I have seen how easy it is for nuclear contamination to occur, and how hard it is to clean it up…. Do nations possess nuclear, chemical and biological weapons because of fear of attack from some other nation, or is it mainly because without them the stronger cannot otherwise exploit the weaker?

— Andreas Toupadakis, quoted by Institute for Public Accuracy Press Release, February 23, 2000. (Andreas Toupadakis had recently resigned from the “Stockpile Stewardship” program on nuclear weapons and worked at Los Alamos National Laboratory. He was critical of US Nuclear policy.)

As the more powerful countries show less commitment to reducing their own arms substantially and continue to pursue their own “national interests”, they affect many others around the world.

• This has led to an increase in resentment against them.
• One option for nations that feel threatened has been to improve their defensive capabilities and increase arms purchases and spending.
• Neighboring countries will often feel the pressure to keep up, “just in case.”
• The military industrial complexes of the wealthier (and more powerful) nations will highlight how so many other countries have increasingly sophisticated weapons (often sold by the wealthier and more powerful nations!) and how that means that they should consider urgently increasing their own military spending and proliferation.
• An increase in arms leads to an arms race and an increase in insecurity.

Many nations around the world today possess, or have the means to procure, weapons of mass destruction. They may be nuclear, chemical, biological or other types of weapons, which can be delivered through a variety of means. It is mainly the more powerful wealthy countries that have such weapons although some poorer nations are also acquiring them.

In recent years, there have been movements and treaties to help control the flow and deployment of arms, be they landmines, small arms, or weapons of mass destruction such as nuclear weapons.

This part of the global issues web site starts by looking in to some of those arms control measures in the nuclear weapons arena and at some of the controversial decisions that have been made.

Nuclear Weapons

All four major nuclear weapons treaties are under pressure. Some UN member nations are skeptical of the commitment from the United States on the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. The Anti Ballistics Missile Treaty is under threat from the United States National Missile Defense Program. The Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty was rejected by the US Senate and Russia initially stalled on the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, START II because of the American missile defense program. Last updated Sunday, October 29, 2006.

Read article: Nuclear Weapons

Militarization and Weaponization of Outer Space

The US is planning to develop weapons for and ensure military dominance in space. This goes counter to the United Nations Outer Space Treaty that provides the legal framework for the use of space for peaceful purposes. A risk of an arms race increases when combined with the missile defense plans. Last updated Sunday, January 21, 2007.

Read article: Militarization and Weaponization of Outer Space

Star Wars; Phantom Menace or New Hope?

The US is also risking abrogation of the Anti Ballistic Missile Treaty by continuing with its Star Wars, or national missile defense system. However, critics point out that the program is very expensive (largely paid for by the public), that the technologies are risky, that the threat rationale isn't very strong and that this will affect international relations, and could lead to an arms race. Last updated Saturday, January 11, 2003.

Read article: Star Wars; Phantom Menace or New Hope?

The US and the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty

The Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) was designed to prevent testing of nuclear weapons and hence reduce the chance of an arms race. On October 13, 1999, the US Senate decided not to ratify the CTBT. This drew condemnation from then US President, Bill Clinton and his White House Administration as well as from various environmental groups, NGOs and other governments. Last updated Monday, August 07, 2000.

Read article: The US and the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty

India and Pakistan go Nuclear

India and Pakistan officially declared themselves nuclear capable when they tested some bombs in 1998. One of their points was about the double standards of the five powerful nations maintaining such weapons while everyone else could not develop them and that they were not doing enough to remove their capabilities. However, the tensions between the two countries themselves have increased and the two nations face many social issues and problems that require attention. Nuclear weapons are therefore even more costly an investment for these countries. Last updated Sunday, October 08, 2000.

Read article: India and Pakistan go Nuclear

Site Information Links

• Top of Page
• Home
• About This Site
• Privacy
• Site Map

Main Section Links

• Human Rights
• Geopolitics
• Trade & Poverty
• Environment

“Bad ideas flourish because they are in the interest of powerful groups.” — Paul Krugman

© Copyright 1998–2008