Hans Blix (the UN inspector who could not find evidence of a nuclear program or any evidence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq), recently stated in the Financial Times magazine that, “The basic thing that drives proliferation, I think, is not the possession of (nuclear) fuel or spent fuel but fear and perceived security risks”. These perceived security risks apply as much to the Five Permanent Members as to the lesser nuclear powers, as well as to aspiring nuclear powers like Iran.
We have to devise a security system, based on effective, enforceable international law that guarantees trading patterns and adequate development of all nations, without the “threat” or false security of nuclear weapons.
This will not happen overnight. It will have to be the result of complex negotiations to radically revise the Charter of the United Nations, which is the bedrock of international law. At present the Charter is interpreted to favour the five Permanent Members (the major nuclear weapon states). It ignores or subverts the need for security of every other nation.
Advertisement
Only when there are a significant number of individuals who are aware of the way their own security is made subservient to the need of the major powers, will the reform of the Charter, and hence, the reform of international law be adequately negotiated, so that we may look forward to a world safe from nuclear threat.
There is a further, recent development. Because of the present turmoil in the financial markets, (the so called “credit crunch”), there is a move to re-negotiate global, financial institutions. As one of the major reasons for the present financial difficulties is the amount of money nations (especially the USA) spend on their military, is this also an opportunity to re-negotiate the global security arrangements?
Discuss in our Forums
See what other readers are saying about this article!
Click here to read & post comments.
2 posts so far.