@@ If the NPT cannot decrease the threat of nuclear war from conspicuously hostile nations, it should be abandoned altogether @@
Arash
February 3, 2006
Time to scrap the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty
By Mike Whitney
“Nothing in this Treaty shall be interpreted as affecting the inalienable right
of all the Parties to the Treaty to develop research, production and use of nuclear
energy for peaceful purposes without discrimination” -- Article 4 of the 1968
Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT)
http://www.un.org/events/npt2005/npttreaty.html
* There’s only one country that has ever used nuclear weapons.
* There’s only one country that has used nuclear weapons on civilian population
centers.
* There’s only one country that has ever threatened to use nuclear weapons on
non-nuclear countries.
* There’s only one country that has over 10,000 nuclear weapons many of which are on
hair-trigger alert for enemies real or imagined.
* There’s only one country that has developed a regime of low-yield, bunker-busting,
“usable” nuclear weapons; suggesting that they could be legitimately used, not to
deter aggression or to stave off an imminent threat, but simply to eliminate the
“suspicion” of weapons programs.
* There’s only one country that justifies unprovoked aggression (preemption) in its
National Security doctrine; allowing it to attack any potential rival to its global
dominance.
* There’s only one country that currently occupies a Muslim nation of 25 million
inhabitants without any proof of an imminent threat, weapons-systems, or territorial
aggression.
The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT)
-----------------------------------------------------------
The purpose of the NPT (Non-proliferation Treaty) is to reduce or eliminate the
development of nuclear weapons. If it is to have any meaning at all it must be
directed at nations that not only have weapons, but that demonstrate a flagrant
disregard for the international laws condemning their use. The IAEA should focus its
attention on those states that have a clear record of territorial aggression,
military intervention, or who consistently violate United Nations resolutions.
In its present form the IAEA and the NPT are utterly meaningless. Rather than leading
the world towards nuclear disarmament, the agency and the treaty have simply ignored
the misbehavior of the more powerful nations and humiliated the non-nuclear states
with spurious accusations and threatening rhetoric.
The NPT was never intended to be a bludgeon for battering the weaker nations; nor was
it set up as a de facto apartheid system whereby the superpower and its allies can
lord above the non nuclear states coercing them to act according to their diktats. It
was designed to curb the development of the world’s most lethal weapons; eventually
consigning them to the ash heap.
The political maneuvering surrounding Iran’s “alleged” nuclear weapons-programs
demonstrates the irrelevance and hypocrisy of the current system. As yet, there is no
concrete evidence that Iran is in non-compliance with the terms of the treaty. That
hasn’t deterred the Bush administration from intimidating its allies and adversaries
alike to assist them in dragging Iran before the Security Council. The Bush
administration is asking the Security Council to enforce “additional protocols” which
will preclude Iran from enriching uranium for use in electric power plants, a right
that is clearly articulated in the NPT.
Article 4 section 2 states:
“All the Parties to the Treaty undertake to facilitate, and have the right to
participate in, the fullest possible exchange of equipment, materials and scientific
and technological information for the peaceful uses of nuclear energy”.
Iran’s determination to enrich uranium is protected under international law and
should not be abridged to accommodate the regional ambitions of the United States. To
concede their legal rights would strike a blow to the principle of international
agreements; implying that the Bush administration alone has the final say-so on
issues of global concern.
Why should Iran accept a standard for itself that is different than that for every
other signatory of the NPT?
No nation should willingly accept being branded as a pariah without evidence of
wrongdoing.
The fact that the United States is occupying the country next door and has yet to
provide a coherent justification for the invasion is a poignant reminder of the
irrelevance of both the United Nations and the IAEA. The two organizations have
remained resolutely silent in the face of the massive incidents of human rights
abuses, war crimes, and crimes against humanity. While Iran is roundly condemned by
heads-of-state and the corporate media, the greatest crime of our generation
continues into its third year without reproach from the world body. The international
community simply looks away in fear.
This alone should illustrate the ineffectiveness of the institutions that are
designed to keep the peace.
If the ruling body at the IAEA is to have any relevance, it must direct its attention
to the real threats of nuclear proliferation posed by those nations that consider
nuclear weapons a privilege that should be limited to a certain group of elite
states. If the IAEA cannot perform its duties in a neutral manner that respects the
rights of all nations equally, it should disband and abolish the NPT without delay.
If the IAEA is uncertain about the real threats to regional peace, they should take
note of the many recent polls which invariably list the same belligerent nations as
the leading offenders. It is these countries that should be scrutinized most
carefully.
It is not the purview of the IAEA to keep the weaker nations out of the nuclear club.
That simply enables the stronger states to bully their enemies with threats of using
their WMD. In fact, it’s plain to see that the current disparity in military power
has created a perilous imbalance between nations which is rapidly spreading war
throughout the world.
One only has to look at Haiti, Afghanistan, Iraq or Kosovo to see the glaring
failures of the unipolar model; where the military prowess of one country is so great
it is emboldened to resolve its differences through conflagration. The NPT was not
created to facilitate the imperial ambitions of the superpower, but to protect the
innocent from the increasing likelihood of nuclear holocaust.
If the NPT cannot decrease the threat of nuclear war from conspicuously hostile
nations, it should be abandoned altogether.
http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_474.shtml
Kavik Kang
news:%wlFf.2343$_l....@newscontent-01.sprint.ca...
>
You might be right. If "conspicuously hostile nations" such as Iran are
able to use the NPT to actually HELP them create nuclear weapons, maybe it
should be abandoned all together, since preventing that very thing was the
only reason that it was created in the first place. No other reason, that
was the only reason for it's creation in the first place. So you may be
right...