Detailed Nuclear Proliferation Presentation


Published on

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Detailed Nuclear Proliferation Presentation

  1. 1. Nuclear Proliferation in the WorldShould America try to slow the acquisition of Nuclear Weapons in HostileNations?Nic Newmark8th Grade Project (B-Odd)The Walker SchoolMr.SurkanDecember 14, 2010Word Count: 1,059
  2. 2. Newmark 2Introduction on Nuclear Proliferation Many countries around the world are starting to gather nuclear material, including NorthKorea who has just found a major uranium deposit, should we be worried? Nuclear Non-Proliferation, the reduction of acquiring nuclear weapons, may seem harmless, but the risks of itmay surprise some people. The main reason for Nuclear Proliferation is to stop the spread ofNuclear Weapons to Hostile Nations. While Nuclear Non-Proliferation does stop the spread ofnuclear materials to potentially hostile nations, it does have its risks.What the Experts Say about NuclearProliferation The NPT (Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty) is the most widely excepted weaponsagreement in the world. Only three countries, Israel, India, and Pakistan, have not signed thetreaty. “As of June 2003, all members of the United Nations except Israel, India, and Pakistanhad signed the NPT. However, one signatory, North Korea, had recently threatened to withdrawfrom the Treaty.”(Njolstad, Olav). This shows that even though the NPT exceeding accepted,there are still threats of having some countries disagree with the terms and conditions of thetreaty. “The very first major nuclear arms control agreement was the Limited Test-Ban Treaty of1963. The LTBT (Limited Test-Ban Treaty) prohibited nuclear explosions in the atmosphere, inouter space, and under water. This treaty was motivated first of all by a desire to reduce andcontain the health hazards caused by radioactive fall-out from nuclear explosions in theatmosphere. Due to the fact that many of the radioactive isotopes that were spread around theglobe in the wake of such explosions have a lifetime of many tens or hundreds or even thousandsof years, the continuation of atmospheric testing was likely to cause additional cancer deaths and8gpzo_reserachpaper_Newmark_v06 5/23/2011
  3. 3. Newmark 3other serious health problems on a large scale for many generations to come.” (Njolstad, Olav)the reason why this treaty was created was to insure the welfare of people who would be affectedby radiological fallout from Nuclear Weapons testing. This treaty worked because it helped keepthe power of nuclear weapons away from those who did not need to have anything to do withthem. “Ever since the Agency was founded in 1957, its safeguards system has provided anindispensable Instrument for nuclear non-proliferation and peaceful nuclear co-operation. InRecognition of this, the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) makes itmandatory for all non-nuclear-weapon States (NNWS) parties to conclude comprehensively. “Safeguards agreements with the IAEA [International Atomic Energy Agency], and thusput all of their nuclear material under Safeguards. Article III of the NPT provides that all NNWSmust “accept safeguards, as set forth in an agreement to be negotiated and concluded with theIAEA, for the exclusive purpose of verification of the fulfillment of its obligations assumedunder [the NPT]…” Such negotiations are to be initiated no later than on the day that the Statedeposits its instrument of ratification to the NPT, and concluded within 18 months.” (Wagramer,Strasse) Nuclear Proliferation is a very controversial topic. One reasons for this is that there are sobad and good outcomes. One good outcome of Nuclear Non-Proliferation (taking away NuclearWeapons) is that terrorist groups like, al-Qa’ida, would not have the nuclear resources that theywould need to start a nuclear war. A bad outcome of Nuclear Non-Proliferation is that the peoplewe do take the Nuclear Weapons away from, could become even more angry and hostile.8gpzo_reserachpaper_Newmark_v06 5/23/2011
  4. 4. Newmark 4Original Research: Nuclear Proliferation A survey on Nuclear Proliferation was conducted by Nic Newmark at The WalkerMiddle School, in Marietta GA, on November 2nd and 3rd. In this survey, there were 38respondents, 19 of them were female, and 19 of them were male. Of the 38 respondents, seven of them were the age of 11-12; twenty-one of them were12-13; five of them were 13-14, and four of them were 14+. In the question asking if Nuclear Non-Proliferation’s Risks outweigh its benefits, or visa-versa, 10 out of the 36 respondents said that the benefits out way the risks. 23 said that the risksout way the benefits. But 3 were neutral on the matter. In another question, respondents were asked if they thought that, if American were to tryto slow the acquisition of Nuclear Weapons by hostile nations that those nations would becomeinfuriated. 26 of the 34 people who answered this question said yes. 7 said no, and 2 thought itcould be both. The final question in the survey was, do you think that Nuclear Proliferation is too risky?21 out of the 35 people who answered this question said yes. 5 said no, and 9 had no opinion onthis question. In an analysis of this survey, it turned out that, in question one, 50% of the respondentwere male and the other 50% was female. In question two, 10% were 11-12, 55% were 12-13,13% were 13-14, and 10% were 14 or older. In question three 27.7% said the benefits of Nuclear Proliferation outweigh the risks,63.8% said the risks outweigh the benefits, and 8.3% said they were neutral. In question four 76.4% said answered yes to the question that hostile nations wouldbecome infuriated if America were to try to take their nuclear weapons. 20.5% said no, and 5.8%8gpzo_reserachpaper_Newmark_v06 5/23/2011
  5. 5. Newmark 5said it could be both. In the final question of the survey 60% said yes to nuclear proliferationbeing to risky, 14.2% said no, and 25.7% had no opinion. (Newmark Survey) While we should be worried about other nations and their Nuclear Programs, Americashould not lets those fears stop the slowing of Nuclear Programs in Hostile Nations. Even thoughNuclear Non-Proliferation does stop the spread of Nuclear Weapons to Hostile Nation, it can berisky at times,8gpzo_reserachpaper_Newmark_v06 5/23/2011
  6. 6. Newmark 6Works CitedBarack Obama’s Plan for Nuclear Disarment. AskObamaNow. Youtube. Jan. 05 2008. Online VideoCozic, Charles P. Nuclear Proliferation: Opposing Viewpoints. Greenhaven Press. Print.ElBaradei, Dr. Mohamed. “Nuclear Proliferation and the Potential Threat of Nuclear Terrorism.” Nuclear Age Peace Foundation, 8 November 2004. Web. 28 September 28 2010. general-threat-of-nuclear-terrorism.html.Goodenough, Patrick. “Pakistan, A Nuclear Proliferator, Will Chair U.N. Nuclear Watchdog Agency.”. CNN News, 28 Sept. 2010. Web. 9/28/10. http://, Nic. “Nuclear Proliferation Survey.” Survey. 3 Nov. 2010.Njolstad, Olav. “The Development and Proliferation of Nuclear Proliferation.”, 19 June 2003.Web., Strasse. “IAEA Safeguards Overview: Comprehensive Safeguards Agreements and Additional Protocols.” <> IAEA, No Date. Web.8gpzo_reserachpaper_Newmark_v06 5/23/2011