Critical Issues Forum

Nuclear Disarmament: Challenges, Opportunities and Next Steps

Benchmark III

May 18, 2009

Revised May 27, 2009

Teacher: Katherine Conover

Contributing Students: Rebecca Amstutz, Aaron Bagley, Cheyane Blevins, Phil Bothun, Mollie Brady, Alyssa Brandt, Garrick Jannene, Dylan Moriart

Nuclear (Non) Proliferation: Avoiding Armageddon

Although there are several obstacles to nuclear disarmament, one major one is the issue of the conflicting goals of NPT signatory nations, NPT non-signatory nations and various NGOs and regulatory agencies, like the IAEA.

The obstacle of divergent national goals has prevented recent NPT Review Conferences from making progress on reinforcing and strengthening the provisions of the NPT. The goals of such nations as China, Russia, the United States, Japan, Iran and Zimbabwe represent some of those divergent views. Goals of groups such as Global Zero and the International Atomic Energy Agency also have a place in the NPT review process.

http://d.yimg.com/a/p/afp/20090401/capt.photo_1238593205084-2-0.jpg

This is an important time for those advocating for nuclear disarmament because two new leaders have come to power. United States President Obama and Russian Federation President Medvedev have been exploring reducing stockpiles, which is a giant step in the right direction. Another exiting opportunity is that the NPT, or nuclear nonproliferation treaty, Review is coming up in 2010. Prior to that, in May 2009, the Preparatory Committee for the 2010 NPT Review Conference will meet in New York to establish concerns and set agenda items. By airing divergent concerns at the preparatory committee, it is hoped that that committee will be able to make solid recommendations to the upcoming NPT Review Conference to insure a safer future for present and future generations.

Various governments and organizations will discuss the issues and goals they hope the 2010 Review Conference will address. The chair for the Preparatory Committee deliberations is the representative from Zimbabwe. Below is a summary of the issues of some of the NPT countries and of the NGO Global Zero and of the International Atomic Energy Agency.

Zimbabwe:

Uranium was recently discovered in Zimbabwe. Zimbabwe’s government would like to assure the world that the uranium will not be used to make bombs but to generate electricity. President Robert Mugabe says that the discovery of uranium will go a long way in further enhancing the government rural electrification program. As a signatory of the NPT, Zimbabwe states that they believe in nonproliferation and wish to work with other countries in order to come up with a plan to better enforce the NPT provisions (Meldrum).

Zimbabwe is chairing the Preparatory Committee, which presents some problems. The leaders of other countries question Zimbabwe’s ability to lead because of the perceived instability of the government and especially concerns about the goals of President Mugabe (Personal communication with Gaukhar Mukhatzhonova, Center for Nonproliferation Studies Graduate Research Assistant, 4/24/2009).

The parts of the treaty that Zimbabwe would like to focus on include Article III number three and Article IV. Article III number three states that the safeguards required by the NPT should “avoid hampering the economic or technological development of the Parties or international cooperation in the field of peaceful nuclear activities”. Article IV states that “nothing in this Treaty shall be interpreted as affecting the inalienable right of all the Parties to the Treaty to develop research, production and use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes without discrimination” and that “all the Parties to the Treaty undertake to facilitate, and have the right to participate in, the fullest possible exchange of equipment, materials and scientific and technological information for the peaceful uses of nuclear energy”. Zimbabwe feels that it is important to able to continue in their nuclear energy research and development without being suspected of nuclear weapons development. Zimbabwe feels that the NPT should concentrate on reducing the stockpiles of the current nuclear powers instead of incriminating small countries that wish to purse peaceful nuclear energy programs (Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons).

United Kingdom:

The United Kingdom has six issues that it would like to have addressed at the 2010 Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty Review. These are:

1. Enforcement of the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty.
2. Continuation of US-Russia negotiations and agreements on further nuclear stockpile reductions.
3. Stopping the development/proliferation of weapons in Iran and North Korea
4. Engaging in multilateral negotiations on a treaty to cut off the production of fissile materials for nuclear weapons.
5. Establishment of a new IAEA-led system that would help states develop civil nuclear energy programs.
6. Exploration of the complex political, military and technical issues that must be resolved in order to reduce, and ultimately eliminate nuclear arsenals, along with preventing nuclear weapons from reemerging (Patterson).

