The Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) that took effect in 1968 was the landmark of international cooperation during the Cold War. As of 2015, there are 190 nations as parties to the treaty with four abstentions and one withdrawal. While the cooperative importance of this treaty cannot be understated, it is not the only International Institution that has a prominent place in the non-proliferation, disarmament and nuclear safety realm. The question isn’t whether these institutions are necessary in the international community, but how effective these Non-Governmental Organizations and institutions are in an international community dominated by sovereign nations. These institutions may have member states or they may be a transnational cooperative based on private/public funding and have obtained authority by its actions and/or the support of sovereign states. In order to argue the merits of this diverse range of NGOs and international institutions in nuclear non-proliferation, disarmament and safety, I will look at the NPT and briefly at its custodial body, the United Nations Office for Disarmament Affairs (UNODA), the EU Non-Proliferation Consortium and finally the IAEA, or the International Atomic Energy Agency. In order to judge the effectiveness of these organizations, I will analyze their mandate, their operational flexibility and their authority in certain cases, such as the ongoing Syrian Crisis, the nuclear situation in Iran, and finally recent pressures in the Middle East with regards to the NPT, namely the relationship between Israel and nearby Arab states.
The NPT has been the called the most binding non-proliferation agreement in existence and has influenced all national and interna...
... middle of paper ...
...-547.
“About ISIS,” Institute for Science and International Security, accessed November 5, 2013, http://isis-online.org/about/.
Patrick Migliorini et al., “Iranian Breakout Estimates, Updated September 2013,” Institute for Science and International Security, October 24, 2013, accessed November 5, 2013, http://isis-online.org/uploads/isis-reports/documents/Breakout_Study_Summary_24October2013.pdf: 1.
Richard Engel and Robert Windrem, “Israel teams with terror group to kill Iran’s nuclear scientists, US officials tell NBC News,” NBC News, accessed November 4, 2013, http://rockcenter.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/02/09/10354553-israel-teams-with-terror-group-to-kill-irans-nuclear-scientists-us-officials-tell-nbc-news.
Ian Johnstone, “US-UN Relations after Iraq: The End of the World (Order) As We Know It?” European Journal of International Law, 15(4) (2004): 814.
In today’s society many countries and even citizens of the United States question the U.S. government’s decision to get in involved in nuclear warfare. These people deemed it unnecessary and state that the U.S. is a hypocrite that preaches peace, but causes destruction and death. Before and during World War II the U.S. was presented with a difficult decision on whether or not to develop and use the atomic bomb.
Mingst, K. A. (2011). Essentials of international relations. (5th ed., p. 78). New York, NY: W.W. Norton & Company.
The United Nations General Assembly 36-103 focused on topics of hostile relations between states and justification for international interventions. Specifically mentioned at the UNGA was the right of a state to perform an intervention on the basis of “solving outstanding international issues” and contributing to the removal of global “conflicts and interference". (Resolution 36/103, e). My paper will examine the merits of these rights, what the GA was arguing for and against, and explore relevant global events that can suggest the importance of this discussion and what it has achieved or materialized.
Wingfield, David R. "Why International Law Supports the Invasion of Iraq: A Short History on UN
The Korean peninsula has gradually been attracting international attention because of North Korea’s refusal of access for International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspection of its nuclear facilities. The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) was signed on July 1, 1968 by USA, USSR and UK. Subsequently, the NPT was opened for signature by other countries and enacted on March 5, 1970. Till date, except India, Pakistan and Israel, all the other 189 member-countries of the UN have signed it. However, North Korea withdrew from the treaty on April 10, 2003. (Jayaprakash) After the collapse of USSR, independent post-Soviet countries started to abandon their nuclear weapon capabilities and decided to cooperate with the international nuclear disarma...
"The Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty Has a Proud Record of Success « Nuclear-news." Nuclear-news. Web. 06 Apr. 2011. .
