Control of Proliferation of Weapons

Control of Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction

The weapons of mass destruction (WMD) have created a long list of debates, arguments and even war. It could not be denied that this WMD was one of the issues highlighted which prompted the recent war in Iraq. This same category is the main reason why North Korea is under much pressure these days because some perceive that North Korea is creating and is actually testing some forms of weapons of mass destruction.

Indeed, the production of weapons of mass destruction - of whatever forms - must be stopped. These things not only threaten the environment, the very lives of the people, but the earth we are all living in. But the question here is how do we control, or much better stop the creation and use of weapons of mass destruction?

Types and/or Forms of WMD

It has been revealed that WMD can be used either in the form of chemical or biological warfare. Biological warfare is already a known "formula" to initiate a war.

Biological warfare

During the prehistoric era, bows and arrows are sued to inflict some form of virus to the opponents. The arrowhead will contain or will be smeared with things (Such as dung, earth or contents of unknown leaves) that will cause infection to anybody who will be inflicted with the said arrowhead. The wounds would become infected, and the opponent is expected to die in (Everett, 2004).

Other more ancient forms of biological warfare were truly innovative. In the second century BC, Hannibal, in exile from Carthage, led a small navy from Bithynia to victory over a superior Roman-backed naval force by having pots full of snakes hurled onto the opposing ships. The pots broke, the disturbed snakes moved through the vessel and the crews abandoned ship. Plague-infected corpses have also been hurled into walled towns during medieval siege warfare. The testing of anthrax on the Scottish island of Gruinard in 1942 has long formed a focus for groups such as Greenpeace (Everett, 2004).

It can be perceived that although biological warfare is already a known category of WMD, history would prove that the biological weapons have been used only sporadically. This is because there have been problems associated with growing the organisms, containing them and keeping them viable as a weapon (Everett, 2004).

Chemical Warfare

Chemical warfare has also been a part of man's history. It should be noted that a Greek fire was used for several years against Byzantium's enemies. The infamous Greek fire was formed through combustion of unknown composition similar in its effects to napalm. In the most recent days, chemical warfare was believed to be the cause of success of some countries who took part in the First World War. It was also during this time when the full horror of industrially-based warfare first was realized. More so, a company which was based in the UK, Porton Down, was established. This company was first positioned as the "chemical warfare establishment" during WWI. However, as days passed by, Porton Down started to shift goals thereby made the company a medium to "understanding and protecting against current weapons, not specifically in developing new weapons" (Everett, 2004).

During the Second World War, there was lesser use of chemical weapons, but the opposing countries remained effective and powerful in their own systems. Nerve gases, however, came into being, with the German scientists as the developers and the first perpetrators. Mercifully, the order for battlefield use never came. Nerve agents were used in the death camps, the most infamous being zyklon-B. In the Far East, particularly in China, the population was subjected to both chemical and biological attack, mainly in occupied areas, as part of military research programs (Everett, 2004).

Another worth noting incident during WWII was the initial and eventual utilization of nuclear weapons. Until now, U.S.' decision of using nuclear weapons against the Japanese territories can still spark big debates among some people.

The sheer scale of the devastation and contamination produced by such nuclear attacks crystallized public opinion into many protest groups, and motivated intellectuals such as Bertrand Russell to provide a counter to the pro-nuclear strategies of their governments (Everett, 2004).

The Control of WMD

It should not be debated whether or not the use of WMD should be stopped or controlled, because it really must be. The aftermath of each and every war, where any form WMD was highly used, is immeasurable. Thousands of people died, millions of properties were lost and even until today, there are series of reports where the effects of nuclear bombs and other WMDs are still affecting even those who happen to live near the areas previously attacked during the last world wars.

So, are there any initiatives from the government sectors to prevent the production and utilization of any form of WMD? Yes there are plenty of movements and actions to control WMD. For instance, there a number of countries which are working hand-in-hand to help finance any actions that would prevent further development of the weapons of mass destructions.

The international community, including Canada, has responded to the perceived security crisis by pouring billions of dollars into threat reduction initiatives in Russia and the Newly Independent States. The Global Partnership Program Against the Spread of Weapons and Materials of Mass Destruction (GPP) is one of these and is prominent in the securing of a portion of the former Soviet weapons of mass destruction (WMD) arsenal, although the effort is not without a variety of challenges." (Collons, 2005)

It can be seen, based on the quoted example above, that there is already a global partnership which is aimed at preventing any further spread of the already created WMDs. This organization would not be established if not for the combined enthusiasm of the people of the countries, who joined to movement, to stop any use of WMDs. More so, this group will not be organized if there is no enough funding from the private and the government sector because such action or movement would really consume a lot of money and efforts from the members.

However, as revealed in the quoted information, there are also a lot of challenges that movements such as this one is facing. Preventing other countries to develop and/or create WMDs is quite impossible; much more in preventing them fro using it. Prove to this was the ongoing problem with the terrorists.

Despite the unperturbed efforts of the U.S. And other allied countries, the development and spread of WMDs seemed unstoppable.

Subsequent developments showed that the United States, much as it is powerful militarily, economically and politically, is unable to tackle proliferation issues single-handedly by means of unilateral use of force, nor is it able to create and sustain on its own an effective world order in this area that would be accepted by the majority of world nations. As for Russia, West European countries and other states, they, failed to convincingly demonstrate the effectiveness of political and diplomatic methods as used against the proliferants, i.e., to substantiate the validity of and the lack of alternatives to the traditional way of controlling the international non-proliferation system." (Kalyadin, 2003)

So what are the best possible approaches to control WMD?

US is not working single-handedly, but not all country who is against the use of WMD has been working with the U.S. For countries which are in pro-WMD, they believe that it is just U.S. alone who want to prevent them from using such WMD. They are made to believe that other countries do not mind nor fear the existence of WMD. Hence, there must be a collective action. Thus, every leaders of the country who are not in favor of using WMD can work hand in hand to controlling further development of any form of weapons of mass destruction.

A first big step can be done, which can be parallel with what the U.S. has initiated in its own country. It should be noted that in the U.S., there is already a proposed bill (H.R. 2939) which aims to:

enhance the prevention and prosecution of crimes committed using weapons of mass destruction" (Kalyadin, 2003).

A bill like this will make illegal any possible threats, attempts, or even conspiracy to use weapons of mass destruction within the country's premises or to any property, including property owned, leased, or used by a foreign government. More so, if other countries will follow the footsteps of the U.S., a bill like this will prevent anyone within country from willfully participating or attempting to participate in the weapons of mass destruction program sponsored by a foreign terrorist power (Kalyadin, 2003).