Tackling nuclear proliferation

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ORgfAIylcwE


In the early 1960’s the world was nearly plunged into Armageddon. We were heading for a nuclear war as a consequence of the Cuban missile crisis. Thankfully the two super powers (USA and USSR) pulled back from the brink. However there was no real progress, no thaw in the ‘Cold War’ until the mid 1980s when Mikhail Gorbachev became Russian leader. Mrs Thatcher (British PM), I always thought it outrageous, has been cheered for this change in relations between east and west. Rubbish! It was Gorbachev that opened a period of ‘Glasnost’. Not the British prime minister. Ronald Reagan, the then US president, welcomed the Russian president and, for a couple of years at the end of the 1980s, it seemed that the ‘Cold War’ was melting.

Ever since the end of Reagan and Thatcher’s time in office the east and west have had, at least, a calm relationship. However the hard-line approach returned when George W Bush and Vladimir Putin became leaders of their respective nations. It was lamentable that a chill had returned: the conflict in Georgia and the proposed US missile bases in Poland and Ukraine being just two examples. The arrogant attitude of both Bush and Putin conspired to damage relations - a potentially disastrous state of affairs.

Could we be returning to Armageddon? If anyone wanted a better relationship it’s clear these two leaders weren’t listening. Indeed Bush’s administration, as I wrote here last year, seemed to be doing everything possible to provoke a reaction by Russia. Putin’s attitude was equally appalling and it seemed that an escalation in tension was developing. An escalation that would be a convenient reason for nuclear re-armament – a step backward for the world. How can countries like Israel, Iran, North Korea and India end their desire to stock up nuclear warheads if the parents (US and Russia) are also stocking up. This is a perilous state of affairs. Perhaps deadly.

The installing of a new administration in the White House has, to an extent, changed the relationship between the two world powers. However Luke Harding, in the Guardian (7th July 2009), says “Though the Obama effect has worked for the new president elsewhere in the world, Russia is a tough nut to crack. Just 15 per cent of Russians say the US is playing a positive role in the world……according to the University of Maryland’s WorldPublicOpinion.org ”

There is no doubt that Mr Obama wants to improve relations. Something that the previous US president never wanted. In yesterday’s Guardian (7th July 2009), it was reported:
Pledging to reverse a ‘sense of drift’ in Washington’s relations with Moscow, the US president said he hoped a new nuclear arms reduction treaty to replace the Start-1 pact, which expires this December, would be ready by the end of the year. “We must lead by the example and that is what we are doing here today”, he said in Moscow.

These are hardly the words of a warmonger. Clearly Obama is a proud American, so proud that he wants to improve the image of his homeland abroad. He isn’t interested in provoking a negative reaction from Russia, only a positive response. One thing is certain, US diplomacy is now working the way it should: to heal and not to harm. This path should be followed by all other countries that have nuclear armaments. The world will be a better place without the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and ending of the world’s reliance on nuclear arms should be encouraged. The recent summit between the American and Russian leaders is a step in the right direction.