China:

According to the H.E. Mr. Cheng Jingye, Head of the Chinese Delegation to the Second Session of the Preparatory Committee for the 2010 Review Conference, China thinks that the 13 Practical Steps (See Appendix I) established in the 2000 conference are still completely relevant and agrees to the no-first use policy. China has signed all protocols involved with nuclear-weapon-free zones and will not threaten non-nuclear weapon states with them. China maintains that the following principles should be firmly addressed regarding nuclear non-proliferation issues.

· The issue should be approached from not only the direct problems, but also the root causes. All nations should adhere to universally recognized international laws and respect each others security interests and pursue common safety.

· All countries should work towards stronger diplomacy and enhancing mutual trust.

· All non-proliferation issues should be taken care of through negotiations and any efforts made should not deviate from the goal of maintaining peace and stability.

· Sanctions on both non nuclear states and nuclear states should be balanced (Cheng).

Argentina:

Argentina is the only Spanish-speaking country on the planet that has pursued nuclear weapons. In the early 1980’s, the military government at the time started a nuclear weapons program, but this program was ended in 1983 following the return of a democratically-elected government. Argentina’s nuclear intentions would be silenced until 1991, when the country created, with Brazil, the Brazilian-Argentine Agency for Accounting and Control of Nuclear Materials (APACC). This bi-national agency ensures both Argentina and Brazil that their respective nuclear technology is only being used for peaceful purposes. More recently, in 2008, Argentina and Brazil signed an agreement of cooperation, allowing the two states to share technology and increase their uranium enrichment operations (NTI).

The actions of the ABACC set the tone for Argentina’s nuclear policy. Argentina views nuclear energy as the premier alternative to fossil fuels to combat environmentally-related issues. At the same time, Argentina is in no way supporting nuclear weapons programs. It is for non-proliferation, and in many cases also disarmament, but at the same time, it is an exporter or nuclear energy technologies (APACCA). This is a long-standing position, as shown by the 1967 Treaty of Tlatelolco, which created a nuclear weapons free zone throughout Latin America and the Caribbean (Treaty of Tlatelolco)). Even though Argentina was a signatory of this treaty, the treaty did not enter legal force in Argentina until the 1983 democratically-elected government came into power (NTI.). Argentina finally acceded to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty in 1995.

Russia:

Russia is concerned about the proliferation of sensitive technologies that might be used for the production of nuclear weapons.  Existing disarmament and non-proliferation mechanisms sometimes fail to promptly and efficiently respond to new challenges to international security.  The negative developments can only be prevented by joint efforts using political and diplomatic means and proven mechanisms of the United Nations, first and foremost, its Security Council.  We suggest working together on nuclear energy development patterns allowing for steady nuclear fuel supply programs based on international cooperation as an alternative to proliferation of sensitive technologies.  We respect the interest of States in developing peaceful nuclear technologies and steadily pursue strengthening and universalization of the NPT.  Russia also finds it important to improve the efficiency of the IAEA verification activity.  The Russian Federation have provided and will provide assistance towards strengthening the IAEA safeguards system, including contributing to financing the national program for scientific and technical support of the Agency’s safeguards activities.  Establishing nuclear-weapon free zones is an effective measure of strengthening nuclear non-proliferation regimes and enhancing regional and international security.  Finally, it would be wise to pay special attention in our work to such problems as the NPT non-compliance, black market phenomenon and the possibility of nuclear material falling into the hands of terrorists (Anotov, April 2008).

United States:

The United States believes that the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons – signed into existence 41 years ago this summer – stands today as the most widely adhered-to nonproliferation and arms control agreement in the history of mankind. The NPT, according to the U.S. in 2008, is “a crucial contributor to international peace and security” (Ford, 2008). The world today is indeed safer and more secure than the one in which the original NPT was signed. The U.S. recently extended thanks to the party states for their commitments to preventing the further spread of nuclear weapons through compliance with the guidelines of the NPT. However, the task of nuclear disarmament is far from being accomplished (Ford, 2008).

The United States, as President Obama articulated earlier in April of this year, has a “moral responsibility to lead in the effort to end nuclear arms because no other country has used one” (Loven, 2009). The United States has shown good faith by taking responsibility in the recent (and continued) reduction of its nuclear stockpiles, as well as in partnering with Russia for a new START agreement later this year (Loven, 2009).

