Will MDS Nordion pay for this service?
--- On Thu, 4/15/10, Marc Garland <email@example.com> wrote:
From: Marc Garland <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: Re: [MbrExchange] Long overdue summit tackles nuclear issues
To: "Member Exchange" <email@example.com>
Date: Thursday, April 15, 2010, 12:53 PM
The US just agreed to take HEU used for Mo-99 production back from Canada. Canada is apparently paying $65M for its disposition, a job that could take hundreds of millions, but at least we've finally got that rogue state under control.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gene Cramer" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Sent: Thursday, April 15, 2010 1:25:10 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
Subject: [MbrExchange] Long overdue summit tackles nuclear issues
Nowadays it takes a summit to solve a problem??? enc
Long overdue summit tackles nuclear issueshttp://swarthmorephoenix.com/2010/04/15/opinions/long-overdue-summit-tackles-nuclear-issues
I April 15, 2010
the independent campus newspaper of Swarthmore college since 1881The past two weeks have been a hopeful time for those who worry about the continued existence of nuclear weapons and their proliferation. Since the end of the Second World War, a number of states have built up nuclear arsenals and the United States and Russia literally built thousands of nuclear weapons each. Despite the Cold War ending two decades ago, nuclear weapons remain a global problem. We are happy to see, however, that President Obama has used his leadership to begin to tackle three of the most difficult problems nuclear weapons still pose.
Most dangerous to international security is the determination of what have been named �rogue� states such as Iran and North Korea to acquire the capability to produce and deploy nuclear weapons. While North Korea is known to have tested nuclear weapons in the
past few years, the Iranian leadership maintains that it wants to use nuclear technology for peaceful purposes. The United States and to a lesser extent the international community as a whole are worried, rightly, that Iran might acquire a nuclear weapon, or worse, the capability of deploying it. If this were to be the case, regional stability in the Middle East, already extremely fragile, would almost certainly be upset as Israel would be faced with the uncomfortable question of intervening in Iran.
Until now, efforts to restrain Iran�s nuclear ambitions have been unsuccessful despite strict United Nations-endorsed sanctions on trading with the country. The Obama administration has been looking to further tighten sanctions to pressure Iran into abandoning its nuclear program. Until now, this has been difficult as support in the United Nations Security Council has not been unanimous, with China often threatening to veto any resolution unless it
was watered down. President Obama reportedly secured a promise from President Hu Jintao of China that the latter would join negotiations.
A second problem, which is becoming increasingly urgent, is the lack of a universal monitoring system for the whereabouts of nuclear weapons. While countries such as the United States and the United Kingdom face no problems protecting their arsenals, concerns have been raised by the U.S. administration of the accountability and security especially of the Pakistani stockpile as well as those of countries that were formerly part of the Soviet Union. In Pakistan, the worry is that a terrorist organization might obtain a nuclear weapon, which would have dramatic consequences for world stability.
After the fall of the Soviet Union, Ukraine was left with enough nuclear material to create an estimated seven warheads, according to The New York Times. The United States signed a deal with Ukraine to remove
the material from the country in exchange for U.S. assistance in providing Ukraine with materials for nuclear power reactors. Deals such as these make us hopeful that further nuclear proliferation can be curbed through international agreements.
On Monday and Tuesday this week, world leaders gathered in Washington, D.C. and agreed that by 2014, all nuclear weapons must be safely stored and accounted for. Such agreements had earlier proved elusive as some countries see them as infringing on their sovereignty. This is an understandable concern, but the threat posed by further proliferation of nuclear weapons is too great to be left unchecked.
The last problem is less imminent than the others, but shows the extent to which nuclear warfare is still a possibility. Both the United States and Russia have sharply cut the numbers of weapons they own and the numbers ready for instantaneous deployment by thousands of warheads. Despite this,
each country still retains enough nuclear weapons to annihilate the other or, for that matter, most of the world.
The summit in Washington this week received a strong initial push when in the week before the summit, the United States and Russia signed a bilateral agreement agreeing to significantly reduce their stockpiles of nuclear weapons. While this agreement has correctly been criticized for not changing the capabilities of either nation, we believe that it contributed to a closer relationship between the United States and Russia, which is necessary after the unproductive relationship under President Bush. While this is only a small step, The Phoenix believes that it can be the start of what a writer in the magazine Foreign Affairs recently called �the road to zero.�
_______________________________________________ MbrExchange mailing list MbrExchange@list.ans.org