How committed is the global community to ending the threat of nuclear war? How much clout does the Non-Proliferation Treaty carry? Do economic trade relations imperil its importance. When will Non-Proliferation be taken seriously?
...Recalling the determination expressed by the Parties to the 1963 Treaty banning nuclear weapons tests in the atmosphere, in outer space and under water in its Preamble to seek to achieve the discontinuance of all test explosions of nuclear weapons for all time and to continue negotiations to this end,
Desiring to further the easing of international tension and the strengthening of trust between States in order to facilitate the cessation of the manufacture of nuclear weapons, the liquidation of all their existing stockpiles, and the elimination from national arsenals of nuclear weapons and the means of their delivery pursuant to a Treaty on general and complete disarmament under strict and effective international control,
Recalling that, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, States must refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations, and that the establishment and maintenance of international peace and security are to be promoted with the least diversion for armaments of the world’s human and economic resources,
Have agreed as follows:...
Bush was a lot of trouble. He monkey'ed around with the balance of power as if it were simply a matter of strategy. It wasn't and isn't. George W. Bush and Richard Cheney gave permission for too much nuclear activity on Earth and destabilized most of the confidence the world had that it could be contained.
Tuesday, December 19, 2006
Bush was a lot of trouble. He monkey'ed around with the balance of power as if it were simply a matter of strategy. It wasn't and isn't. George W. Bush and Richard Cheney gave permission for too much nuclear activity on Earth and destabilized most of the confidence the world had that it could be contained.
By Peter Baker
Washington Post Staff WriterTuesday, December 19, 2006
President Bush signed legislation (click here) yesterday permitting civilian nuclear cooperation with India, reversing three decades of nonproliferation policy in the interest of redefining U.S. relations with the world's largest democracy and reshaping the geopolitical balance as China asserts itself in Asia.
Bush, who has made the fight against the spread of nuclear weapons a centerpiece of his foreign policy, persuaded Congress to make an exception for India despite its not having signed the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Although critics warn that the deal could spark a regional arms race, Bush called it a landmark moment that finally relegates Cold War-era tensions to the past.
"The United States and India are natural partners," Bush said at a signing ceremony in the East Room attended by lawmakers, diplomats and Indian Americans. "The rivalries that once kept our nations apart are no more -- and today, America and India are united by deeply held values."...
By that premise, then the USA has natural enemies. It would seem as though Bush/Cheney wanted to insure that was the case. Placing nuclear proliferation in the hands of India not only imperils the people of India, it has the boat rocking over "The One China Policy." When does this gamesmanship with the future of our children and the children of other nation's stop? Bush/Cheney placed nations in opposition to each other so there were going to be NATURAL ENEMIES come hell or high water.
The circumstances with Iran provide a venue for the global community to set precedent in handling nuclear proliferation. I hope that is among the highest priorities here along with the safety of Israel, Europe, Arab nations and other continents.
I would think this would be an opportunistic time for China to work for greater peace without escalation of danger. It is a time for the USA, Russia, China, France and the United Kingdom to actually stand together to reverse the trend initiated by Bush and Cheney.
The nuclear threat can be handled, but, not if there is going to be opportunistic economies of weapons that continue to destabilize and increase capacity. The world is a lot smaller and getting even smaller with every ballistic missile built, sold or traded.
"The United States and India are natural partners," Bush said at a signing ceremony in the East Room attended by lawmakers, diplomats and Indian Americans. "The rivalries that once kept our nations apart are no more -- and today, America and India are united by deeply held values."...
By that premise, then the USA has natural enemies. It would seem as though Bush/Cheney wanted to insure that was the case. Placing nuclear proliferation in the hands of India not only imperils the people of India, it has the boat rocking over "The One China Policy." When does this gamesmanship with the future of our children and the children of other nation's stop? Bush/Cheney placed nations in opposition to each other so there were going to be NATURAL ENEMIES come hell or high water.
The circumstances with Iran provide a venue for the global community to set precedent in handling nuclear proliferation. I hope that is among the highest priorities here along with the safety of Israel, Europe, Arab nations and other continents.
I would think this would be an opportunistic time for China to work for greater peace without escalation of danger. It is a time for the USA, Russia, China, France and the United Kingdom to actually stand together to reverse the trend initiated by Bush and Cheney.
The nuclear threat can be handled, but, not if there is going to be opportunistic economies of weapons that continue to destabilize and increase capacity. The world is a lot smaller and getting even smaller with every ballistic missile built, sold or traded.