What the signatories of the NPT must do now is learn to hold one another accountable. This treaty is an honor code, as emphasized by Article VI of the NPT:

Each of the Parties to the Treaty undertakes to pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to nuclear disarmament, and on a Treaty on general and complete disarmament under strict and effective international control (Non-Proliferation Treaty, 1968).

But the U.S. reminds the world that the NPT is simultaneously an international collaboration. As President Obama stated in Prague, “Words must mean something…Now is the time for a strong international response” (Huffington Post, 2009). The United States would like to see more teeth added to the NPT so that countries are better able to hold one another accountable to their actions as the world continues in its pursuit of nuclear disarmament (U.S. Dept. of State, 2009).

Iran:

The Islamic Republic of Iran approves and applauds the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, but there are a few improvements needed.

First, Iran approves the intentions of Presidents Obama and Medvedev to reduce their nation’s large and unnecessary nuclear stockpiles.  For the entire world's sake, Iran hopes that these talks come to fruition.

Next, the continuation of the nuclear arms race, as seen with the United Kingdom’s Trident Missile Program, is both an unnecessary expenditure and a threat to global peace.  Iran asks that new weapons programs such as the Trident be stopped

Also, Iran hopes that the persecution of developing nations that wish to have peaceful nuclear energy programs, such as Iran, will cease.  It is stated in the NPT that all nations should have access to peaceful nuclear technology.

In addition, it is of grave concern that the issue of Israel's nuclear weapons program has been completely ignored.  Israel is a threat to the stability of the Middle East, and should be dealt with by the United Nations Security Council.

Iran congratulates the efforts of the African Union in creating a Nuclear Weapons Free Zone on the African continent.  Iran hopes that, with Israel's cooperation, a similar zone can be created in the Middle East.

Japan:

From the view point of the only nation to experience the devastation of nuclear bombings, Japan strongly hopes for the achievement of a safe world free of nuclear weapons at the earliest possible date. Japan, with the goal of improving the security environment, places immense importance on maintaining and strengthening the NPT, which is the cornerstone of the nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation regime. Nevertheless, the NPT regime now faces a variety of serious challenges. In regards to nuclear disarmament, NPT Nuclear Weapons States are making small steps towards nuclear disarmament. However, greater progress on nuclear disarmament is needed and is imperative for maintaining and strengthening the NPT. Nuclear issues of the Korea and Iran States are of a very high priority and need immediate attention. Next, as the demand for energy grows, the question of how to balance the needs of peaceful uses of nuclear energy with nuclear weapons capability is an important issue that the international community must deal with. Finally, dedicated efforts must continue in order to improve the universalization of the NTP. These are extremely grave challenges, but Japan is convinced that the NPT regime can be strengthened further by meeting them (Japan).

Global Zero:

As stated in their webpage, Global Zero is a new international initiative launched in Paris on December 8, 2008 by 100 political, military, business, faith and civic leaders from across political lines. On the Colbert Report, a late night TV political satire program, Queen Noor, the Queen of Jordan and the Global Zero media spokesperson, stated, “The presidents of the United States and Russia have made it clear nuclear proliferation is the gravest threat to the world today (H.M. Queen Noor.)” Global Zero will support these leaders in their endeavors by combining high-level policy work with global public outreach to achieve a comprehensive agreement to eliminate all nuclear weapons worldwide through phased and verified reductions. Global Zero’s goal at the NPT review is to develop a step-by-step policy plan for the phased elimination of all nuclear weapons. Finally, Global Zero is committed to keeping the public aware of the NPT review process (Global Zero: About the Campaign).

International Atomic Energy Agency:

For the IAEA, the importance of safety and security in our world is the top priority. Thus this agency believes that the depletion of nuclear stockpiles should be continued and the United States and Russia should also be acknowledged for their efforts. The safeguards that are currently in place are a good start, but the safeguards should grow in number. Also the IAEA believes that nuclear energy and peaceful uses of nuclear materials should become more of a top priority to the nuclear superpowers. There should also be a closer focus on suspected nuclear states, and better rewards for them to join the NPT. There should be an IAEA bank of all nuclear materials that would be distributed to any country that desires the materials, under the supervision of the IAEA (Statement on behalf of the IAEA Secretariat at the General Debate).

