'The Bush Administration is objecting to a groundbreaking treaty that set up a nuclear weapon-free zone in Central Asia.
Under the treaty signed Friday, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, and Turkmenistan committed themselves not to produce, buy, or allow the deployment of nuclear weapons on their soil.
But the United States, along with Britain and France, refused to attend the signing ceremony in the Kazakh capital, Almaty, citing a 1992 treaty that Russia signed with four of the five nations that Moscow claims could allow missiles to be deployed in the region...
...Arms control groups believe the Bush administration is being disingenuous.
"The reason that many of us suspect the U.S. is opposed to this is more fundamental," the independent Arms Control Association's Daryl G. Kimball told OneWorld. "This is a very strategic region. The U.S. is reticent to give up the option of deploying nuclear weapons in this region in the future."
In May, the journal Foreign Policy named Manas airbase in Kyrgyzstan one of the six most important U.S. military bases in the world. The base was originally established as a hub for multinational operations following the September 11th attacks five years ago.
"In addition to its proximity to Afghanistan," the Foreign Policy article stated, "Manas is located near the immense energy reserves of the Caspian Basin, as well as the Russian and Chinese frontiers."'us.oneworld.net
Shouldn't states that want to limit nuclear proliferation be encouraged? Doesn't this indicate that the US, and 'the West', are less interested in a safer world than in a world which they dominate?
Apparently, bush feels more countries should have nukes, except, of course, some of the ones that want one.
U.S., India Reach Deal On Nuclear Cooperation With Fuel Imports Allowed, Arms Program Could Grow
By Jim VandeHei and Dafna Linzer Washington Post Staff Writers Friday, March 3, 2006; Page A01
NEW DELHI, March 2 -- President Bush and Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh announced Thursday an unprecedented agreement that would provide U.S. nuclear power assistance to India while allowing the country to substantially step up its nuclear weapons production.
Under the agreement, India is to separate its civilian and military nuclear programs over the next eight years in order to gain U.S. expertise and nuclear fuel to meet its rapidly rising energy needs. India's civilian facilities would be subject for the first time to permanent international inspections.
Bush and Singh praised the deal at a joint news conference, but they did not mention that it would allow India to produce vast quantities of fissile material, something the United States and the four other major nuclear powers -- China, Russia, France and Britain -- have voluntarily halted. The pact also does not require oversight of India's prototype fast-breeder reactors, which can produce significant amounts of super-grade plutonium when fully operating. - Washington Post
Posts: 17506 | Location: Lincoln Place, Granite City, IL, USA | Registered: 06-03-02
Excerpt from bush's radio address of Feb. 14, 2004:
This week, I proposed a series of new, ambitious steps to build on our recent success against proliferation. We must expand the international cooperation of law enforcement organizations to act against proliferation networks, to shut down their labs, to seize their materials, to freeze their assets and to bring their members to justice.
We must strengthen laws and international controls that fight proliferation. Last fall at the United Nations I proposed a new Security Council resolution requiring all states to criminalize proliferation, enact strict export controls and secure all sensitive materials within their borders. I urge the Council to pass these measures quickly.
The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, one of the most important tools for preventing the spread of nuclear weapons, is undermined by a loophole that allows countries to seek nuclear weapons under the cover of civilian nuclear power programs. I propose that the world's leading nuclear exporters close that loophole. The Nuclear Suppliers Group should refuse to sell enrichment and reprocessing equipment and technologies to any state that does not already possess full scale, functioning enrichment and reprocessing plants.
For international rules and laws to be effective, they must be enforced. We must ensure that the International Atomic Energy Agency is fully capable of exposing and reporting banned nuclear activity. Every nation should sign what is called the Additional Protocol, which would allow the IAEA to make broader inspections of nuclear sites. We should also establish a special IAEA committee to focus on safeguards and verification. And no nation under investigation for proliferation violations should be able to serve on this committee or on the governing board of the IAEA. Governments breaking the rules should not be trusted with enforcing the rules. - For Immediate Release February 14, 2004, WhiteHouse.gov
Posts: 17506 | Location: Lincoln Place, Granite City, IL, USA | Registered: 06-03-02
Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, and Turkmenistan committed themselves not to produce, buy, or allow the deployment of nuclear weapons on their soil.
Man oh man, another 'axis of evil'. Where do these guys get off NOT wanting nuclear weapons on their soil? Just waiting for the deadline. Those fella's are ag'in' us!
Posts: 509 | Location: Australia | Registered: 02-19-03
