to provide the same transparency that it demands from others with nuclear capabilities. Cold War rhetoric and tactics are no longer valid stances in terms of nuclear proliferation. These additions to US nuclear policy reflect recognition that the atmosphere has changed in relation to nuclear arms and their use. New players in the game have caused a need to shift from a generalized nuclear policy to one that takes into account every individual circumstance. The US needs to adopt a new philosophy that reflects cultural sensitivity and that reflects the situation that exists between the US and each individual entity in the nuclear playing field."
Abstract A backwater of the Cold War since hostilities of the Korean War ended, has been the divided Korean peninsula. Since the 1990s, this issue has repeatedly captured the attention of the world, with the generally assumed rise of North Korea to the status of a nuclear power.
From the Paper "Since the 1990s the divided Korean peninsula, which had been a backwater of the Cold War since the end of hostilities in the Korean War in the 1950s, has repeatedly captured the world's attention with the widely-assumed rise of North Korea (the Democratic People's Republic of Korea or DPRK) to the status of a nuclear power. Given the status of the current dictatorial regime of North Korea as a virtual international "pariah" state - a state in which a massive military exists side-by-side with a primitive, faltering economy and even widespread famine - its nuclear capability has dominated all discussions of its foreign relations and strategies to engage it."
Abstract This paper examines how, between 1945 and 1992, over one-thousand nuclearweapon tests were carried out in the U.S.A. It looks at how the poor decisions of leaders has led to one of the largest scale environmental hazards that has ever taken place and how we now need to channel energy into cleaning up the mess. It discusses how investing into technologies that will help clean up the most severely contaminated sites is key to the survival of the environment and how the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act (RECA) of 1990 must be amended as well to be more inclusive of the people that weapons testing has harmed and more responsibility needs to be taken on the part of the state. This investigation follows the history of nuclearweapons testing in the United States and its environmental impacts. From site selection to pulling the trigger, the issues surrounding environmental equity and the nuclear tragedy are explored to reveal a horrifying story.
Outline
Introduction
Discussion
In the Beginning
The Dawn of the Age of Trinity
Shot Harry: A Shot to the Heart
"Downwinders": Decades After the Fact
Conclusion
From the Paper "The National Academy of Science (NAS) released a report discussing the long-term problems that downwinders will face in the present and coming years. What they uncovered is quite possibly the worst environmental hazard that has ever occurred. In some areas it has been suggested that it will take three hundred years, or more, for radioactive materials to reach safe levels and some areas may need to be under surveillance for several thousands of years (Fialka, 2000). The NAS report predicted that the long-term costs would be somewhere between one-hundred fifty-one billion to one-hundred ninety-five billion dollars and even more shocking is that some sites may never be completely clean. More problems are arising as urban sprawl continues and these areas face pressure from suburban development (Fialka, 2000)."
Abstract This paper employs a critical review of the body of literature, original research synthesis to determine if indeed a causal relationship can be found between the production of nuclear energy and the proliferation of nuclearweapons. An exhaustive statistical regression analysis illustrates that the relationship between the aforementioned variables is not significant and thus, that the hypothesis of correlation and causation cannot be confirmed. However, the paper goes on to provide evidence to suggest correlation between the proliferation of nuclearweapons and other factors such as global military tensions and certain categories of world events. The paper includes graphs and tables.
Paper Outline:
Literature Review
Proposal
Data Sources
Data Analysis
Results and Interpretation
Discussion
Conclusion
Reference List
From the Paper "The body of literature is generally in concessus with regard to the link between the production of nuclear energy and the proliferation of nuclear weapons. There is, however, disagreement over the method by which nuclear weapons and materials are spread. Some argue that terrorist organisations and rogue states are able to acquire enriched uranium from nuclear waste deposits. Others claim that these parties are more likely to invest in nuclear energy technology as a means of acquiring nuclear weapons while other still claim that the link between these two factors in negligible or non existent. "
Tags: cold, war, energy, korea, npt, reactor, terrorism
Abstract In this article the writer looks at several different types of weapons of mass destruction, which, when in the wrong hands, can do a great amount of damage. The type of weapons of mass destruction mentioned include biological weapons, chemical weapons, nuclearweapons, and radiological weapons. Throughout this paper the writer discusses the various types of weapons of mass destruction and looks at what the individual weapons are called. The writer then examines what these weapons can do and mentions the symptoms of these weapons. Further, the writer explores how they are used and the precautions that can be taken to protect society from them.
From the Paper "Although anthrax may be the most well known biological weapon, there are several other biological agents which can be used as weapons that are worth noting. These include the Ebola virus, Bubonic plague, Yellow Fever, Smallpox, Ricin, Botulism toxin, Saxitoxin, Rocky Mountain spotted Fever, Typhus, Q fever, and others."
"Biological weapons are not used strictly to attack humans; instead they may be used to attack crops and animals as well to disrupt an area's agricultural supply. Additionally, by attacking the agricultural supply, this may be a way of transmitting the biological weapons to human beings."