Addressing the Obstacle of Conflicting Goals: Public Awareness/Knowledge

There are high hopes for the 2010 NPT Review Conference:

· Greater efforts by nuclear power states, such as the United States and Russia, to disarm larger portions of their stockpiles.

· Pressure for States that do not now follow the NPT, such as Korea, Iran, Israel, and Pakistan (even though they have not signed the treaty) to do so.

· Stronger efforts to resolve the differing and sometimes conflicting goals of NPT nations, non-signatory nations and various organizations and agencies.

One way to address the obstacle of conflicting goals and concerns is through public awareness. However, from all that people are concerned about nuclear destruction, it might as well be Legos burning. The concern about nuclear proliferation, stockpiles, and attack has dropped off of the radar of Western peoples. During the Cold War, people were more aware of the risk of nuclear attack, but they were naïve about the devastation that such an attack would have. The governmental campaign of “Duck and Cover” advised citizens to get under a table or to put cloth or paper over their heads in the event of a nuclear attack. Such naivety seems absurd. Getting under a table would not offer very much protection from a nuclear bomb. People were unaware of the true power of nuclear weapons.

Even though people at this time were unaware of the magnitude of nuclear power, at least the dangers associated with nuclear weapons were a part of the public consciousness. Today, they are not. Over 20 public opinion polls of the last year regarding problems and priorities have not evidenced any concern about the nuclear realm, according to PollingReport.com (Problems and Priorities).

http://www.aasc.ucla.edu/cab/gz/02_31.html

OKOYAMA Yoshihisa, survivor Cremating the dead at the riverbed.

An important step in working for nuclear disarmament and for addressing the obstacle of conflicting national goals is educating the public. One way to do this is through the arts. One collection of such artwork was created by victims of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and is displayed at the UCLA website: http://www.aasc.ucla.edu/cab/200712090001.html.

Commercial artists, too, have created powerful images that can help increase public awareness of the nuclear threat. Two of perhaps the most famous artists are Andy Warhol (Atomic Bombs Silkscreen, shown at right) and Roy Lichtenstein. Their works and others are posted at: http://www.firstpulseprojects.net/bombproject/Artists2.html.

A variety of musicians have addressed nuclear issues in their songs. Bob Dylan’s anti-war ballad, “A Hard Rain’s a-Gonna Fall” was popular in the 1960’s. More recently, Iron Maiden's 'Brighter than a Thousand Suns,' has addressed this issue in music (Nuclear Weapons in Popular Culture: Music). One particularly haunting song is “When the Children Cry,” performed by White Lion, an American rock band popular in the 1980’s during the height of the Cold War. The words of the first verse are as follows:

Little child
Dry your crying eyes
How can I explain
The fear you feel inside
‘Cause you were born
Into this evil world
Where man is killing man
And no one knows just why
What have we become
Just look what we have done
All that we’ve destroyed
You must build again.

(“When the Children Cry” Lyrics)

Awareness of the public on this high profile and sensitive topic is crucial to making nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament real in the eyes of world leaders. One other way to make the public more aware is through the information given out by the non governmental organizations. BASIC is a research NGO that stands for the British American Security Information Committee. They examine security images, nuclear and biological policies and military strategies. They are the first security group to have crossed the Atlantic (“About BASIC” n.d.). The Committee on Disarmament, Peace and Security is an NGO that is a liaison to the UN. Their main purpose is to inform other NGOs on the status of negotiations, county positions, major obstacles and opportunities. They are the primary ally for the international movement of arms control, peace and disarmament (Committee on Disarmament, Peace, and Security. n.d.). Friends of the Earth is a green NGO that does not approve of nuclear energy and other uses for having nuclear reactors. The energy is very clean, but FOE believes that it is very expensive and it is too risky when the other uses are destructive and other options are available for green energy (“Friends of the Earth: Who We Are” n.d.). Each of these NGOs and others, too, work to put pressure on world leaders in part by making the public aware of the nuclear disarmament issue.

