Pros And Cons Of Nuclear Proliferation

1590 Words7 Pages
NUCLEAR PROLIFERATION Nuclear proliferation is the spreading of nuclear weapons and manufacturing them in nations that are not part of the Non Proliferation treaty, NPT. It is said that to have these weapons mean the instability of other nations sovereignty and that it could cause threat to other nations. 189 nations signed a treaty called the NPT or Non Proliferation treaty stating that they would not be involved in manufacturing nuclear weapons or spreading. This was not signed by a few countries that will be taken a look at closely later. These countries are, India , Pakistan, Israel and North Korea. The birth of the Nuclear weapon was back during World War 2. The united states of America, Canada, japan, UK, USSR and Germany had conducted…show more content…
This was due to the rapid advancement in firearms that were later witnessed in World War 1, and the conference was called by the Tsar of Russia, Nicholas II. Second and third Hague Conferences were called for in 1907 and 1915. The second successful but the third was not accomplished due to the eruption of the first world war. The league of nations was set up after the first world war which was aimed at reducing arms. Also, the Washington Naval Conference also came about which had the aimed at the five great naval powers, namely the United States, Japan, China, France, Britain, Italy, Belgium, Netherlands, and Portugal. The League of nations however was not very successful in achieving its goals. In this period as well, the Geneva Conference also came about to ban Chemical weapons during war. This was in 1925. After world war two was finally over, the Baruch Plan was introduced in 1946. It was aimed at averting the nuclear arms race. However, this plan was rejected by the Soviet Union. In 1953, President Dwight D. Eisenhower gave a speech, Atoms for Peace, it led to the International Atomic Energy Agency to be set up in 1957 and was aimed at promoting peaceful uses of nuclear…show more content…
Some are in the opinion that when it comes to having nuclear weapons countries will be much more safer having them. Reason being, it will deter other nations from even thinking of causing issues with their country. Through this theory they say that it will bring about world peace. It is well known, the devastating effects of nuclear weapons. If launched it could wreck an entire nation depending on its size. This was the opinion of Kenneth Waltz. It is the known as mutually assured destruction or MAD. One example he gave was that during the cold war, it was the only time 2 great nations did not come into military conflict and that was because both nations had with them nuclear weapons. Besides that, some say yes, it is true that nations should have nuclear weapons but only selected nations. That being for the sole cause of balancing power insuring that war will not breakout again, in this case Post- cold war Europe. This was the opinion of , Professor Mearsheimer. Also, there are concerns about other things, mainly the nuclear weapons fall into the hands of other than the government. What would they use it for and what if it falls into the hands of terrorists. Back in the day during the cold war, the USSR and America were both close to a great destruction. This was caused by the threat of nuclear weapons. Thus the question still is there, whether or not these weapons may be used or

More about Pros And Cons Of Nuclear Proliferation

Open Document