The Role of Nuclear Non-proliferation in Determining World Affairs

Nuclear weapons proliferation, whether by state or nonstate actors, poses one of the greatest threat in the International security and world affairs. A nuclear weapon is an explosive device that derives its destructive power from nuclear reactions. Nuclear weapons are the most damaging weapons that have been created. There are two ways to make nuclear weapons:

1.fissile weapons (also called atomic bombs or bombs) and

2.fusion weapons (also called hydrogen bombs, H-bombs or thermonuclear weapons).

The way that the energy of nuclear detonation is different in these nuclear manufacture technologies. Nuclear fission produces the atomic bomb, a weapon of mass destruction that uses the force released by dividing atomic nuclei. When a free neutron hits one atomic nucleus of radioactive material such as uranium or plutonium, it knocks two or three other neutrons free of charge.

Nuclear weapons are the power of nuclear energy, nuclear energy used for 2 purposes; one is the civil purpose and another one is the military purpose. Using nuclear energy for the civil purpose is not banned. In the 1950s, attention shifted to the peaceful purposes of nuclear fission and its seizure of power generation. Today, the world produces a lot of electricity from nuclear power as it did from all sources combined in the early years of nuclear power. But there are some nations using for their military purposes too. nations have nuclear weapons to show their military power. “The nine nations that have nuclear weapons. Only five nations out of nine have legally recognized nuclear weapons.

North Korea has claimed to have carried out its first successful hydrogen bomb test, but which other nations have nuclear warheads. Just nine nations around the world have access to nuclear weapons, according to a report from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI).

In total, there are believed to be around 16,300 nuclear weapons spread between these nine nations.

The United States, Russia, the UK, France, China, North Korea, India, Pakistan, and Israel all control some nuclear weaponry. Russia and the US share 93 percent of all nuclear warheads, but they have been asked to reduce the number of weapons they have under the new START treaty (Treaty on Measures for the Further Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms).” (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/politics/the-nine-countries-that-have-nuclear-weapons-a6798756.html cited on 16th January 16, 2018) according to this news, there are nine nations they have nuclear weapons.

The main problem of the Nuclear weapon is disrupting the balance of power between the nations. In essence, the balance of power is a kind of international order. But theorists differ from the normal operation of the balance of power. Structural realists describe an "automatic version" of theory since the balance of the system is an automatic, self-regulating, and unintended consequence of countries striving to achieve their own narrow interests. Previous versions of the balance of power were more consistent with the "semi-automatic" formula of theory, requiring a "balancing" state to throw its weight on one side of the scale or the other, depending on which is lighter, to regulate the system. The balancing process is a function of human coexistence, with emphasis on the skill of diplomats and statesmen, a sense of community of nations, shared responsibility, desire and the need to maintain the equilibrium of the energy system. But because of this nuclear weapon, this equilibrium is disrupted.

Because of these nuclear weapons, nearest nations are most affected if another nearest country has nuclear weapons. Example if India has nuclear weapon our Sri Lanka, Pakistan and other nearest nations most affected by India’s nuclear weapon. Another problem is If terrorists have nuclear weapons, Problems will be multiple. For an example When LTTE period if they have weapons it’s difficult to beat them by Srilankan army and there are a lot of problems might be raised. “The threat from terrorists trying to launch a nuclear attack that would "change our world" is real, President Barack Obama has said. The world has taken " concrete" steps to prevent nuclear terrorism, he told the Nuclear Security Summit in Washington. But the so-called Islamic State (IS) obtaining a nuclear weapon is "one of the greatest threats to global security," he added. More than 50 nations were represented at the summit.” (BBC news 02nd April 2016). It shows how Problem will arise if terrorists have nuclear weapons.

The Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) is an essential element of the global nuclear non-proliferation regime and establishes a comprehensive, legally binding framework based on three principles.

1.States that do not possess nuclear weapons as of 1967 - one year before the treaty is opened for signature - agree not to acquire them.

2.the five States are known to have tested nuclear weapons as of 1967 - the nuclear-weapon States - not to assist other States in acquiring them and moving towards eventual disarmament; and

3.To ensure access by non-nuclear-weapon States to civilian nuclear technology and energy development. The objective of the NPT is to prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons and weapons technology, to promote the peaceful uses of nuclear energy and to promote the goal of disarmament. The Treaty establishes a safeguards system under the responsibility of the IAEA, which also plays a central role under the Treaty in areas of technology transfer for peaceful purposes. This treaty signed on 1st July 1968 and effective 5th March 1970. Any How most of the nations (1960 nations) signed with this Treaty. But There are 5 nations did not sign with this treaty. India, Israel, Pakistan, North Korea and South Sudan Did not sign with this treaty. It is one of the weaknesses of the treaty.