Conclusion

Thanks to the work of various NGOs, like Global Zero and others, and thanks to public statements by Presidents Obama and Medvedev and to the commitment of other world leaders, there is increased press coverage of concerns regarding nuclear proliferation. Such coverage, along with the work of concerned artists in a variety of media, should lead to greater awareness and knowledge on the part of citizens worldwide about this issue. This, in turn, will hopefully lead to greater public involvement that can put pressure on the participants in the NPT Review Conference to be more successful than they have been in the past at addressing and resolving any conflicting viewpoints.

Appendix I

The Ploughshares Monitor

Summer 2005, volume 26, no. 2

13 Practical Steps

The following text is excerpted from the 2000 NPT Review Conference Final Document.

The Conference agrees on the following practical steps for the systematic and progressive efforts to implement Article VI of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons and paragraphs 3 and 4(c) of the1995 Decision on "Principles and Objectives for Nuclear Non-Proliferation and Disarmament":

1. The importance and urgency of signatures and ratifications, without delay and without conditions and in accordance with constitutional processes, to achieve the early entry into force of the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty.

2. A moratorium on nuclear-weapon-test explosions or any other nuclear explosions pending entry into force of that Treaty.

3. The necessity of negotiations in the Conference on Disarmament on a non-discriminatory, multilateral and internationally and effectively verifiable treaty banning the production of fissile material for nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices in accordance with the statement of the Special Coordinator in 1995 and the mandate contained therein, taking into consideration both nuclear disarmament and nuclear non-proliferation objectives. The Conference on Disarmament is urged to agree on a programme of work which includes the immediate commencement of negotiations on such a treaty with a view to their conclusion within five years.

4. The necessity of establishing in the Conference on Disarmament an appropriate subsidiary body with a mandate to deal with nuclear disarmament. The Conference on Disarmament is urged to agree on a programme of work which includes the immediate establishment of such a body.

5. The principle of irreversibility to apply to nuclear disarmament, nuclear and other related arms control and reduction measures.

6. An unequivocal undertaking by the nuclear-weapon States to accomplish the total elimination of their nuclear arsenals leading to nuclear disarmament to which all States parties are committed under Article VI.

7. The early entry into force and full implementation of START II and the conclusion of START III as soon as possible while preserving and strengthening the ABM Treaty as a cornerstone of strategic stability and as a basis for further reductions of strategic offensive weapons, in accordance with its provisions.

8. The completion and implementation of the Trilateral Initiative between the United States of America, the Russian Federation and the International Atomic Energy Agency.

9. Steps by all the nuclear-weapon States leading to nuclear disarmament in a way that promotes international stability, and based on the principle of undiminished security for all:

(a) Further efforts by the nuclear-weapon States to reduce their nuclear arsenals unilaterally.

(b) Increased transparency by the nuclear-weapon States with regard to the nuclear weapons capabilities and the implementation of agreements pursuant to Article VI and as a voluntary confidence-building measure to support further progress on nuclear disarmament.

(c) The further reduction of non-strategic nuclear weapons, based on unilateral initiatives and as an integral part of the nuclear arms reduction and disarmament process.

(d) Concrete agreed measures to further reduce the operational status of nuclear weapons systems.

(e) A diminishing role for nuclear weapons in security policies to minimize the risk that these weapons ever be used and to facilitate the process of their total elimination.

(f) The engagement as soon as appropriate of all the nuclear-weapon States in the process leading to the total elimination of their nuclear weapons.

10. Arrangements by all nuclear-weapon States to place, as soon as practicable, fissile material designated by each of them as no longer required for military purposes under IAEA or other relevant international verification and arrangements for the disposition of such material for peaceful purposes, to ensure that such material remains permanently outside of military programmes.

11. Reaffirmation that the ultimate objective of the efforts of States in the disarmament process is general and complete disarmament under effective international control.

12. Regular reports, within the framework of the NPT strengthened review process, by all States parties on the implementation of Article VI and paragraph 4 (c) of the 1995 Decision on "Principles and Objectives for Nuclear Non-Proliferation and Disarmament," and recalling the Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice of 8 July 1996.

13. The further development of the verification capabilities that will be required to provide assurance of compliance with nuclear disarmament agreements for the achievement and maintenance of a nuclear-weapon-free world.

