The UN and Nuclear Arms

By Deeptanshu Singhvi

As technological development has sped up during the 21st century, the threat of nuclear war continues to encroach upon us. Although the Nuclear Arms Treaty targets peaceful nuclear use among all sovereign nations, it has become increasingly clear that the threat of nuclear war is disproportionately high because of a few specific nations – Iran and North Korea. President Obama recently pushed through a United Nations Resolution that would eliminate the loopholes in nuclear security.
​
Problems with previous resolutions have sparked international dissent; members of the United Nations complain that President Obama’s policies are singling out certain nations. In fact, the crippling sanctions against Iran that were approved last year have lived up to this accusation. In response, President Obama issued a statement explaining that, “This is not about singling out an individual nation. International law is not an empty promise, and treaties must be enforced.” Despite the brutal criticisms the nuclear sanctions faced, Obama’s policy drastically slowed oil trade in the Iranian economy, and crippled the nation’s nuclear budget. In fact, the damage was on a large scale as the Iran Government even declared a temporary shut-down of their infamous nuclear program. Quantitatively, $2 billion dollars of resources worth of resources were funneled away from Iran’s nuclear mission. To further the drastic crisis, inflation in the economy has increased by 176% over the last year and has impacted the lives of ordinary citizens.

Currently, the most recent nuclear arms resolution, has advocated for disarmament talks and more diplomatic cohesion. Members of the United Nations want to offer Iran some concession in order to slow down the heavy nuclear growth within the region. For example, last year, a German Green Energy Corporation submitted a proposal to the United Nations asking permission to help Iran with its solar energy facility so that the nation would consider curbing its nuclear program development. However, some of these concessions have backfired on the United Nations goal – last year Turkey shipped Iran 1,200 kilograms of low-enriched uranium.

Recently, the nuclear resolution to mandate talks with Iran has not only gained momentum in the United Nations but also has been accepted by the otherwise stubborn Iran. Ali Baqeri, one of the deputy heads of the Nuclear Program in Iran, in an interview with Reuters explained that Iran had enriched some if its reactors to 20%, and already started operations to convert the uranium into reactor fuel. Iran is also pursuing diplomatic talks with the EU, and hopes to gain some form of leniency. Iran is simply pursuing its right to enrichment – however, foreign powers have reasonable doubt to believe that an imminent threat might be next and are justified in taking precautionary action.

Furthermore, recent humanitarian projects in the United Nations have prompted fewer resources and discussion over nuclear talks. Recently forces have been increased to help in African Hunger efforts, restorations in Yemen, the Syrian rebel crisis as well as the aid in Mali. Resources are being diverted to other peacekeeping operation, which harms the credibility of nuclear issues. While it may appear on the surface that nuclear talks may be on the low, Obama has pushed for other policies that can trap the growth in international violence. Just recently, the International Arms Treaty was approved on a majoritarian vote. On the numerical front, all 193 member states reached an agreement on the piece of legislation.

Specifically, General Ban Ki Mon expressed his admiration for this new treaty when he claimed it to be “powerful new tool in efforts to prevent grave human rights abuses.” UNICEF, a sub division of the United Nations, welcomed the treaty and has promised more intervention to make sure that standards are met. The United States exports 30% of the world’s gun materials, and has heavy regulations – experts consider this to be a heavy factor in Obama’s support for the passage of this treaty. The United Nations has taken a supply side approach; it seeks to end global government corruption and individual militias that unjustly exert their rule on innocent people.

Ultimately, while there are international discrepancies, the United Nations is taking innovative strides to push for international safety. Whether they target the supply side chain or employ armed forces, the United Nation has pledged to aim for prosperity.

1.http://www.jpost.com/Middle-East/UN-Chemical-investigation-ready-to-deploy-within-48-hours-311468
2.http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=44718&Cr=nuclear&Cr1=#.UX8LSbWyDzw
3.http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2013/04/25/300124/israel-source-of-threat-crisis-in-me/
4.http://www.iol.co.za/news/africa/iran-s-wooing-of-africa-yields-scant-results-1.1505256