Scientists should be interested in the proliferation of nuclear weapons and see the role that technology can play in mitigating the threat. Although it is natural for scientists to want to simplify the problem in a way that makes it seem concrete and solvable, the formation of a very simple global model can lead to inappropriate, wasted and even counterproductive solutions. The tensions surrounding nuclear weapons over the decades have simplified models of problems, giving us some simple answers. Nuclear proliferation concerns should place constraints on the growth of nuclear energy, but there are no rapid reforms to the problem of proliferation. Unfortunately, scientists are the worst criminals who seek easy answers through technological reform. During the 1960s, this model led many physicists and others to predict that there would be 20 or more nuclear-weapon States by 1980. The failure of this prediction in the early 1980s led to a reassessment of this model. The main problem with the original model is that there is no essential need for states to produce nuclear weapons. For most states, nuclear weapons do not have a clear benefit for strengthening security, either as a component of a military strategy or as a political tool. States that have followed nuclear weapons have done so from their naive and theoretical point of view.

The continued success of the NPT requires that we strengthen the system and provide a variety of incentives for countries to remain within the system. Security assurances have provided incentives in the past for countries to accede to and remain in the NPT. It is not known how long it can last successfully, especially if someday the US influence weakens. UU. In world affairs. Other measures must be considered to keep the system united. In the original NPT negotiations, countries that have committed themselves as non-weapon States will, in turn, receive assistance to develop their civil nuclear energy programs. This was an incentive for countries not to abandon the non-proliferation regime, and at the time was a powerful argument for non-proliferation of civilian nuclear energy. We must remember that there is much greater optimism about the future of commercial nuclear energy when the system began; the prospects for nuclear energy were almost unlimited. Although this incentive was not strong enough to attract India and Pakistan, it was possible to attract North Korea to join it in 1985. At present, the negotiation of the NPT for most countries is designed for mutual security and cost reduction, Abandonment of nuclear weapons, the threat of nuclear attack is reduced without the enormous cost of maintaining and maintaining an independent deterrent. The Treaty itself has never been amended.

The treaty has been at risk over the past decade because of clandestine activity within the signatory states. It has been discovered that one (Iraq) has operated secret nuclear programs in defiance of its NPT obligations. The other country (North Korea) continues to resist the efforts of the International Atomic Energy Agency to verify compliance with its safeguards agreement under the NPT.

Some argue that a one-stage fuel cycle strategy is destined to produce future uranium shortages and plutonium recycling is inevitable to avoid rising fuel costs due to depletion of resources. While we appeal to the simple logic that all resources are limited and therefore should be conserved, there will be technological changes that generally reduce the costs of extraction and extraction. However, the upper limit of uranium cost would be the cost of extracting from sea water, which is thought to be ~ $ 100 / lb, almost eight times the current price, and depression. If this increase in the price of nuclear fuel will occur, the cost of nuclear electricity will increase by not more than 20%. Therefore, the economic argument for reprocessing, even in this extreme case, will not be convincing.

To date, the commercial nuclear industry has played little or no role as a bridge to enter the country into a nuclear arms race, and there are no known cases in which persons or subnational groups steal nuclear weapons facilities. However, this does not mean that there is nothing to worry about.

It is important to address the need of developing countries to increase energy supplies. To reduce their reliance on fossil fuels, it is desirable that the developed world share nuclear technology with them, with appropriate safeguards, as provided for in article IV of the NPT. It is time to consider with caution the increased use of nuclear energy under the most stringent standards of protection. Energy reactors (below cost) can be provided to host countries under the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). Other forms of energy production can also be exported under this mechanism, leaving the option of technology to a bilateral agreement. However, the recipient will have to ratify the NPT and accept the latest IAEA safeguards to receive subsidized reactors. A full range of initial inspections will be needed. Fuel cycles that produce materials that can be used for weapons in any part of the process cannot receive financial incentives. It will give more support to the nuclear non-proliferation in determining world affairs.