Nuclear Weapons

1
Nuclear Weapons

• Presented By
• Linda Stewart-Knight
• Matt Donatoni
• Mike Bartholow

2
Background Information

• Arms Race
• Continuous race between weapon states to improve
  weapons such that there is a temporary gain of
  power
• United States and Soviet Union are the major
  nuclear weapons states
• U.S. dominates in being the first to make
  improvements on strategic weapons
• Many nations seek nuclear weapons because there
  neighbors have them

3
Nuclear War

• Statistics
• 51,000 warheads in the world
• Hiroshima bomb killed 90,000 immediately and
  50,000 later
• Some of todays bombs are 2,000 times as strong
• 5 tons TNT per person

• Studies
• Major nuclear attack could cause a nuclear
  winter cutting out 95 of sunlight
• Temp. would drop to 18F-45F for 20 weeks
• Damage to ozone would increase radiation by 50

4
How much is spent on the Arms Race?

• Russia 10.5 of GNP
• U.S. 6.4 of GNP
• West Germany 3.7 of GNP
• Japan 0.9 of GNP
• By the end of 1980s Global Expenditure was 1
  trillion

5
Other Expenses

• In the 80s 70 of for Research
  Development was spent of defense
• Funding for housing, social services and
  education is often cut while its increased for
  arms (1980s)
• Environment Toxic waste from military plants are
  some of the worst in the nation

6
How do we prevent this?

• Global nuclear weapons would need to be reduced
  to below 500 warheads1 OF THE TOTAL CURRENTLY
  AVAILABLE

7
Arms Control Treaties

• 1968 Nonproliferation Treaty
• Salt Treaty of 1972
• Salt II 1979
• START Negotiations (Strategic Arms Reduction)
• Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) 1990
• U.N. Test Ban Review Conference 1991

8
Nonproliferation Treaty

• Required states with nuclear weapons to work
  toward arms control disarmament
• Required states without nuclear weapons to
  refrain from attaining them
• Required states to submit their nuclear energy
  programs for inspection by the U.N
• DID IT HELP?
• No, Non-nuclear states felt that the nuclear
  states werent fulfilling their side of the deal

9
Salt Treaty of 1972

• Soviet Union and United States agree not to
  increase the amount of missile launchers beyond
  what they currently had
• HOW AFFFECTIVE WAS IT?
• States were still allowed to improve other
  weapons
• The U.S. held the lead, and continued to improve
  other launchers

10
Salt II - 1979

• Put a halt on the development of several types of
  launchers

• HOW AFFECTIVE WAS IT?
• The Department of Defense Congress would only
  sign it if they were allowed an increased budget
  for other nuclear weapons

11
START Negotiations

• Deals with Strategic Nuclear Weapons
• 1980s - U.S. proposed to decrease the amount of
  land-based missiles
• These were the Soviet Unions strength
• The United States main strength was in
  submarine-launched missiles
• --------------------------------------------------
  ------
• The Bottom Line
• The U.S. was most interested in preserving their
  power than in decreasing the amount of nuclear
  weapons

12
START II

• Aim to decrease the amount of nuclear warheads by
  2/3 by the year 2003

Start only deals with reducing the amount of
strategic weapons rather than tactile weapons.
START fails to address concerns regarding the
control of tactile weapons. Because of this,
progress has been slow.
13
Non-Proliferation Treaty

• Proposal
• Unscheduled inspection of nuclear facilities
• Sanctions against violators
• Tighter rules regarding the purchase of equipment
  to produce nuclear weapon
• --------------------------------------------------
  -------
• No Official Declaration was adopted
• THE U.S. WOULDNT AGREE

14
U.N. Test Ban Review Conference -1991

• Goal To decrease nuclear weapon testing
• This would be a step toward disarmament
• 1963 Introduced
• All parties would agree to refrain from carrying
  out any nuclear weapons test explosions (1996)
• In 1991 at the conference, the vote was 75 to 2.
  The U.S. and Britain voted against it, claiming
  that testing is needed to ensure deterrence

15
Overall Conclusions

• Because there is a reliance on arms for peace,
  there is no push towards conflict resolution
  through other means
• The overall picture shows how costly it is
• Economically
• Socially
• Environmentally

16
Case Study

• Tactical Nuclear Weapons
• The Nature of the Problem

17
Tactical Nuclear Weapons (TNWs)

• Part of the American and Russian nuclear arsenals
• Least regulated by arms control agreements
• Only subject to informal rulings
• Declarations made by George Bush and Mikhail
  Gorbachevautumn of 1991
• Further developed by Boris YelstinJanuary 1992
• Rulings are unfit to withstand challenges
• Since 1992, TNWs have not been part of the agenda
  for US-Russian arms control and disarmament

18
TNWs (cont.)

• Exist in large numbers, pose the risk of early
  and/or unauthorized use, vulnerable to theft
• lack of attention is both dangerous and
  unfortunate

19
Properties of TNWs

• Dangers are linked to their physical properties
  and the policies for their deployment and
  employment
• Their small size and lack of electronic locks or
  Permissive Action Links (PALs) contribute to
  their openness to theft and unauthorized use

• The means of their construction and recommended
  use pose major problems in terms of their
  physical and political control
• Existence of TNWs in national arsenals increases
  the risk of production and reduces the nuclear
  threshold
• Result Nuclear balance will be less stable

20
Professional Issues

• TNWs are vulnerable to unauthorized use by almost
  anyone
• Should TNWs be given more attention, so better
  methods of protection can be developed?
• Who should have control over the use of TNWs?

21
Legal/Policy Issues

• TNWs exist in national arsenals, increasing the
  risk of production and reduces the nuclear
  threshold
• Is this in violation of the START Treaty?
• The deterioration of US-Russian Relationsslowed
  down progress of coming up with START III

22
Ethical Issues

• The Utilitarian Perspective
• Issue Is it ethical to possess TNWs for
  deterrence? Is it o.k. to possess TNWs knowing
  they have the potential to be so destructive?
• The Rights Perspective
• Issue Can the use of TNWs as a deterrent in
  order to protect the global community be
  justified?
• The deliberated killing of innocent persons is
  judged wrong, regardless of the goals sought.
  (Barbour 205)

23
Ethical Issues (cont.)

• Common Good Perspective
• Issue Can the use of TNWs as a deterrent in
  order to protect the global community be
  justified?
• The Fairness Perspective
• Issue Is it fair to judge which countries have
  the right to possess TNWs based on economic and
  political position?
• Issue Is it fair that only certain countries
  possess TNWs and maintain a strategic advantage
  over countries without the same technology?

24
Ethical Issues (cont.)

• The Virtue Perspective
• Acting ethical would evolve from being truthful,
  respectful and honest.
• Issue TNW production and use can be seen as a
  hostile, untruthful and untrustworthy act. Thus,
  how virtuous are we being when we support the
  manufacturing of TNWs?

25
Stakeholders

• Countries and Governments throughout the world
• All of those countries citizen
• Military
• The Environment
• All living organisms

26
Possible Actions

• Eliminate TNWs all together
• Regulate the use of TNWs more strictly
• Implement more protection by limiting use to
  higher commanding officials in the military
• UN can conduct routine inspections of any
  production and storage sites

27
Eliminating TNWs
28
Regulating TNWs
29
Final Decision

• Regulate TNWs
• Stop any new production
• Allow the UN to conduct inspections (announced
  and unannounced) on any suspected missile silos
  in any country
• It is too optimistic to expect elimination of
  TNWs all together

30
THE END