argument top image

What are the positions on nuclear weapons? Show more Show less
Back to question

Nuclear weapons have been inciting fear, controversy, and awe since their creation. With the recent push to ban these weapons gaining popularity across the world, many new positions have sprung up as a response.

Nuclear weapons are a reality we must accept Show more Show less

Although nuclear weapons are destructive and have the potential to do large amounts of damage to the world. They are a reality that we must accept as there is no effective way to ensure that every country would uphold a worldwide agreement to ban them.
< (3 of 3)

It would be impossible to enact a world-wide ban of nuclear weapons

Although banning nuclear weapons would be ideal, it is simply not possible in the modern world. It would be impossible to force every country to agree to disarm their nuclear arsenal, or to keep them from building back up even if they have agreed.
< (1 of 1)

The Argument

Although nuclear weapons are destructive and inhumane, It would be almost impossible to enact a worldwide ban. In 2017, a Treaty to Ban Nuclear Weapons was signed by 84 states[1]. Although many have hope that this will lead to the eventual ban of all nuclear weapons, this is unlikely. Treaties such as this have been signed and made effective before to no avail. In 1993, The Chemical Weapons Convention was signed into international law and forbade the development,stockpiling, and use of chemical weapons. Although this convention had good intentions, it truly wasn’t as effective as people had hoped as even though Syria agreed to this treaty, reports continue to emerge of their use of chemical weapons[2]. Beyond that, feuding countries such as India and Pakistan would not easily agree to disarm their nuclear arsenal until they feel secure[3]. Effectively banning nuclear weapons would mean effectively solving feuds between all countries and ensuring these countries never have conflict again, which would be extremely difficult if not impossible. It is impossible to un-invent a weapon. Regardless of the number of countries that agree to disarm their nuclear weapons, the reality is that these weapons still exist and that if every country in the world doesn’t agree to disarm, then no country will fully disarm. It is a matter of power and security

Counter arguments

Many believe that the Nuclear Ban Treaty would be able to effectively ban Nuclear Weapons as it would create pressure on countries to disarm. This pressure to disarm would lower the nuclear threat and cause countries to globally abandon the nuclear arms race.

Proponents

Premises

Rejecting the premises

References

  1. https://www.icanw.org/signature_and_ratification_status
  2. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/23340460.2017.1409082
  3. https://carnegieeurope.eu/2014/08/25/case-against-total-nuclear-disarmament-pub-56486
This page was last edited on Monday, 19 Oct 2020 at 17:06 UTC