As expected, the Iranians have broken the UN/IAEA seals at the uranium conversion plant at Isfahan, enabling them to continue conversion and enrichment activites. The Iranians - not unreasonably - argue that any bar on them producing fuel leaves them "dependent on an exclusive cartel of nuclear fuel suppliers - a cartel that has a manifest record of denials and restrictions for political and commercial reasons". Bush is said to be "deeply suspicious" of their motives, and who isn't? However, who can blame them for feeling justified in developing nuclear weapons, anyway? By their actions over the last few months, the U.K. and U.S. gov'ts have effectively destroyed what little restraint on nuclear proliferation may have existed.
Non-nuclear nations sign up to the NPT on the understanding that those signatories with nuclear weapons are committed to the cessation of the arms race, and to pursuing " ... general and complete disarmament". The non-nuclear states must themselves be "deeply suspicious", therefore, when they see the US Senate approving money for the research of "robust nuclear earth penetrators" or, even worse, for "reliabe replacement warheads". And then there's the news of Britain's atomic weapons establishment at Aldermaston being re-equipped - without any consultation in parliament - for the building of next generation bombs. How's that for showing "good faith"?
(The British rationale for this is that a nuclear capability maintains Britains international standing and influence. So; if you want international influence, get yourself some nukes, seems to be the moral there).
Then there's India. India, of course, refuses to sign the NPT, and has devepoled it's own sizeable nuclear arsenal. In response, Bush has proposed "full civil nuclear energy cooperation with India" and says that "international institutions are going to have to adapt to reflect India’s central and growing role", thus reinforcing the equation 'nuclear weapons = international influence' and adding further incentive for proliferation. Here's what the Iranians had to say about it: “India is looking after its own national interests ... We cannot criticise them for this. But what the Americans are doing is a double standard. On the one hand, they are depriving an NPT member from having peaceful technology, but at the same time they are cooperating with India, which is not a member of the NPT.”
One last point: I see, also, that the US are presently in negotiations with North Korea. That's admirable - but, to my mind, that does rather point to a further incentive for proliferation. Iraq had no nukes - Iraq gets invaded. North korea has nukes - North Korea gets negotiated with. Ergo; if you don't want to be invaded, get yourself well armed.
Non-proliferation, RIP.
Non-nuclear nations sign up to the NPT on the understanding that those signatories with nuclear weapons are committed to the cessation of the arms race, and to pursuing " ... general and complete disarmament". The non-nuclear states must themselves be "deeply suspicious", therefore, when they see the US Senate approving money for the research of "robust nuclear earth penetrators" or, even worse, for "reliabe replacement warheads". And then there's the news of Britain's atomic weapons establishment at Aldermaston being re-equipped - without any consultation in parliament - for the building of next generation bombs. How's that for showing "good faith"?
(The British rationale for this is that a nuclear capability maintains Britains international standing and influence. So; if you want international influence, get yourself some nukes, seems to be the moral there).
Then there's India. India, of course, refuses to sign the NPT, and has devepoled it's own sizeable nuclear arsenal. In response, Bush has proposed "full civil nuclear energy cooperation with India" and says that "international institutions are going to have to adapt to reflect India’s central and growing role", thus reinforcing the equation 'nuclear weapons = international influence' and adding further incentive for proliferation. Here's what the Iranians had to say about it: “India is looking after its own national interests ... We cannot criticise them for this. But what the Americans are doing is a double standard. On the one hand, they are depriving an NPT member from having peaceful technology, but at the same time they are cooperating with India, which is not a member of the NPT.”
One last point: I see, also, that the US are presently in negotiations with North Korea. That's admirable - but, to my mind, that does rather point to a further incentive for proliferation. Iraq had no nukes - Iraq gets invaded. North korea has nukes - North Korea gets negotiated with. Ergo; if you don't want to be invaded, get yourself well armed.
Non-proliferation, RIP.
