What Happened at the 47-Nation Nuclear and What Are the Implications

President Obama's nuclear summit is set to conclude today as scheduled. The two day summit was called by the president of the United States in an attempt to gain global support in the fight against terrorism. This summit focused mainly on keeping nuclear arms from the hands of terrorists, either through larceny or through direct sales to suspicious persons. The question that many are asking is whether it was effective or not.

Many people are divided on the real reason behind this summit. Some believe that Obama is just revving up for his reelection bid by showing how good he is at foreign affairs. Still others do believe that he was honest in his attempts to keep one of the worst weapons in human history from falling into the hands of terrorists. No matter which side you fall on, the question of effectiveness still remains. To understand the effectiveness of this meeting, you will need to understand the tangible goals that were laid out in this summit.

The first of these goals was to open communication between world leaders. With 47 nations in attendance, this may not have opened the lines between all countries and world leaders, but it does account for a large portion of them and certainly all of the nations that are currently, or at least soon to be, nuclear capable, except of course, Iran. Considering they were all at the same table and willing to discuss the options, the communication was open. The fact that there were several arguments and disagreements as to how to handle things is a moot point. This is, as we all know, a part of politics. The constant debates and bickering will always be there, unless everyone can feel as if it were their idea that everyone was agreeing to, but that is not possible. So, the first goal was met in a sense that the lines of communication are open, even if they are not all on the same channel.

The second goal was to come to an agreement on how to prevent terrorists from getting a hold of these nukes. This is a little more difficult to see the results to. While many arguments came about as to how to act on this, everyone agreed that the "bad guys" shouldn't have these weapons. Russia was the first to voice their difference of opinion on the way that the US proposes to handle North Korea and Iran. They do not agree with the heavy economic sanctions that have been proposed. One thing that was in agreement, was that all nations should back the UN in this matter and support them and their nuclear arm, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Many nations feel that it is not the United States that should be making the rules on how to deal with sanctions and punishments for uranium enrichment. It should be the UN doing this. Not all nations agree to the IAEA having this say, but all nations, except the US, are more in favor of that than the United States having this control and power. While all nations agree to the prevention of terrorists and extremists having these devices, the type of enforcement and who should enforce it are still up in the air. At least the nations are trying to figure the best way to go about this and the lines of discussion are open. So for this goal, there was some progress made. While it was not met entirely, steps were taken towards the goal.

While these were the main two goals of the conference, there were some more minor progressions made. One of the biggest is the fact that all 47 nations were willing to come together and discuss the topic of nuclear treaties. This is huge. There were several countries in attendance that have very stressed or nonexistent treaties. These same "enemies" were able to sit down and have a civilized discussion about the future of the world. Another gain on this front was that the Ukraine agreed to discontinue the use and study of uranium and nuclear technology. For this struggling country to agree to abandon such an inexpensive technology in lieu of international safety is a huge step forward. This is something that even the United States has not pledged. I believe this example will go far towards showing the rest of the world that a non-nuclear world is possible.

Overall, this summit may have seen like a disaster. There was Russia coming out arguing, the U.S. trying to pull everyone to their side of the table on the Iran sanctions issue, Israel's Prime Minister, Netanyahu, skipping the meeting to avoid a confrontation with Palestinians that do not acknowledge their possession of nukes (they did, however, send a delegation to participate), Iran refusing to attend and stating that they want to hold their own summit in the near future in protest to the US stance on sanctions, and it was all capped off with a female cyclist being struck and killed by a summit motorcade. The problems seem like they are endless, but there was some progress made. If you look at the grand scheme, this was just like a meeting of our Congress. It takes years of meetings to get a simple law passed due to conflicting opinions on the best methods. There is even greater disparity between the world's leaders and even fewer meetings. Personally, I feel this was a success simply because these nations were able to talk and no wars broke out and all the delegates were able to walk out of it alive. I feared it would be much worse than it turned out to be. Maybe in about twenty or thirty more years, we can look forward to a nuclear free world.

Sources:

Russia's Tough Stance on Sanctions Kicks Off Summit

Summit Agrees to Secure Nuclear Materials in Four Years

Hope, Fear at Nuclear Summit

Bicyclist Killed By N-Summit Security Vehicle

Summit: Global Effort Required to Protect Nukes

Iran Denounces Washington Nuclear Summit, Prepares its Own