Neo cons in USA may believe (and try make us believe) that we have God in White house but the fact is he has miserably failed the people of the country to even do normal duties as thousands of people were left stranded in the aftermath of the cyclone. So now they are supposed to pray, officially!! Amen to that!! The same is true when the “developed” countries try playing God to other Nation and its people. Non Proliferation Treaty (NPT) is likewise meant to protect the ordinary mortals around the world from whatever threat, the devil. The condition is we give them the Power to protect us (Its rather funny asking for something we don’t have!!). Thank god North Korea has buckled (hold on…today they are saying they want “civilian” nuclear reactor!!). Thank god Bomb Khan is grounded. Now we are safe it seems. Are we?. Off course not.
NPT is and will always remain biased. What gives the Nuclear states the right to dictate terms on others when they themselves are a threat?. Unless and until the nuclear bombs are banned the threat will remain. There is an argument that nuclear bombs are deterrents. The example that is oft quoted in this context is sharp drop in wars or people dying in war since the use of nuclear bombs. However the context of choosing Hiroshima and Nagasaki to experiment these bombs is itself questioned but that is a different story. It is also not true that full-scale wars of the size of “World wars” can never happen. For the simple reason that “world wars” has never happened!!. What is taught in history is a farce since these so called world wars were fought in northern hemisphere and so didn’t involve majority of humanity. The West lives in the world of self-importance. They like to define everything from their worldview. The “world” here is Europe and America. People in other part of the world are therefore waiting to be discovered. So Columbus although wanted to “discover” India, poor fellow lost his way and “discovered” some other place they still call them Indians!!!. The Second World War did involve Japan but that still is short of “world”. Yes it true that last six decades or so the nuclear states have not gone into war. Agreed. But they did use other nations to carry their proxy war. They called it cold war but the people in many of these unfortunate nations used as pawns suffered immensely. “Terrorists” in Afghanistan or Iraq are only showing what was given to them. So who is responsible?. It was assumed that nuclear bombs would give protection to the people in USA or Britain from outside threat. That has been proven wrong. But yes they are not threatened by any nation state. However a threat is a threat and sometimes it is because of the policy these “developed” nations pursue which can be seen as threat to other countries. So are we arguing that all nation should have nuclear bombs to protect its citizens from what it perceives as a threat?. Although it is logical, we cannot support such a argument for the simple reason it will make world more unsafe. The argument here is why is that some countries have exclusive right to nuclear bombs?. Who gave them this divine right?. Yes its true that proliferation of technology can be used by some regime to create nuclear bomb the reason why NPT is an important treaty. But what makes one assume that nuclear nations cannot misuse their power. Some claim that they are “responsible” states. History as well as contemporary happenings has taught us how Machiavellian and self-serving the policies of “developed” nations can be. “Responsibility” is not restricted to idea of proliferation only, it also means they don’t misuse this power. “Responsibility” also means that the advantages of the nuclear energy be given to all. Not doing these will be being irresponsible. For the same reason Iran or any country has right to tap the nuclear energy for its domestic purpose. Every nation has a responsibility to its people. To provide basic necessity, comfort and opportunity to grow to their potential. Globally the demand of electricity is much more than supply (nearly 7-8%). This is bound to increase since the per capita consumption of poorer nation is very low. Very soon as non-renewable source of energy gets depleted (and becomes inaccessible to many) these demands will only grow urgent and stronger. These have to be addressed. The problem, which concerns us is that, these technologies being dangerous can fall into wrong hand and become a threat to world (assuming that the Nuclear five (N-5) are not a threat!!). So is this immediate need for renewable source of energy by vast population of the world in loggerhead with security issues of the world. Yes it is. Nuclear technology can definitely be misused to make bomb and take the world on ransom. It is very much conceivable. So what do we do?. The only way out could be to create a mechanism to transfer the nuclear energy rather than the technology. A centralised nuclear reactor (a hub) can be built in a region to cover a group of countries. This need be controlled by international agency like IAEA. The revenue earned could go to UN thus strengthening the organisation further. Thus a “responsible” way of energy transfer is possible. There is also a need to focus attention on creating efficient energy storing devices. If these are not done as early as possible then the legitimate claims of countries around the world for nuclear technology will only increase. USA is nobody to “grant” technology for “peaceful” purpose to India. Nor is India “very special” to acquire these technology were others cannot. This is hypocrisy. In the contemporary world non-polluting and renewable source of energy is what people want and Iranians are definitely no different. Nobody can deny any people the benefits of technology. The advantages of technology have to be shared. Inventions and discoveries are done for the benefit of humanity and therefore cannot be restricted on the basis of geography. There is a saying in Arabic mauth a alim mauth a alam meaning death of a scientist is death of an epoch. Scientists and technologists are citizens of the globalised world. They have a responsible towards society in that to make the advantages accessible to people. People of Iran have all the right to enjoy their life in all its comfort as anyone in New York or Dublin or pyongyang
