According to Mohamed ElBaradei, the director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, as many as 49 countries now have the wherewithal to build nuclear weapons. For every country such as Libya, which abandoned its secret nuclear program in 2003, there are other countries, such as Brazil, considering the development of nuclear weapons.
The problem, said ElBaradei last year, is the inherent hypocrisy of countries such as the United States and Russia, who possess thousands of nuclear weapons, telling smaller nations they can't have any of their own.
Until the world commits to eradicating the nuclear weapons, ElBaradei said "we will continue to have this cynical environment that all the guys in the minor leagues will try to join the big leagues. ... They will say 'If the big boys continue to rely on nuclear weapons, why shouldn't I.'"
When the nation with the most weapons decides it wants to rip up treaties, build new weapons and use them pre-emptively, what does that tell the rest of the world? If those 40 or so other countries with the technical capability and/or the required material to build a nuclear weapon decide to do so, the world becomes that much more dangerous.
The need for a return to the careful diplomacy that ultimately reined in the nuclear menace has never been greater. The alternative is a frantic global free-for-all that could result in even more nations with nuclear weapons and fewer inhibitions about using them.
Randolph T. Holhut has been a journalist in New England for more than 25 years. He edited "The George Seldes Reader" (Barricade Books). He can be reached at randyholhut@yahoo.com.
Thanks, Randy, for doing your part to push the nuclear issue to the forefront. I urge everyone to read "House of War" by James Carroll (Houghton Mifflin, 2006). It's basically a history of nuclear arms in the US, yet engaging -- hard to put down even.
by
Russ Wellen (58 articles, 1029 quicklinks, 66 diaries, 335 comments)
on Wednesday, October 18, 2006 at 1:45:30 PM