By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General - UN council endorses nuclear curbs

Source 

The UN Security Council has unanimously adopted a resolution calling for nuclear disarmament, in a session chaired by US President Barack Obama.

 

The resolution calls for further efforts to stop the spread of nuclear arms, to boost disarmament and to lower the risk of "nuclear terrorism".

It was the first time a US president had chaired a Security Council summit.

The resolution comes amid growing concerns among Western powers over Iran's nuclear ambitions.

 


"The historic resolution we just adopted enshrines our shared commitment to the goal of a world without nuclear weapons," Mr Obama told the Security Council after the resolution was adopted.

He said the next year would be "absolutely critical in determining whether this resolution and our overall efforts to stop the spread and use of nuclear weapons are successful".

UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon called the resolution "a fresh start toward a new future".

'Proliferation risk'

The resolution does not specifically mention countries by name, such as North Korea and Iran, but reaffirms previous Security Council resolutions relating to their nuclear plans.


Iran's nuclear programme has been criticised by the US and five nations who are set to hold talks next week.

Iran says its nuclear ambitions are for peaceful energy purposes, but others fear it is developing weapons.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu reflected those fears in his speech to the UN General Assembly on Thursday, saying that stopping Iran acquiring nuclear weapons was the world's most urgent task.

After the resolution was passed, Iran rejected allegations about its nuclear programme as "totally untrue" and reiterated its "readiness to engage in serious and constructive negotiations with interested parties".

The resolution commits member nations to work toward a world without nuclear weapons, and endorses a broad framework of actions to reduce global nuclear risks.

It also urges states to:

  • join and comply with the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT)
  • refrain from testing nuclear weapons and ratify the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT)
  • ensure safeguards of nuclear material and prevent trafficking

Mr Obama stressed that the US would play its part, seeking a new strategic arms reduction treaty with Russia and moving ahead with ratification of the test ban treaty.

"Although we averted a nuclear nightmare during the Cold War, we now face proliferation of a scope and complexity that demands new strategies and new approaches," Mr Obama said.

"Just one nuclear weapon exploded in a city, be it New York or Moscow, Tokyo or Beijing, London or Paris, could kill hundreds of thousands of people."

'Preposterous' allegations

Also on Thursday, a UN ministerial conference adopted a declaration urging compliance with the CTBT, which has been signed or ratified by 100 countries since 1996.


US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton presence at the meeting marked the first US participation at the biannual conference since 1999, when the US Senate refused to ratify the treaty.

On Wednesday, the first day of the UN General Assembly, Iran's plans came under fire from several world leaders, including French President Nicolas Sarkozy and UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown.

Russia signalled that it might be prepared to soften its opposition to sanctions against Iran over its nuclear plans, though China, another Security Council member, said increasing pressure on Iran would not be effective.

But in a statement circulated outside the Security Council on Thursday, Iran said France and the UK had not complied with their own nuclear disarmament obligations, and were therefore not in a position to judge others.

It accused Mr Sarkozy of making "preposterous" claims, and said the UK "deliberately and cynically [had] ignored its legal commitments" to the NPT.

"Our commitment to non-proliferation remains intact," the statement said

 



Around the Network

No surprises here. Like any exclusive club, the more nations join the nuclear club, the less important club membership is. Nobody who's already in the club wants to let a new member in.

A couple interesting points about Iran: It's not just the state of Iran that wants a nuclear arsenal, the people of Iran want it too. So even if the revolution succeeds in replacing the theocracy with a democracy, Iran will most likely continue to develop nuclear weapons.

However, polls also suggest that the people of Iran would be willing to trade their nuclear program for a lifting of sanctions. So they're quite willing to bargain as long as the offer is compelling enough.

Now if we could just get that pesky authoritarian regime out of the way...



"The worst part about these reviews is they are [subjective]--and their scores often depend on how drunk you got the media at a Street Fighter event."  — Mona Hamilton, Capcom Senior VP of Marketing
*Image indefinitely borrowed from BrainBoxLtd without his consent.

bumpity bump



When he says the US will play its part does that mean the US will start getting rid of their nuclear weapons as well? Cause that would be alot of them.



Vetteman94 said:
When he says the US will play its part does that mean the US will start getting rid of their nuclear weapons as well? Cause that would be alot of them.

Reduce stockpiles? Sure, why not?

Disarm completely? Not a chance in hell. And even a peace-loving lefty like myself wouldn't want the US to fully disarm its nuclear arsenal.



"The worst part about these reviews is they are [subjective]--and their scores often depend on how drunk you got the media at a Street Fighter event."  — Mona Hamilton, Capcom Senior VP of Marketing
*Image indefinitely borrowed from BrainBoxLtd without his consent.

Around the Network
famousringo said:
Vetteman94 said:
When he says the US will play its part does that mean the US will start getting rid of their nuclear weapons as well? Cause that would be alot of them.

Reduce stockpiles? Sure, why not?

Disarm completely? Not a chance in hell. And even a peace-loving lefty like myself wouldn't want the US to fully disarm its nuclear arsenal.

LOL,  I agree



Vetteman94 said:
famousringo said:
Vetteman94 said:
When he says the US will play its part does that mean the US will start getting rid of their nuclear weapons as well? Cause that would be alot of them.

Reduce stockpiles? Sure, why not?

Disarm completely? Not a chance in hell. And even a peace-loving lefty like myself wouldn't want the US to fully disarm its nuclear arsenal.

LOL,  I agree

Obama does not. He wants them all gone. Even ours. Start at 4:25 if you just care about this point.



Well that is just stupid then



Don't be naive. It's just another tactic to discourage new nations from joining the club.

"See, we don't even want nuclear weapons. We're gonna get rid of them any year now, so there's really no point in you getting nukes, either. Here we are commiting to getting rid of these terrible weapons and if you're trying to get more, you must be a terrible person."

It's a transparent attempt to seize the moral high ground.

The US and Russia could spend decades slowly disarming their nuclear stockpiles and still maintain an arsenal capable of leveling all civilization. Dialing down the armament makes all kinds of sense in terms of reducing costs and recovering potential fuel, but nobody is naive enough to think that the genie of nuclear war can be stuffed back in his bottle.



"The worst part about these reviews is they are [subjective]--and their scores often depend on how drunk you got the media at a Street Fighter event."  — Mona Hamilton, Capcom Senior VP of Marketing
*Image indefinitely borrowed from BrainBoxLtd without his consent.

famousringo said:

Don't be naive. It's just another tactic to discourage new nations from joining the club.

"See, we don't even want nuclear weapons. We're gonna get rid of them any year now, so there's really no point in you getting nukes, either. Here we are commiting to getting rid of these terrible weapons and if you're trying to get more, you must be a terrible person."

It's a transparent attempt to seize the moral high ground.

The US and Russia could spend decades slowly disarming their nuclear stockpiles and still maintain an arsenal capable of leveling all civilization. Dialing down the armament makes all kinds of sense in terms of reducing costs and recovering potential fuel, but nobody is naive enough to think that the genie of nuclear war can be stuffed back in his bottle.

So when he says things you agree with, he is being honest. When he says stupid things, it's just a smoke screen, and what he really thinks is what you agree with.

I wish I could look at the world that way. I would never get upset about anything.