(http://www.ploughshares.ca/libraries/monitor/monj05b.htm

Works Cited

About BASIC. (n.d.) Retrieved May 5, 2009 from BASIC website: http://www.basicint.org/about.htm

Antonov, Anatoly. (April 2008) “Statement for the Delegation from the Russian Federation,” pp. 13 – 22. Retrieved May 4, 2009 from the UN website: http://www.un.org/NPT2010/SecondSession/delegates%20statements/Russian%20Federation.pdf

APACCA Statement. (2008, May) Retrieved May 12, 2009, from United Nations: http://www.un.org/NPT2010/SecondSession/delegates%20statements/Brazilian-Argentine%20Agency.pdf

Cheng, Jingye. Statement to the Second Session of the Preparatory Committee for the 2010 Review Conference of the Parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. (28 April 2008) Retrieved May 13, 2009 from the UN website: http://www.un.org/NPT2010/SecondSession/delegates%20statements/China

Committee on Disarmament, Peace and Security. (n.d.) Retrieved May 5, 2009 from CDP website: http://disarm.igc.org/

Ford, C. (2008, April 28). A Recipe for Success at the 2010 Review Conference. In Reaching Critical Will [2008 NPT PrepCom Government Statements]. Retrieved April 23, 2009, from Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom Web site: http://www.reachingcriticalwill.org/////.pdf

Friends of the Earth: Who We Are. (n.d.) Retrieved May 5, 2009 from the FOE website: http://www.foe.org/who-we-are

Global Zero: About the Campaign. (n.d.) Retrieved April 20, 2009 from the Global Zero website: http://www.globalzero.org/en/about-campaign

H. M. Queen Noor. (April 7, 2009). Retrieved April 20, 2009 from the Comedy Central website: http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/224012/april-07-2009/h-m--queen-noor

Huffington Post. (2009, April 5). Obama Prague Speech on Nuclear Weapons (Full Text). In The Huffington Post. Retrieved May 1, 2009, from http://www.huffingtonpost.com////obama-prague-speech-on-nu_n_183219.html

Japan. (n.d.). United Nations [Delegation of Japan to the Conference on 

Disarmament. ]. Retrieved May 4, 2009, from http://www.un.org/NPT2010/

 SecondSession/delegates%20statements/Japan.pdf

Loven, J. (2009, April 10). Obama: U.S. must lead effort to end nuclear arms. Janesville Gazette, p. A7.

Meldrun, Andrew. “Mugabe hails uranium find and vows to pursue nuclear power” The Guardian, Monday 21 November 2005. Retrieved April 17, 2009 from The Guardian website, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2005/nov/21/zimbabwe.andrewmeldrum/print.

Non-Proliferation Treaty. (n.d.). Retrieved April 30, 2009, from http://www.fas.org/////.htm

NTI: Research Library: Country Profiles: Argentina. (2009, February) Retrieved May 12, 2009, from Nuclear Threat Initiative: http://www.nti.org/e_research/profiles/Argentina/index.html

Nuclear Weapons in Popular Culture: Music (2 May 2009.) Retrieved May 5, 2009 from the Wikipedia website: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapons_in_popular_culture#In_music

Patterson, F. (n.d.). United Kingdom Statement to the 2008 NPT Preparatory Committee. Retrieved April 8, 2009, from http://ukunarmscontrol.fco.gov.uk/

Problems and Priorities. (2009) Retrieved April 8, 2009 from Polling Report website: http://www.pollingreport.com/prioriti.htm

Statement on behalf of the IAEA Secretariat at the General Debate. (2008). Retrieved May 4, 2009 from the UN website: http://www.un.org/NPT2010/SecondSession/delegates%20statements/IAEA.pdf

Treaty of Tlatelolco.(2008, Retrieved May 12, 2009, from OPANAL: http://www.opanal.org/index-i.html

“Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons Signed at Washington, London, and Moscow July 1, 1968 Entered into force March 5, 1970.” Retrieved May 3, 2009 from http://www.fas.org/nuke/control/npt/text/npt2.htm.

U.S. Department of State. (2009, April 5). Remarks of President Barack Obama . In Embassy of the United States - Prague, Czech Republic [President Obama’s Visit to Prague]. Retrieved May 1, 2009, from http://prague.usembassy.gov/.html

“When the Children Cry” Lyrics. (n.d.) Retrieved April 20, 2009 from the Metrolyrics website: http://www.metrolyrics.com/when-the-children-cry-lyrics-white-lion.html