Kissinger Joins Call For Global Nuke Ban
Four prominent U.S. defense experts said Thursday the United States could make a "vital contribution" toward ending a growing nuclear proliferation threat by working with other countries toward creating "a world without nuclear weapons."
Reliance on nuclear weapons as a deterrent "is becoming increasingly hazardous and decreasingly effective," the bipartisan group said in a commentary.
The authors were former Secretary of State Henry A. Kissinger, former Secretary of State George P. Shultz, former Defense Secretary William Perry and former Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Sam Nunn.
"North Korea's recent nuclear test and Iran's refusal to stop its program to enrich uranium — potentially to weapons grade — highlight the fact that the world is now on the precipice of a new and dangerous nuclear era," they said.
They also expressed alarm at the likelihood that nonstate terrorists will get their hands on nuclear weapons.
If nuclear weapons states would band together to end reliance on nuclear weapons, the commentary said, it "would lend additional weight to efforts already under way to avoid the emergence of a nuclear-armed North Korea and Iran."
Iran and many other non-nuclear countries have long complained about the "double standard" of nuclear powers in possessing atomic weapons while demanding that others refrain from having them.
The most notable of the four experts is Kissinger, 83, who has achieved elder statesman status since his service as national security adviser and secretary of state under presidents Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford three decades ago. He is an unofficial adviser on Iraq policy to President George W. Bush.
Shultz also served in Nixon's cabinet and was President Ronald Reagan's secretary of state for more than six years. Perry was President Bill Clinton's defense secretary for three years and later advised Clinton on North Korea policy. Nunn was chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee from 1991-97 and currently is co-chairman of the Nuclear Threat Initiative, which works to reduce international threats from weapons of mass destruction.
The essay noted that the concept of a nuclear-free world is not revolutionary, pointing out that the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) envisions that nuclear weapons states divest themselves of such armaments over time.
The essay expressed concern that the increasing number of potential nuclear enemies worldwide could dramatically increase the risk that nuclear weapons will be used.
New nuclear states do not have the benefit of years of Cold War-era safeguards that prevented nuclear accidents, misjudgments or unauthorized launches, it said.
"Will new nuclear nations and the world be as fortunate in the next 50 years as we were during the Cold War?" it asked.
© 2009 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. Reliance on nuclear weapons as a deterrent "is becoming increasingly hazardous and decreasingly effective," the bipartisan group said in a commentary.
The authors were former Secretary of State Henry A. Kissinger, former Secretary of State George P. Shultz, former Defense Secretary William Perry and former Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Sam Nunn.
"North Korea's recent nuclear test and Iran's refusal to stop its program to enrich uranium — potentially to weapons grade — highlight the fact that the world is now on the precipice of a new and dangerous nuclear era," they said.
They also expressed alarm at the likelihood that nonstate terrorists will get their hands on nuclear weapons.
If nuclear weapons states would band together to end reliance on nuclear weapons, the commentary said, it "would lend additional weight to efforts already under way to avoid the emergence of a nuclear-armed North Korea and Iran."
Iran and many other non-nuclear countries have long complained about the "double standard" of nuclear powers in possessing atomic weapons while demanding that others refrain from having them.
The most notable of the four experts is Kissinger, 83, who has achieved elder statesman status since his service as national security adviser and secretary of state under presidents Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford three decades ago. He is an unofficial adviser on Iraq policy to President George W. Bush.
Shultz also served in Nixon's cabinet and was President Ronald Reagan's secretary of state for more than six years. Perry was President Bill Clinton's defense secretary for three years and later advised Clinton on North Korea policy. Nunn was chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee from 1991-97 and currently is co-chairman of the Nuclear Threat Initiative, which works to reduce international threats from weapons of mass destruction.
The essay noted that the concept of a nuclear-free world is not revolutionary, pointing out that the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) envisions that nuclear weapons states divest themselves of such armaments over time.
The essay expressed concern that the increasing number of potential nuclear enemies worldwide could dramatically increase the risk that nuclear weapons will be used.
New nuclear states do not have the benefit of years of Cold War-era safeguards that prevented nuclear accidents, misjudgments or unauthorized launches, it said.
"Will new nuclear nations and the world be as fortunate in the next 50 years as we were during the Cold War?" it asked.
Popular in Politics
- Obama prom pictures surface
- Is President Obama ending the war on terror? 118 Comments
- Now, some unions upset over Obamacare
- IRS official Lois Lerner placed on leave 125 Comments
- Rand Paul uses 2016 bully pulpit to push Obama on drones
- IRS' Lerner was asked to resign, refused: GOP Sen.
- Protester heckles Obama during counterterrorism speech Play Video
- Obama: America at a "crossroads" in fighting terrorism 102 Comments
3. Why do you leftists constantly invoke the cliche of Hitler and Hate Speech? You are frankly becoming tedious and exposing your lacking in critical thinking. Those who are against illegal immigration are not against Hispanics coming to this country. They are against law breakers. We are a civilized society, a society of law. Keeping out ILLEGAL aliens is not hate or anything to do with Hitler. It is enforcing the law. Do you understand. It is rule of law. By the way, if you knew the history of the Holocaust, the German Jews were legal and productive members of German society. Some had been there for 500-1000 years. Hitler ignored the laws in order to purge the Jew from German society. The issue there was racial and ignoring the law for a political purpose. Sort of like those who want all Hispanic illegal aliens to magically become US citizens. Why, because they are Hispanic?
4. Those of of us with brains and intelligence are against ILLEGAL immigration no matter what the race. Why isn't your heart bleading all over the place for Chinese illegals (of which there are many) or Southeast Asian illegals (of which there are many). You bleed for the Hispanic illegals because you essentially are the racist.
Read books by Edward Gibbon, instead of reading Newsweek. Maybe you will learn to come up with original aruments instead of invoking "Hitler" or "hate speech" all the time.
Where to start with your ignorance Patriot75.
1. We are not talking about immigration, we are talking about lawbreakers crossing the border illegally.
2. We are also not talking about Native American attitudes to the colonization of America. These are the winds of history, primitive peoples are always supplanted by the advanced. The Native "English" were supplanted by the Celts who came from Central Europe originally and settled in England through conquest. The Native Americans had no laws concerning immigration. Therefore, the Europeans broke no laws coming to America. I might add, if you want to invoke the Native American argument, what did the Hispanics do to the Aztecs when they illegally immigrated to Mexico? Not many of them left are there.
- Continued Part 2
Posted by getserious1 at 11:49 AM : Jan 05, 2007"
What is the relevance of that statement?
While it is true that guys like the senile Kissinger is 'inconsequential', how is your 'nut case' building a nuke in his garage have any bearing on nations forgoing nukes?
To be sure, the feverish rush to accumulate/acquire nukes will be a lesson and signal for the weak-minded 'nut case' to actually get into the act himself!
Posted by grumpas at 09:59 AM : Jan 05, 2007"
You got that right. LOL
The thing is; foolish people are inclined to think that the rest of the world is just as foolish too.
The most realistic response to an heavily nuclear-armed US is that
OTHERS ARE MORE INCLINED TO EMULATE THE HEAVILY WEAPONIZED US, rather than being bullied by the US into a state of no nukes or no arms.