Font Size: a A A

Nuclear Security And Proliferation:a Case Study Of Iran

Posted on:2014-01-17Degree:MasterType:Thesis
Country:ChinaCandidate:THEODORE OPPONG YEBOAH W F HFull Text:PDF
GTID:2246330398461523Subject:International relations
Abstract/Summary:PDF Full Text Request
My research begins by trying to establish the meaning of nuclear security and nuclear proliferation. It goes on by creating a hypothesis as to why states decide to go nuclear within the context. According to Sagan (1996) the notion that nuclear weapons are pursued only when states face a significant security threat is flawed. Nuclear weapons are more than simply national security tools:They also serve as political objects in domestic debates and internal bureaucratic struggles, and as international symbols of modernity and prestige.These additional motives go beyond the primary drive of achieving security, and therefore cast a doubt over the reasoning offered by Waltz and the "proliferation optimists"(in Sagan’s terms). This doubt encompasses both the rationality supposedly possessed by decision makers in nuclear states, and the security assurances labeled by Waltz as the central pillars of stability in a nuclear world.The importance of nuclear security and nuclear proliferation cannot be underestimated today especially given contradictions that have arisen from the different works that have been authored by prominent scholars.In this light, the research first tries to evaluate the impact of the various terminologies that make up the title of my thesis to establish the meaning they carry in relation to what constitutes the international regime that is responsible for nuclear security and non-proliferation (the NPT).The Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) is widely regarded and continues to this day to be so described in just about all the literature on the subject as perhaps the most successful multilateral treaty in history. It currently has188States Party to it, though it is not universal since three states (India, Israel and Pakistan) have never signed it, and North Korea purported to withdraw from it in2003, though the legality of this is yet to be ascertained. It is also regarded as the principal legal basis of the broader regime of rules and constraints designed to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons as well as of weapon-usable fissile material and technology.Despite these very positive features, the NPT has been regarded widely from its conception as being an essentially discriminatory treaty since it creates a very clear distinction between the states that had exploded a nuclear device prior to1967who are known in treaty language as nuclear-weapon states (NWS) and the far greater number of non-nuclear-weapon states (NNWS) who are prohibited from undertaking to manufacture or otherwise acquire nuclear explosive devices. Moreover, the NNWS with civilian nuclear energy programmes are required to conclude safeguards agreements with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) covering all their nuclear material, designed to verify that they are not diverting nuclear materials or equipment from peaceful uses to nuclear weapons or nuclear explosive devices.The voluntary and non-binding nature of most of the instruments in the current regime, together with its apparent stringent and unfair agreements give disadvantaged states reason to be reluctant to participate in global initiatives. This, among others are noticeable weakening factors of the whole international effort to stem proliferation and enhance nuclear security.This paper seeks to further with the help of chosen IR theories i.e. Realism and Constructivism gauge states’behavior within the regime and try to understand why some flout regulations while others abide by them.I came across a number of reasons ranging from national interests of states to perception of threats by states. In addition, there is a general concern among NNWS about the level of resources that states must devote to reporting duties related to their adherence to international commitments, as well as doubts about unfair intentions underlying requests of transparency and information sharing mostly when they come from western powers and multilateral organizations, erode in practical terms chances of full participation, and therefore, of achieving a robust nuclear security system. This phenomenon is one that is putting the validity of the nonproliferation regime in doubt as well as compromising the effectiveness of its mechanisms.Measures to revert such weakening factors were put under the microscope by my research to determine if they could be part of any future design of global governance.In this sense, ways to achieve broad cooperation as well as a clear understanding of risks of proliferation and threats to nuclear security and its consequences are brought to the fore in the course of my research work.The Iranian issue is used as a case in point to demonstratively highlight issues that are pertinent with nuclear security and the non-proliferation regime. The Iranian issue is one typical instance that undermines the regime and bears to make evident the flaws of the regime.Those in fear of Iran’s intentions conclude that Iran’s acquisition of nukes is not healthy for an increasingly unstable Middle East. Will there be a regional nuclear race for states to deter each other? And how would this play out with global security concerns, especially with all the insurgent and terrorist groups? Nuclear weapons would likely spread elsewhere around the globe, increasing the danger from such weapons in coming years. The more countries possess nuclear weapons, the greater the probability that they would actually use them.My research in this connection sought to verify If Iran indeed is a rogue state that is destabilizing international peace and order by deciding to pursue nuclear weapons capability with its uranium enrichment programme or it is only exercising its alienable rights to pursue nuclear power designed to address civilian needs.In this connection, the research probes facts in a very open-minded manner to try and establish some veracity or prove some falsehood. It attempts to establish if the fears are founded and investigate measures to take for a lasting solution if that is the case.On one hand, my research tries to neutrally delve into Iranian reasoning and make logic of their concerns with respect to their position in the international regime and subsequent treatment they have received from the proponents of the regime.And on the other hand, the research also tries to investigate what the accusing party is driving at and whether its actions are justified within legal confines.Lastly but not the least, the research attempts to maintain a direction of logic by identifying strategies that exhibit proportionality between the objectives pursued and the instruments used in their pursuit and that if they are the right tools for the right task, right tools for the wrong task or wrong tools for the right task.
Keywords/Search Tags:Proliferation, Nuclear Threshold, Uranium Enrichment, Nuclear Regime
PDF Full Text Request
Related items