Is president obama’s nuclear non-proliferation policy realistic (policy brief)

Is President Obama’s nuclear non-proliferation policy realistic? Section What is the issue? President Barack Obama has envisaged an innovative nuclear policy that can turn out to be realistic if nations around the world are cooperative for the greater good of mankind. Nuclear terrorism and nuclear proliferation are the two threats President Obama has emphasized the international community should act upon to avoid nuclear arms race, potential nuclear war and terror that could be of an unimaginable scale. The policy encourages nations to pledge to decrease nuclear weapons, endorse the CTBT and forbid the proliferation of fissile material around the world and strengthen the role of IAEA with more resources and authority. President Obama also announced willingness to negotiate with North Korea and Iran to stop nuclear proliferation not withstanding other issues with these nations (Allison, G. & Dillon, D. 2010). The policy also urges nations without nuclear arms to stop acquisition and permits access to nuclear energy. These objectives can be achieved by strengthening international inspections with more resources and authority and the implementation of rules to foil black markets, uncover and intercept the trafficking of nuclear materials and use financial instruments to interrupt nuclear trade (President Obama speech on Nuclear Disarmament 2009).
Section 2: The strengths and weaknesses of different positions on the issue
Realising President Obama’s vision is highly challenging due to the various reasons that include:
i. The IAEA has indicated the absence of evidence against Iran. Therefore, Iran cannot be forced by the West to sign the NPT that allows the enrichment of uranium for fuel (Hammond, J. R. 2009).
ii. The willingness of President Obama to hold wide ranging and direct talks with Iran provides the best opportunity to build a cooperative relationship and an acceptable agreement through an effective policy can even prevent the nation from building nuclear weapons plant and stabilize the surrounding region (Bertram, C. 2009).
iii. The decade long favouritism of British people towards investment in nuclear weapons has taken a turn with their opinion to scrap all nuclear weapons instead of building a new nuclear weapon plant which is a positive sign for collective action from nuclear weapon powers (Glover, J. 2009).
iv. The disarmament of United States can provoke nuclear proliferation in small size because the deterrence factor will not prevail thus increasing the prospects of more Irans and North Koreas in future (Mazol, J. 2009).
Section 3: Recommendations
i. North Korea can be persuaded to disarm by exposing the reality of their impoverishment compared to the prosperity of South Korea (Lankov, A. 2009).
ii. During earnest discussions, it should be clear to Israel that there is no exception (U. S. Defense Cuts, Obamas Europe Trip, and Nuclear Disarmament, 2009).
iii. Suggested voluntary and forced nuclear disarmament aspects are (i) global adherence to IAEA safeguards (ii) rules to prevent withdrawal from NPT and hold nations responsible for violations of NPT (iii) compulsory adherence to Additional Protocol to use peaceful nuclear technologies and (iv) automatic penalties for nations that violate safeguard agreements (Pifer, S., Cirincione, J. & Gaddy, C. 2010).
Russia’s consent to cooperate to the arms reduction cause and the likelihood of Iran crisis to succeed if there is multilateral pressure without threat would means there is progress and potential for President Obama’s nuclear policy to be realistic through stringent rules and negotiations (Pilkington, E. 2010).
Reference
Allison, G. & Dillon, D. 2010 ” Nuclear Disorder: Surveying Atomic Threats” Foreign Affairs, volume 89, issue 1, pages 74-85 Available: http://belfercenter. ksg. harvard. edu/publication/19819/nuclear_disorder. html. Retrieved on January 28, 2010.
Bertram, C. 2009 Europe must wholeheartedly back Obama’s initiative on Iran Available:
http://www. europesworld. org/NewEnglish/Home/Article/tabid/191/ArticleType/ArticleView/ArticleID/21415/language/en-US/EuropemustwholeheartedlybackObamasinitiativeonIran. aspx. Retrieved on January 28, 2010.
Glover, J. 2009 Voters want Britain to scrap all nuclear weapons, ICM poll shows Available:
http://www. guardian. co. uk/politics/2009/jul/13/icm-poll-nuclear-weapons. Retrieved on January 28, 2010.

Hammond, J. R. 2009 The New York Times’ ‘ fit to print’ version of the IAEA in Iran Available: http://www. foreignpolicyjournal. com/2009/08/31/the-new-york-times-fit-to-print-version-of-the-iaea-in-iran/. Retrieved on January 28, 2010.
Lankov, A. 2009 Changing North Korea Available: http://www. foreignaffairs. com/articles/65506/andrei-lankov/changing-north-korea. Retrieved on January 28, 2010.
Mazol, J. 2009 Nuclear Doublethink: How Disarmament Undermines Nonproliferation Available: http://www. iar-gwu. org/node/101. Retrieved on January 28, 2010.
Pifer, S., Cirincione, J. & Gaddy, C. 2010 Resetting U. S.-Russian Leadership on Nuclear Arms Reductions and Non-Proliferation Brooking – Arms control series Available: http://www. brookings. edu/~/media/Files/rc/papers/2010/01_us_russia_nuclear_pifer/01_us_russia_nuclear_pifer. pdf. Retrieved on January 28, 2010.
Pilkington, E. 2010 Obamas Year One: Pro Available: http://www. worldaffairsjournal. org/2010%20-%20JanFeb/full-Pilkington-JF-2010. html. Retrieved on January 28, 2010.
President Obama speech on Nuclear Disarmament 2009 Available:
http://www. acronym. org. uk/docs/0904/doc10. htm. Retrieved on January 28, 2010.
U. S. Defense Cuts, Obamas Europe Trip, and Nuclear Disarmament, 2009 Available: http://www. cfr. org/publication/19061/us_defense_cuts_obamas_europe_trip_and_nuclear_disarmament. html. Retrieved on January 28, 2010.