Posts
Gun violence is male violence
7 years ago
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
Green Party and Youth Involvement in Politics
I recently answered a few questions on the Green Party and youth involvement in politics for a journalism student at Wilfrid Laurier University. Here's the link: http://thereluctantindependent.blogspot.com/2009/11/interview-with-katie-gibbs-leader-of.html
Tuesday, November 17, 2009
Maiden Blog
The Green Party's Objection to the India-Canada Nuclear Trade Deal
Yesterday the Green Party of Canada “expressed grave concerns” that PM Harper was close to concluding a nuclear deal with India that, at a minimum, does not require India to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). Green Party Leader May wants to see Canada adopt Australia’s policy of not exporting uranium to countries that have not signed the NPT.
While I believe that nuclear non-proliferation is beneficial and the prospect of these weapons falling into the possession of some of the world’s more unsavoury regimes is problematic. I think the NPT is the wrong avenue for non-proliferation and therefore the Green Party’s recommendation is misguided and concern misplaced.
Humans are excited by nuclear weapons, their mere mentions conjures up images of the end of the world. However, nuclear weapons have been a big disappointment. They have been militarily useless. Countries that possess them have not found them valuable in conflict (e.g., the US in Korea, Vietnam, or Iraq; the USSR in Afghanistan; France in Algeria; the British in the Falklands; Israel in Lebanon and Gaza; and China in Vietnam). Not only are they militarily useless, but their deterrence capability has been questioned. John Mueller argues that conventional military hardware would have been enough to deter the Cold War from becoming hot (see John Mueller, Atomic Obsession) The Green Party’s (and everyone else’s) concern is out of touch with reality, this adds to their allure and seemingly usefulness.
This fixation with nuclear weapons adds to the hysteria over proliferation. However, nuclear proliferation has been modest. Most countries that have wanted nukes have developed them (despite the NPT) and all have acted responsibly with them (e.g., during the upheaval of China’s Cultural Revolution the security of their nuclear weapons was never in doubt). Most technologically able countries, however, chose not to develop nukes (because they recognize their uselessness).
Currently, it seems as though the world is moving past the nuclear age. The US and Russia have cut their nuclear weapons from 50, 000 during the height of the Cold War to around 18, 000. France and Britain have significantly reduced their stockpiles. And countries like India and Pakistan have kept them in far lower numbers than expected. This was all done outside of the NPT. In fact, there is some evidence that arms limitations agreements between the US and Russia increased the levels of nukes during the Cold War. Nuclear weapons as bargaining chips.
The Green Party should let the deal pass with no objection and should work towards letting nuclear weapons becoming near-extinct on their own, outside of formal treaties.
This is a cross-post form Duke Peterson's Blog.
Yesterday the Green Party of Canada “expressed grave concerns” that PM Harper was close to concluding a nuclear deal with India that, at a minimum, does not require India to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). Green Party Leader May wants to see Canada adopt Australia’s policy of not exporting uranium to countries that have not signed the NPT.
While I believe that nuclear non-proliferation is beneficial and the prospect of these weapons falling into the possession of some of the world’s more unsavoury regimes is problematic. I think the NPT is the wrong avenue for non-proliferation and therefore the Green Party’s recommendation is misguided and concern misplaced.
Humans are excited by nuclear weapons, their mere mentions conjures up images of the end of the world. However, nuclear weapons have been a big disappointment. They have been militarily useless. Countries that possess them have not found them valuable in conflict (e.g., the US in Korea, Vietnam, or Iraq; the USSR in Afghanistan; France in Algeria; the British in the Falklands; Israel in Lebanon and Gaza; and China in Vietnam). Not only are they militarily useless, but their deterrence capability has been questioned. John Mueller argues that conventional military hardware would have been enough to deter the Cold War from becoming hot (see John Mueller, Atomic Obsession) The Green Party’s (and everyone else’s) concern is out of touch with reality, this adds to their allure and seemingly usefulness.
This fixation with nuclear weapons adds to the hysteria over proliferation. However, nuclear proliferation has been modest. Most countries that have wanted nukes have developed them (despite the NPT) and all have acted responsibly with them (e.g., during the upheaval of China’s Cultural Revolution the security of their nuclear weapons was never in doubt). Most technologically able countries, however, chose not to develop nukes (because they recognize their uselessness).
Currently, it seems as though the world is moving past the nuclear age. The US and Russia have cut their nuclear weapons from 50, 000 during the height of the Cold War to around 18, 000. France and Britain have significantly reduced their stockpiles. And countries like India and Pakistan have kept them in far lower numbers than expected. This was all done outside of the NPT. In fact, there is some evidence that arms limitations agreements between the US and Russia increased the levels of nukes during the Cold War. Nuclear weapons as bargaining chips.
The Green Party should let the deal pass with no objection and should work towards letting nuclear weapons becoming near-extinct on their own, outside of formal treaties.
This is a cross-post form Duke Peterson's Blog.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
