[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Archive Top]

[cdn-nucl-l] discussion between Whitlock and Adams re. proliferation and the IAEA

I have no problem posting this discussion to the Listserv.
 
Jeremy.
-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Adams [mailto:TomAdams@nextcity.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2002 12:30 PM
To: Whitlock, Jeremy
Subject: Re: [cdn-nucl-l] reply to Adam McLean's comment on "progress" in North Korea

If you are agreeable, I would like to post this whole discussion to the listserv. Tom

"Whitlock, Jeremy" wrote:

 I would say the NPT has warts and holes, but it's unfair to say it has failed.  Only the blunders get publicized of course, so the world does not hear about the constant, year-round checks and balances that are taking place under the NPT, in all corners of this pretty planet.  It is generally successful, although I'll admit that "generally successful" is not as comforting when applied to nuclear non-proliferation, as it is in other disciplines...Regarding the NK reactors, yes you're right, I support the strategy.  I would have been happy if ANY form of energy supply were substituted for their dual-use reactors, but it's always pleasing when another stinking fossil plant (coal, gas, or oil) isn't built on this planet.Cheers,Jeremy.
-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Adams [mailto:TomAdams@nextcity.com]
Sent: Wednesday January 16, 2002 11:09 AM
To: Whitlock, Jeremy
Subject: Re: [cdn-nucl-l] reply to Adam McLean's comment on "progress" in North Korea
 
The NPT has failed to live up to its original intentions, but it is much better than nothing. What I intended by my last statement was that we need an effective means of controlling a wide range of potentially destructive technologies, not just nuclear. You probably disagree, but I think the US giving NK reactors was a mistake.

As an aside, I appreciate the civility of this discussion.

Tom

"Whitlock, Jeremy" wrote:

Well, I certainly hope we don't "inspect" too many other countries the way we're "inspecting" Afghanistan.  So, short of Blitzkrieging our way into suspect countries and using every weapon at our disposal (except perhaps, nuclear weapons themselves, but no guarantees) to uncover the people and technologies we're looking for, we need diplomatic and technological leverage to open the door.  That is the essence of the Non-Proliferation Treaty, and that is the card being played in North Korea.  It's not perfect, it could be improved, but I prefer that approach.Your last sentence is status quo -- and also the essence of the NPT.Cheers,Jeremy.
-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Adams [mailto:TomAdams@nextcity.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2002 1:24 PM
To: Whitlock, Jeremy
Subject: Re: [cdn-nucl-l] reply to Adam McLean's comment on "progress" in North Korea
Jeremy, in this instance I hope your nerves are not too easily calmed. I would feel more secure if the inspection team was ensuring that NK has no nuclear facilities capable of being used for weapons, but that is not a level of discipline the IAEA is mandated to achieve. Your time interval observation is a fond hope that you and I share but only a hope. Your point about "the crucial link with civilian nuclear power" is illogical. Afghanistan is being inspected for nuclear facilities now in a way that makes me feel secure (about Afghanistan) although that country has no pretensions to "civilian" nuclear technology. Perhaps we can agree that nuclear technology, like other potential technologies of mass destruction, must be controlled whether it flies a "civilian" flag or not. Tom

"Whitlock, Jeremy" wrote:

I certainly feel more secure knowing an inspection team is in North Korea.  In an absolute sense, I doubt few of us really feel secure about anything, especially since Sept. 11. The importance of the time interval (and learning process) since the IAEA's blunder with Iraq should not be overlooked, nor the crucial link with civilian nuclear power that is enabling the inspections in the first place.Jeremy.
-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Adams [mailto:TomAdams@nextcity.com]
Sent: Tuesday January 15, 2002 3:19 PM
To: Whitlock, Jeremy
Subject: Re: [cdn-nucl-l] reply to Adam McLean's comment on "progress" in North Korea
Jeremy, your point is interesting, although calling the bombing the "best thing to ever happen to the Iraqi nuclear bomb program" seems exaggerated. My main point was that the IAEA's inspections of North Korea should not make us feel secure. Tom

"Whitlock, Jeremy" wrote:

 

Actually Tom (and I realize you were probably being a bit facetious), the prudence of the Israeli bombing the Osirak reactor is questionable.  In fact, one could argue that it was the best thing to ever happen to the Iraqi nuclear bomb program.  It forced Saddam to go the route of an HEU weapon, which is a far easier route than plutonium, including being much easier to hide -- as the extent of Saddam's success (and probable continuing efforts) indicates.

Jeremy Whitlock

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tom Adams [mailto:TomAdams@nextcity.com]
> Sent: Tuesday January 15, 2002 1:15 PM
> To: CNS listserv
> Subject: [cdn-nucl-l] reply to Adam McLean's comment


NTMail K12 - the Mail Server for Education