Treaty of Nuclear Non-Proliferation Essay Example

by the economic and the diplomatic measures. During the Second World War, the military was the primary development of the nuclear technology. There was the making of the two atomic bombs from the uranium-235 and the plutonium-239 and dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki respectively in Japan during the year 1945 thereby bringing the long war to an abrupt end. There was then the turning of the attention to the civil applications. During half a century, there was the enabling of the access by the nuclear technology to a source of energy that was virtually unlimited during the time when there was the rising of the constraints on the fossil fuels usage. There was, therefore, the framing of the question of the extent and the ways that the generation of the nuclear power contributed to the alleviation of the risk from the nuclear weapons. Therefore, the nuclear non-proliferation treaty erupted to prevent the multiplication of the nuclear weapons.

It also played the role of curbing the conversion of the civil uranium to the uses by the military (Perkovich, 2008). The International Atomic Energy Agency systems of safeguarding played this role under the NPT. It involved the cooperation in the development of the nuclear energy and at the same time ensure that the civil uranium, the plutonium, and the other associated plants were only used for the purposes of the peaceful missions and thereby not contributing in any manner to the proliferation of the programs of the nuclear activities. During the year 1995, there was the indefinite extension of the NPT, and there was also the widening of its scope to involve the nuclear activities that had not

been undeclared. There was the renouncing of the nuclear weapons by most of the countries and the recognition that the acquisition of the nuclear weapons would instead of enhancing the national security otherwise threaten it. There was, therefore, the embracing of the NPT as the public commitment to the use of the nuclear technology and the materials for the peaceful purposes only.

NPT also played the role of banning all the members of the treaty apart from the Russia, France, China, United Kingdom and the United States from possessing the nuclear weapons and committing those five exceptional states to the eventual elimination of their atomic arsenals (Educational Foundation, 1946). The treaty also offered the norms as well as the foundation of the worldwide regime that prevented the spreading of the nuclear weapons across the globe. The one hundred and eighty-seven states that subscribed to the NPT including all the significant states of the concern apart from the India, Pakistan, Israel and the arguably North Korea was liable to the banning of all the nuclear weapons. Regarding the Ambassador, Robert Grey, who was the former control moderator of the United States, the NPT was in some ways an agreement that was significant as the charter of the United Nations itself. There was also the believe that there was the battering of the regime of the NPT and therefore the need of strengthening it.

Moreover, the NPT played the role of spreading the news for the necessity of the substantial reduction of the nuclear arms if not complete disarmament that increasingly took shape. For instance, in April 2009, the president of the United States at that time reignited the

global efforts of non-proliferation through the landmark speech at Prague. Subsequently, in the same year in September, the United Nations Security Council passed the Resolution 1887 unanimously that called for the increased efforts of the total nuclear disarmament triggered by the NPT. There were the heightened appeals by the other member states to the nations like the United States, Israel, and Iran to follow the same route of disarmament.
The effectiveness of NPT in the prevention of the spreading of nuclear weapons.
It is evident that the NPT enjoyed numerous success in the curbing of the proliferation of nuclear. There were the signing and abiding by the rules of the treaty by many of the states. There was also the increase in the number of the declared states though slightly (Brilmayer, 1999). There was also the concern by the treaty to those who made no attempts of signing to the NPT since the nuclear programs caused a problem to the security of the region in the Middle East. The areas suffering from the persistent conflict would also continue posing the problems to the NPT since there was the high likelihood of the states increasing in the weapons whenever they got worried of the security needs of their countries.

Comparison and contrasting of the realism and constructivism interpretations of the NPT

The realism interpretations of NPT

The realism understanding of the NPT is that it results from the theories of the rational deterrence and the tradition of the prudence (Martin, 2004). It offers an explanation that routinely mentions the reasons for the states abstaining from the use of the nuclear weapons from 1945 as a form of deterrence. There is the

argument that the uncertainty concerning the course of the nuclear war following along the certainty that the destruction by the war might be immense. The concerns regarding the exogenous factors like the uncontrollable escalation, the high costs and the retaliation that might threaten the existence of the states indicates the direct deterrence. Therefore, due to the above factors, there is the argument that with the existence of the nuclear weapons, the likelihood of the emergence of war are less.

