Global Zero Persuasive Essay

The 20th century saw the emergence of wars using increasingly sophisticated technologies.The breakthroughs in the field of science and technology sent the world into new turmoil because of the power of new inventions (Hardy and Glen). During World War II, Albert Einstein and his colleagues introduced a bomb of catastrophic destructive power that could be created with nuclear fission (Hardy and Glen). Nuclear proliferation is the spread of nuclear weapons to nuclear technology to nations that are not recognized as Nuclear Weapon States (Hardy and Glen). Over the last decade, it has been easier for nations to acquire nuclear weapons and build nuclear weapons programs
The United States should not support the Global Zero Movement or ratify the …show more content…
The Global Zero Campaign is an organization that calls for “the phased, verified of all nuclear weapons worldwide” on the grounds that this is “ the only way to eliminate the nuclear threat- including nuclear proliferation and nuclear terrorism (Joffe and Davis, pg.1). The government of the United States supports the idea of declaring global disarmament a top priority at least in terms of rhetoric if not action. Supporters of the Global Zero movement argue that if the threat of nuclear war is lifted, the “great powers of the world” might not be so terrifying anymore ( Joffe and Davis, pg.1). This is a false lived idea because stability is not determined by the size of the nuclear weapons or power of the country but by the threat of attack. The Global Zero Movement calls for stronger barriers against nuclear weapons and materials that make them ( Joffe and Davis,pg.1). Supporters argue it will take a great power committed to the elimination of nuclear power to marshal the political, economic, and military functions of “dangerous” nations.( Joffe and Davis,pg.3). A “dangerous” country is figurative approach and doesn't have a definite definition of what would be seen as “ dangerous.” This would create hard punishments and incentives to convert nations towards nonproliferation. The views of the critics of the Global Zero Movement are more useful for the United States …show more content…
This all began after the Cuban Missile Crisis when the United States ratified the Limited Test Ban Treaty, which banned nuclear tests except ones conducted underground. The missile crisis highlighted the instability of the arms race (Tauscher, pg.1). President Kennedy wanted to create a ban that would do more, but the Senate wouldn't allow him (Tauscher,pg.1). Today, the world is still searching for a resolution banning all nuclear weapon testing. Supporters of a ban believe the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty will need ratification . The ratification of the CTBT will allow for greater cooperation on the other elements of the President's Prague Agenda. The Prague Agenda showed President Obama's vision to live in a world with world peace and without nuclear weapons ( Tauscher, pg.2). One of the arguments of the supporters of the CTBT is the idea that the United states doesn't need to conduct nuclear explosive tests because its weapons are functional and superior to those of other nuclear states.Another argument is that a Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty will force other states not to test their nuclear weapons and provide a disincentive which will allow for a greater ability to catch the states that try to cheat the system (Tauscher,pg.2). The United States abides by the core requirements of the treaty because they do not need to test