Talking About Nuclear Non-Proliferation. In A Cynical Sort Of Way

radiation-646218_1280

Alexander Nekrassov writes from London: The mess that America, Britain, France and their allies in the Middle East have created in the region and in the neighbouring North Africa is absolutely huge. The current state of things in Libya alone says it all really. And they can call their interventions whatever they like: exporting democracy, protecting innocent civilians, providing humanitarian aid and blah-blah-blah, but in reality it all amounts to meddling in other people’s affairs and toppling governments, in the hope of conducting an asset grab or having unrestricted access to oil and other mineral resources.

But imagine for a moment if Libya had had its own nuclear weapons. Would the international community, which nowadays seems to be limited to the US and several of its NATO allies, dare to intervene, even it if that madman Gaddafi had decided to whack every single one of his citizens? Nope, it would not have dared to do that. Just like it would never dare to attack that other psycho, Kim Jong Un, who is gradually starving his population to death, safe in the knowledge that his nukes keep the international community with it’s very limited membership away.

And if we stay in that cynical mode and imagine that the late Saddam Hussein would have had nuclear weapons at his disposal, operational and not the imaginary ones that George Bush and Tony Blair were talking about, then there would have been no invasion of Iraq and presently the international community – yes, that limited version of it – would not have been having all that unrestricted access to Iraqi oil.

So what I’m saying here is that the perception in the world exists and grows stronger that having nukes, especially at times when the international community – yep, that very same limited one – keeps interfering all over the place, to accommodate its narrow interests. And that is where we stroll into the complex area of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty that has a whopping 189 nations party to it, with only four spoilsports staying out, i.e. India, Israel, Pakistan and North Korea that had pulled out of it in 2003 when they basically violated every article in it.

So, what we have here, ladies and gentleman is a situation: we have four countries possessing nuclear arms that are not members of the proud community of nations that are party to the NNPT and we have loads of countries that have no nukes and no chance of acquiring any abiding by it. And we also have about a dozen or even more countries that are backing the treaty all the way, but are sort of thinking of getting nukes of their own, considering that the international community – I hope you still remember that it’s a very limited membership community – has become pretty aggressive in its behaviour and might decide tomorrow to get involved in some other country, out of purely humanitarian considerations.

Take Iran, for example. Now would it be making so much effort to make its own nuclear bomb if it didn’t have an example of Iraq, with the international community – yeah, yeah, the limited membership one – invading it on false pretences and sucking out all that oil? Call me a cynic, but if I were a mad mullah, I would be terrified at the prospect of joining Iraq with its unique democracy, doing my best to acquire that nuclear bomb as fast as I could.

And I suppose the same probably applies to many other proud nations that are having second thought about the nukes, say, in the Middle East, Africa, Asia and Latin America. Because no one can guarantee that the international community – the limited version of it – might not get frisky all of a sudden and start exporting that democracy of theirs to distant lands with serious mineral wealth in them.

What I’m implying here, people, is that nuclear non-proliferation is a great thing, if everyone is playing by the rules and doesn’t have any hidden agendas and a trigger-happy attitude. But if they do, then you can basically kiss this whole arrangement goodbye. Especially considering that we already have four countries with nukes that are not even signatories to the treaty.

— End —

2 Comments

Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *