A Promise for the Future: Hoping for Obama’s Success
After terrorism, U.S. President Barack Obama's top priority in international diplomacy is nuclear weapons. Since becoming the president, he has been speaking about nuclear disarmament. After one year of preparations by the Obama administration, the nuclear policy that has been presented declares that the United States will neither use nor threaten to use any nuclear weapons against countries that do not have nuclear weapons — even if the country attacks the U.S. with chemical or biological weapons or threatens to use them. Yes, there is definitely one condition attached. This announcement will remain intact only if the country continues to abide by the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
On April 5 of last year, when Obama announced U.S. and Russian nuclear weapons cut-offs, it was hard to believe that he would actually go for such limits, but now, on April 8, Obama and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev have actually gone ahead and signed the new START. If the numbers can be reduced, then there is nothing that could bring more relief to the world. After all, nuclear weapons are not weapons of war but weapons of mass destruction. America is the only country in the world that used these weapons of mass destruction — in World War II — and even now it leads the world in terms of the number of nuclear weapons, firepower and policies. Therefore, Obama's declaration is important. Let's not forget that as soon as they received indications of Obama's plans, institutions related to nuclear weapons began lobbying against it. There is a section from both parties that has also criticized Obama. The opponents of the Russia–U.S. arms reduction treaty claim that Obama has endangered America's security.
Now, just take a look at the global situation these days. If a world order where nuclear weapons capability is the original measure of your position as a superpower and where there is a looming danger of nuclear weapons falling in the hands of terrorists, then the promise of reducing nuclear weapons and completely avoiding their growth and development in the future is not entirely unimportant. Also, while looking at the nuclear intentions of North Korea and Iran, the desire to move in the same direction has been growing in their neighbors.
Here, for a country like the U.S., whose psychological viewpoint is to consider itself the one and only superpower and to maintain its supremacy over the world, a policy like this can be viewed as promising for the future. According to the treaty with Russia, the two countries will not keep more than 1,500 arms and 700 missiles. They are committed to this agreement, and this is the reason why they have consented to their surveillance.
Obama is also negotiating for the approval of the treaty banning nuclear testing, the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT). Of course, this is not favorable in terms of India's policies. India considers CTBT unfair, and it is so. This means that although Obama's initiatives have increased the challenges for our nuclear policies, it has also laid the foundation for ending the threat of mass destruction. So, we should welcome it too. Yes, India should not stay back in creating an atmosphere against the CTBT, but it should also do something that gives a push to Obama's campaign.
On April 5 of last year, when Obama announced U.S. and Russian nuclear weapons cut-offs, it was hard to believe that he would actually go for such limits, but now, on April 8, Obama and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev have actually gone ahead and signed the new START. If the numbers can be reduced, then there is nothing that could bring more relief to the world. After all, nuclear weapons are not weapons of war but weapons of mass destruction. America is the only country in the world that used these weapons of mass destruction — in World War II — and even now it leads the world in terms of the number of nuclear weapons, firepower and policies. Therefore, Obama's declaration is important. Let's not forget that as soon as they received indications of Obama's plans, institutions related to nuclear weapons began lobbying against it. There is a section from both parties that has also criticized Obama. The opponents of the Russia–U.S. arms reduction treaty claim that Obama has endangered America's security.
Now, just take a look at the global situation these days. If a world order where nuclear weapons capability is the original measure of your position as a superpower and where there is a looming danger of nuclear weapons falling in the hands of terrorists, then the promise of reducing nuclear weapons and completely avoiding their growth and development in the future is not entirely unimportant. Also, while looking at the nuclear intentions of North Korea and Iran, the desire to move in the same direction has been growing in their neighbors.
Here, for a country like the U.S., whose psychological viewpoint is to consider itself the one and only superpower and to maintain its supremacy over the world, a policy like this can be viewed as promising for the future. According to the treaty with Russia, the two countries will not keep more than 1,500 arms and 700 missiles. They are committed to this agreement, and this is the reason why they have consented to their surveillance.
Obama is also negotiating for the approval of the treaty banning nuclear testing, the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT). Of course, this is not favorable in terms of India's policies. India considers CTBT unfair, and it is so. This means that although Obama's initiatives have increased the challenges for our nuclear policies, it has also laid the foundation for ending the threat of mass destruction. So, we should welcome it too. Yes, India should not stay back in creating an atmosphere against the CTBT, but it should also do something that gives a push to Obama's campaign.
Previous article![]( "The Falls of Baghdad")
