Ashraf alaa badawi 900010200 mppa 570 Dr.

Sameh

Critique and analysis on U.S position towards NPT Outline for assignment 1

Introduction A) Politics and power B) Thesis statement: us is violating NPT

Body one The history of the United States toward nuclear energy and weapons

Body two and conclusion Based on the data of body one or the history of the US is . Considered violation of NPT

How can the US act differently in a positive way toward the world

Action speaks louder than words, and practice what the united states preaches

The critique and analysis A well-known fact, that politics is based on manipulation, which includes negotiations and bargaining on alliances or conflicts of interest unfortunately, the rules of practicing effective and efficient power for decision making is not always serving the well fare orientation this can be explained deeply the Micaville theory. And also through how the U.S succeeded in manipulating and clarifying the fact of Irans violation to NPT, ALTHOUGH, through history U.S is not committed to the NPT That is why I chosen the United States of America. One tool to formulate a credible analysis and critique for us position towards the NPT is to clarify the history and experience of US towards nuclear power. The United States not only was the first country to develop nuclear power, but also was the first country to use it in warfare. So, the development of nuclear weapon was used in Hiroshima and Nagasaki in World War 2. In November1962 things have changed a little since partial test ban treaty took place and the US approved it. the treaty basically was about The treaty banning nuclear weapon tests in the atmosphere, in outer space and under water, often abbreviated as the Partial Test Ban Treaty (PTBT), Limited Test Ban Treaty (LTBT), or Nuclear Test Ban Treaty (NTBT). In other simple words, this treaty aim to prevent nuclear fall out. after the end of world war 2 and the dissolution of soviet union in 19991 , U.S started to be hesitant and halted toward nuclear testing programs under bill Clinton regime. In1998 spending on all U.S. nuclear weapons and weapons-

related programs was $35,100,000,000 .2012, Iran could threaten U.S. military initiative in the Middle East with nuclear war. If this is not true, Why couldn't the former Soviet Union do similar things during the Cold War, and why can't other nuclear powers make similar threats today when they don't like a particular American initiative? The simple reason is that threatening nuclear war against the United States is not credible unless one is willing to commit national suicide, President Barack Obama arrived in office determined to make a sharp break with George W. Bush's policy on nuclear nonproliferation. Obama and his team believed that the only way they could get allies to support a tough line against countries like Iran or North Korea that were seeking to acquire nuclear weapons was to comply with the United States' own obligation under the Nuclear NonProliferation Treaty (NPT) to reduce its nuclear stockpile. The president's embrace of nuclear abolitionism and his strong push for an arms-reduction treaty with the Russians countered the argument, common throughout the developing world, that the United States was a nuclear hypocrite(foreign policy) -- that it was violating the same international rules that it was insisting that Iran observe. The combination of engagement and NPT-compliance has helped Obama persuade Russia, China, and other states to pass tough sanctions in the U.N. Security Council.

Consequently, the history of the united sates is full of contradictions between the promises and positive positions towards and others nuclear treaties, and what they are actually implementing in the real world. It was very smart from U.S.A

administration to cross judgments on Iran while the U.S is actually violating the NPT. However, I didnt say that Iran is with or against NPT , it will be irrelevant to analyze IRAN since I have chosen the united states. Am skeptical about the notion of representing to the whole world that the U.S is fully devoted to NPT, while on the real world clarifies this devotion is toward nuclear weapons. United states is not practicing what is preaching . As mentioned above politics and decision-making is based on manipulation. Clarity and openness of agenda is a bit utopian but there will be no harm of trying to reach any level of clarity, transparency and commitment for the well- fare orientation.

References 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. http://www.brookings.edu/projects/archive/nucweapons/50.aspx http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapons_and_the_United_States http://www.twf.org/News/Y2009/0926-IranPlant.html http://walt.foreignpolicy.com/category/topic/us_foreign_policy http://www.jta.org/news/article/2010/05/30/2739372/israel-rejects-unnuclear-confab-resolution 6. http://tribune.com.pk/story/314002/us-not-in-position-to-tell-iran-whatto-do-in-the-stra 7. http://www.jta.org/news/article/2011/08/04/3088854/barak-israeli-uspositions-on-1967