All countries should have the right to pursue a nuclear defence. The recent attempts of North Korea and Iran to build up their own nuclear weapons have raised the international awareness and have intensified the debate concerning the spread of nuclear weapons.
The western world states that these countries are not stable enough to possess nuclear power. But does really this community have the right to determine who shall have nuclear defences and who shall not? In fact, until now nuclear weapons have been used by only one state – the USA. Why shall the citizens of only nine countries be protected from nuclear attack and the rest shall not be. After all, this contradicts with the fundament human freedoms. All countries should have the right to pursue a nuclear defence Yes because...No because... To prove that claim we will use an example from the recent history. Every human being has the same cost – it is priceless. Debates > All countries should have the right to pursue a nuclear defence. Pros of Dropping the Atomic Bomb. Pro’s of Dropping the Bomb The pros for dropping the bomb are that the war ended faster when Japan saw how devastating the atomic bomb was.
The atomic bomb leveled both Hiroshima and Nagasaki. If the United States had not dropped the atomic bomb on Japan, then the United States would have been forced to invade Japan, which was making preparations for the invasion. The thought process with dropping the bomb was that it would save hundreds of thousands of American soldiers lives. With dropping the atomic bomb, the United States had to be the one’s making the atomic bomb. Arguments FOR using nuclear bombs. The benefits of having nuclear weapons. Theorists of both schools of international relations, neo-realist and neo-liberal, agree that the root cause of...
The writer hosts Frontline on Express News (kamran.shahid@tribune.com.pk) Theorists of both schools of international relations, neo-realist and neo-liberal, agree that the root cause of conflicting relations in the international system is the lack of a ‘central authority’ above nation states. ‘Anarchy’ rules the system and makes cooperation among states impossible.
For neo-liberals, ‘anarchy’ can only be overcome and war averted with the establishment of international institutions and ‘recognised regimes’ which constitute the body of laws and norms in order to make defection and breach of agreements less likely and cooperation among states more likely. Realists negate the above argument. In the short span of 50 years the world has witnessed the gradual but transatlantic spread of nuclear weapons. Benefits of Nuclear Weapons. Benefits of Nuclear Weapons Nuclear weapons have existed for several years now and so has the debate about the need for making these weapons.
The more the arguments against it, the more and more countries want to own these weapons and establish their power. So then why all this uproar against nuclear weapons when everyone wants to possess it? Obviously, people haven’t forgotten the little boy and Hiroshima. Still why do countries want nuclear weapons on their portfolio? 1. We are not talking about the power from nuclear energy; on the other hand, we are talking about the political power that comes from owning a nuclear weapon. 2.
Nuclear weapons are considered as one of the best negotiation tools available in the international political circuit. 3. On the one hand when organizations and nations debate and question the need for nuclear weapons, still countries continue to research methods to develop their own nuclear weapons. 4. Yet, nothing can justify the use of these weapons.