NPT is and will always remain biased. What gives the Nuclear states the right to dictate terms on others when they themselves are a threat?. Unless and until the nuclear bombs are banned the threat will remain. There is an argument that nuclear bombs are deterrents. The example that is oft quoted in this context is sharp drop in wars or people dying in war since the use of nuclear bombs. However the context of choosing Hiroshima and Nagasaki to experiment these bombs is itself questioned but that is a different story. It is also not true that full-scale wars of the size of “World wars” can never happen. For the simple reason that “world wars” has never happened!!. What is taught in history is a farce since these so called world wars were fought in northern hemisphere and so didn’t involve majority of humanity. The West lives in the world of self-importance. They like to define everything from their worldview. The “world” here is Europe and America. People in other part of the world are therefore waiting to be discovered. So Columbus although wanted to “discover” India, poor fellow lost his way and “discovered” some other place they still call them Indians!!!. The Second World War did involve Japan but that still is short of “world”. Yes it true that last six decades or so the nuclear states have not gone into war. Agreed. But they did use other nations to carry their proxy war. They called it cold war but the people in many of these unfortunate nations used as pawns suffered immensely. “Terrorists” in Afghanistan or Iraq are only showing what was given to them. So who is responsible?. It was assumed that nuclear bombs would give protection to the people in USA or Britain from outside threat. That has been proven wrong. But yes they are not threatened by any nation state. However a threat is a threat and sometimes it is because of the policy these “developed” nations pursue which can be seen as threat to other countries. So are we arguing that all nation should have nuclear bombs to protect its citizens from what it perceives as a threat?. Although it is logical, we cannot support such a argument for the simple reason it will make world more unsafe. The argument here is why is that some countries have exclusive right to nuclear bombs?. Who gave them this divine right?. Yes its true that proliferation of technology can be used by some regime to create nuclear bomb the reason why NPT is an important treaty. But what makes one assume that nuclear nations cannot misuse their power. Some claim that they are “responsible” states. History as well as contemporary happenings has taught us how Machiavellian and self-serving the policies of “developed” nations can be. “Responsibility” is not restricted to idea of proliferation only, it also means they don’t misuse this power. “Responsibility” also means that the advantages of the nuclear energy be given to all. Not doing these will be being irresponsible. For the same reason Iran or any country has right to tap the nuclear energy for its domestic purpose. Every nation has a responsibility to its people. To provide basic necessity, comfort and opportunity to grow to their potential. Globally the demand of electricity is much more than supply (nearly 7-8%). This is bound to increase since the per capita consumption of poorer nation is very low. Very soon as non-renewable source of energy gets depleted (and becomes inaccessible to many) these demands will only grow urgent and stronger. These have to be addressed. The problem, which concerns us is that, these technologies being dangerous can fall into wrong hand and become a threat to world (assuming that the Nuclear five (N-5) are not a threat!!). So is this immediate need for renewable source of energy by vast population of the world in loggerhead with security issues of the world. Yes it is. Nuclear technology can definitely be misused to make bomb and take the world on ransom. It is very much conceivable. So what do we do?. The only way out could be to create a mechanism to transfer the nuclear energy rather than the technology. A centralised nuclear reactor (a hub) can be built in a region to cover a group of countries. This need be controlled by international agency like IAEA. The revenue earned could go to UN thus strengthening the organisation further. Thus a “responsible” way of energy transfer is possible. There is also a need to focus attention on creating efficient energy storing devices. If these are not done as early as possible then the legitimate claims of countries around the world for nuclear technology will only increase. USA is nobody to “grant” technology for “peaceful” purpose to India. Nor is India “very special” to acquire these technology were others cannot. This is hypocrisy. In the contemporary world non-polluting and renewable source of energy is what people want and Iranians are definitely no different. Nobody can deny any people the benefits of technology. The advantages of technology have to be shared. Inventions and discoveries are done for the benefit of humanity and therefore cannot be restricted on the basis of geography. There is a saying in Arabic mauth a alim mauth a alam meaning death of a scientist is death of an epoch. Scientists and technologists are citizens of the globalised world. They have a responsible towards society in that to make the advantages accessible to people. People of Iran have all the right to enjoy their life in all its comfort as anyone in New York or Dublin or pyongyang