The constructivism interpretations of NPT

The constructivism interpretation of the NPT is that it is namely the interpretation of the ongoing processes of the interaction socially that the shared ideas determine. It follows that the interest of the tenets of the actors of the theory has its construction from the shared ideas other than being offered by nature. Following the proposition that the basic tenet of the interests of the actors being from the shared ideas, there is the demonstration that the non-use of the nuclear lends itself better to the usual considerations that give an explanation of the beliefs associated with the weapons becoming embedded in the practices and the ultimate concentration to become a taboo. The major account for the constructivism view of the NPT is that the non-use of the nuclear weapons as a taboo (Tannenwald, 2007). There is the better understanding of the theory of constructivism through the normative reading of the patterns of the history of the nuclear non-use, and therefore, the notion becomes a taboo as the authoritative and the proscriptive norm ultimately.

Similarities

The broad similarity between the two interpretations is that the regime of the nuclear non-proliferation offered a significant influence for

the elites of the states to practice the abstinence of the nuclear weapons and therefore, the regime needs the strengthening other than weakening it.
The other similarity is that in both the understandings of the NPT, the understandings offers the evidence that is persuasive on the reason for the need of the multitude of the materials that would discourage the proliferation of the weapons and at the same time encouraging the forbearance of the nuclear weapons.
The other aspect of the similarity between the realism and constructivism understanding of the NPT is that in both the cases, there are the needs for the security in the states. The states do not, however, embark on the use of the nuclear weapons to secure their security. Instead, they advocate for the nuclear non-proliferation and non-use of the nuclear weapons to achieve their needs for the security.

Differences

The difference between the constructivism and the realism understanding of the NPT is that according to the realists, the Nuclear Non-proliferation offers the states an access to the technology of the weapons and gives the democratic cover for the secret development of the programs of the nuclear weapons that they have the likelihood of doing so in order to satisfy their needs for the security (Solingen, 2007). The norms of the NPT are useless and that there would be better spending of the money on the other programs. According to the constructivists, the need for the security is an empty expression which may not have the understanding outside the social environment of the state. Because the regime of the nuclear non-proliferation shapes the interpretation of the value of the value of the nuclear weapons,

the strengthening, and upholding of the plan is critical to stopping the proliferation in the future.

In conclusion, the Nuclear Non-Proliferation emerged as the strategy of inhibiting the spread of the nuclear weapons. After the emergence of the treaty, many states became its signatory. The agreement played significant roles in ensuring that there is no spread of the nuclear weapons and the nuclear technology. The treaty was effective in carrying up its roles as many states joined the treaty as well as most of the signatories signing and abiding by the rules of reduction in arms or the complete disarmament. There is the understanding of the NPT in two broad perspectives of realism and constructivism. Also, there are similarities and the differences in the two general opinions of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation.

References

• Brilmayer, L.  (1999) ‘Realism Revisited: The Moral Priority of Means and Ends in Anarchy’, in Global Justice, Nomos, 41, ed. Ian Shapiro and Lea Brilmayer, (New York,  New York University Press)
• Educational Foundation for Nuclear Science (Chicago, Ill.), Atomic Scientists of Chicago., & Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists (Organization). (1946). Bulletin of the atomic scientists. Chicago: Atomic Scientists of Chicago.
• Martin, S. B. (2004) ‘Realism and Weapons of Mass Destruction: A Consequentialist Analysis’, in Sohail H. Hashemi and Steven P.Lee, (eds) Ethics and Weapons of Mass Destruction: Religious and Secular Perspectives, (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press)
• Nye, J. S. Jr. (2005) Understanding International Conflicts, An Introduction to Theory and History, 5thedition, (New York, Pearson Longman)
• Perkovich, G., Acton, J. M., & International Institute for Strategic Studies. (2008).Abolishing nuclear weapons. London: Routledge for the International Institute for Strategic Studies.
• Solingen, E. (2007). Nuclear logics: Contrasting paths in East Asia and the Middle East.
  

Princeton: Princeton University Press.