"One way to prevent succumbing to some forms of biological weapons is through good hygiene, in much the same way one can prevent the spread of everyday bacteria and viruses."
Abstract This paper briefly discusses the threat that WMD pose to America because of the trading of nuclearweapons. It discusses the treaty signed by most countries in the world and how UN control of the trade of these weapons is essential in preventing a disastrous nuclear war.
From the Paper "Weapons proliferation, simply defined, is the rapid increase or spread of weapons in the context of global security. If we are to measure the weapons capabilities of the world, the United States retains the lion's share: in 2002 the Economist estimated that American military spending would exceed 379 billion in 2003 (Economist, 6/18/2002.) For comparison's sake, Russia, the world's second largest nuclear power, had a total GDP of merely 346.6 billion in 2002 (Economist, 7/22/2003.) However, the "balance of terror" that underscored the cold war era was in many ways much safer than the current situation. Whereas "weapons proliferation" once referred to the number of weapons in existence, it has taken on a new meaning; it now is usually meant to reflect the number of political entities capable of using weapons of mass destruction. The number of such countries has increased beyond UN Security Council permanent members to include India, Pakistan, Israel and perhaps most notably North Korea."
Abstract The paper analyzes the interplay between North Korea and the United States in this debate over nuclearweapons. The paper explains that it is very likely that this event played its course due to a realist perspective; as such weapons imply mass power, so it is a power equation. However, the paper points out that this suggests that in the future, all debates regarding such weapons will remains international ones.
From the Paper "It is clear that the most significant news issue currently in the United States regarding North Korea concerns the debate over North Korea's ownership of nuclear weapons. News articles have repeatedly detailed the processes of these discussions between North Korea and the United States. Most of these articles are negatively based towards North Korea, implying that they will not give up and nuclear weapons in their possession, which in turn suggests that North Korea remains a threat towards the United States. However, with North Korea's recent promise to rid themselves of such nuclear weapons, one must analyze these events through the perspectives of global politics, through the theories of the realist, liberal and the radical to determine which system approaches functioned here in their entirety.
Abstract The writer asks the question whether a country can remain superpower if it does not have nuclearweapons. A few countries are analyzed such as United States, Soviet Union, Japan and Korea. It also looks at the move for nuclear proliferation and examines this trend.
Table of Contents:
I. Question and Thesis
II. The Move to Multipolar Notions of Power in the World?
III. The Specific Example of the Soviet Union: Military Strength, Economic Failure
IV. Japan: A Small Land still Rising?
V. Nuclear Proliferation
VI. The Middle East, The Common Market;Uncertain Kinds of Economic Strength, Millennial Ways of Becoming a World Power.
V. Conclusion
From the Paper "The cost of developing a nuclear capability, the political costs associated with their use, and the difficulty of hiding their development make them less likely to emerge as a primary method of state policy, says the U.S. Commission of National Security for the 21st Century. Thus we are assured we have less to fear than we ever had from a nation using a nuclear threat as a deterrent. (51) As any good student of rational-actor theory knows, the fear and threat of actual nuclear war is so great, it would be ridiculous, not to say M.A.D. for any nation to embark upon mutual destruction with another nation, should that other nation have nuclear weapons.
"This attitude discounts the increasing concern over the proliferation of nuclear weapons among nations in a world not dominated on every level by two major nuclear powers. It also does not take into consideration the possibilities of actors with vastly different interests than nations, such as terrorist groups, gaining access to such weapons. And from a less vital point of view security-wise, but of equal theoretical interest is the notion of how nuclear weapons function as bargaining chips in negotiation, regardless of their likely use as weapons, and as symbolic examples of state power."
Abstract The writer looks at globalization in a flat world as described by Thomas Friedman who outlines a situation that is even more dangerous than a time when only nation states had access to nuclear technology. In this article, the writer discusses that today, geopolitical conflicts based in ideological differences combined with the economic realities of globalism have given rise to a situation where the destructive power of nuclearweapons may soon no longer be confined to nation states. The writer maintains that it is a problem of such proportions and magnitude that its importance dwarfs the relative importance of nearly every other conceivable problem. The writer concludes that there are grave consequences of failing to control the global economy more effectively and of failing to increase our financial assistance to those regions where poverty rather than ideological sympathy for terrorists, motivates cooperation between those with access to nuclear material and those who wish to attack the United States.
Outline:
Background and History of the Problem
From the Paper "The Cold War bankrupted the Soviet Union by demanding so much economic investment that ordinary Russian citizens lived a perpetual life of extreme deprivation. Even the vast Russian military eventually was unable to pay many of its career soldiers and the many scientists and technicians responsible for safeguarding its nuclear facilities and materials. Since the end of the Cold War in 1990, many of its nuclear facilities have been shut down, but not reliably secured. As a result, vast amounts of highly enriched Uranium is susceptible to theft for sale on the international black market. Even the nuclear scientists and technicians still employed in the Soviet Union earn significantly less than what would be considered minimum wage in this country and therefore, have tremendous incentive to use their access to nuclear materials to supplement their incomes. "
Tags:weapon, technology, nation, dangerous, military