In September 1980, Iraq invaded Iran because of a territorial dispute. This led to a long drawn out war that cost many lives and billions of dollars in damages, with either side unable to claim victory. This paper will focus on the three things that distinguish this war from previous wars. First, it was an excessively protracted and attritive war, lasting eight years, essentially destabilizing the region and devastating both countries. Second, it was a disproportionate war in regards to the means employed by either side. Iraq was supported by Kuwait, the United States, and several other Western European countries, allowing them to acquire advanced weapons and expert training (History.com staff, 2009). Lastly, this war used three modes of warfare not seen in previous wars: ballistic-missile attacks, the use of chemical weapons, and attacks on oil tankers in the Persian Gulf (History.com staff, 2009).
International organizations such as NATO and the UN are essential not only for global peace, but also as a place where middle powers can exert their influence. It is understandable that since the inception of such organizations that many crises have been averted, resolved, or dealt with in some way thro...
Waltz, K. (2012, July/August). Why Iran Should Get the Bomb. Global. Retrieved January 17, 2014, from http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/137731/kenneth-n-waltz/why-iran-should-get-the-bomb
This conflict began developing in 1994 when North Korea announced its intentions to withdraw from the NPT. This led to the US and North Korea signing the Agreed Framework. Under this agreement, North Korea agreed to stop its illicit plutonium production in exchange for increased aid from the United States. While this agreement broke down in 2002, the Six-Party Talks restarted the efforts to stop North Korea from gaining nuclear weapons, involving the aforementioned North Korean, South Korea, Japan, China, Russia, and the United States. This le...
One of the foremost growing concerns in the modern globalized world is the increasing rate of nuclear proliferation. Coupled with the burgeoning number of nuclear devices is the threat of a terrorist possibly obtaining a weapon of such magnitude. While one could argue that the rising number of states with nuclear capability is a disturbing prospect, particularly as many pursue such capabilities without the approval of the “traditional” nuclear powers, terrorists in possession of nuclear arms presents the most horrific outlook concerning nuclear proliferation. Terrorist groups, unlike states, are not organized governmental bodies, which complicates any means of formalized diplomacy or negotiation. Furthermore, unlike as compared to a state, one cannot formally declare war on a terrorist group, thus causing difficulties in regards to concerns of specific conflicts or targets. It is not as if one could penalize a terrorist group with economic sanctions or any other means states employ to deter threats from and intimidate one another. The globalized world has created a form of terrorism that knows no borders, and it would be very difficult to exert one’s will on a terrorist group, at least on a large scale. The coinciding fact that terrorists do not conduct warfare in the same manner as states do makes them increasingly unpredictable. A terrorist employment of a nuclear arm would not occur during an organized conflict; rather it would be used in a terrorist attack without warning. And due to the growing fervor of fundamental religious terrorism, there is a greater willingness among terrorists to sacrifice their own lives in pursuit of their goals. These combined elements create a frightening world in which today’s most astounding new threat possesses weapons of the most awesome power.
*Throughout the 1920s Germany demanded equality.Anglo-French differences over Germany were already great and these spilled over into the area of disarmament as Britain again sympathised with the German cause.
From the creation of nuclear weapons at the start of the Cold War to today, the world has experienced struggles fueled by the want of nuclear power. The bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the Cuban Missile Crisis, and Iran’s nuclear weapon program are some of the most important conflicts over nuclear weapons. Thanks to the use of nuclear weapons in 1945 to end World War II, the world has come extremely close to a nuclear war, and more countries have began developing nuclear power. Unmistakably, many conflicts since the start of the Cold War have been caused by nuclear weapons, and there are many more to come.
The System-level of analysis shows that the Iraq Crisis (2003–present) is not a domestic conflict as it involved international actors like UN, IAEA and countries like USA. In 1991, after the second Gulf War, UN enforced the destruction of weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) on Iraq. The UN condemnation of Iraq was crucial to preserve its authenticity. The UNMOVIC and IAEA had been responsible to check Iraq's acquiescence with its responsibility to eradicate WMDs (UN Chronicle, 1991). Iraq’s non-cooperation with inspection agencies by obstructing the inspection from 1997 to 2002 resulted in massive international pressure and strengthening USA’s doubts on Iraq. The apprehe...
Thakur, R. & Sidhu, W. P. S., 2006. The Iraq Crisis and World Order: Strutural, Institutional and Normative Challenges. Tokyo: United Nations University Press.