Problem Of Proliferation

The Problem of Proliferation

There is a controversy as to the meaning of proliferation. Proliferation is the process of deadly weapons being bought and sold in the market place of corruption and greed. Government leaders are playing a deadly game by implementing creation of foreign policies that are set to obtain goals, yet sponsor actions that contradict those goals. The chapter argues that we must be able to evaluate the facts and separate them from our emotions concerning the situation.

The Problem of Defining Proliferation

Henry Sokolski stated in 1993 that even the intelligence community has not been able to define the term proliferation adequately. The military, intelligence agencies, terrorist organizations and diplomats will all define the term differently because of their different perspectives. Although there is controversy in the exact meaning, I feel that the basic meaning is evident, which is nations who do not possess the deadly weapons of mass destruction attempt to obtain them by illegal methods.

The Threat of Nuclear Proliferation

Nuclear proliferation is the most feared form of proliferation, while terrorism is the most feared force that is suspected of having the ideological motivation ant the ways that the knowledge and resources are obtained to make it a real threat. A non-proliferation treaty was signed by a group of nations whom called themselves the "Nuclear Club." This group considers themselves as being the arbitrators of the control of nuclear energy and nuclear weapons. There are states who argue this saying that they have the right to possess the weapons for their security. Scott Sagan argues this idea fearing that it may cause a chain reaction with other nations obtaining and even making their own nuclear weapons. Proof of this theory was made clear when explosions occurred during testing of weapons by Pakistan and India in May of 1998.

The contradictions have been made evident and public in several articles and reports. In in 1995 the United States Department of Strategic Command suggested that the U.S. should give, as part of it's persona that it will become "irrational and vindictive if it's vital interest are attacted". USA Today, in 1997 contained two articles in the same paper that contradicted each other. One of the articles stated that Chinese Military is developing high-tech weapons to win a war against the United States and the other was the US may sell nuclear technology to China. In 1998 Joseph Douglas Jr. Stated that the treaty will have no impact on the issues, particularly Russia, as they could change their government overnight.

The terrorist groups view the diplomats as being liars who play the game of diplomacy and they have decided to use what-ever means necessary to obtain the nuclear weapons whether it be illegal or otherwise. These terrorist