Should More Countries Acquire Nuclear Weapons? Why or Why Not.

Should More Countries Acquire Nuclear Weapons? Why or Why Not.
Assignment
Date of Submission
1915 words
Student Name
University Name
More Countries Acquiring Nuclear Weapons
This essay is aimed to argue about the acquisition of nuclear weapons and their implication for regional security. The argument is to deal with the threat as they develop rather than realize it is critical. The argument arises from the emergence of threats. In response, the offense-defensive theory is evidence of the International Relations theories to support the argument. However, societal responsibility, environmental concern, and ethical paradigms oppose the theory of threat. Besides, these factors support reducing violence and act more peacefully. Correspondingly, the weapon of mass destruction (WMD) they expect to use has been adapted by many regions. The massive adoption of the offense-defense theory to detain the threats from realization has given rise to the acquisition of nuclear weapons. These weapons contradict the fundamentals of societal, environmental, and even economic components of a region. Therefore, no more acquisition of nuclear weapons should be practiced. In support, the causes of adoption of the act of acquiring nuclear weapons and its destructive outcomes are illustrated in this paper.[Shiping, Tang. "Offence-defence theory: towards a definitive understanding." The Chinese Journal of International Politics 3, no. 2 (2010): 213-260.] [Choi, Jong Kun, and Jong-Yun Bae. "Security implications of a nuclear North Korea: Crisis stability and imperatives for engagement." Korea Observer 47, no. 4 (2016): 807.] [Ibid1]
Undoubtedly, the role of globalization in this practice is pivotal. It is because globalization has influenced the political forces and induced control over it. For illustration, political issues are no more restricted to regional concerns. Instead, any issues in the political spectrum are dealt unanimously by non-governing bodies of associated regions. The practice of integrated measures to address political issues has declined the rate of political challenges. For example, no massive destruction as experienced during the world war has taken place after establishing the United Nations. Conversely, the negative aspect of an integrated response to the political challenges is the cause of cold-wars. Even though such wars are not massively destructive, yet their impact is negative. In association with the fundamentals of offense-defense theory, the states are free to take initiatives against stateless and militant terrorist groups. The ethical spectrum, on the other hand, suggests considering relevance for designing any actions against the threat.[Potter, William C. "The unfulfilled promise of the 2015 NPT review conference." Survival 58, no. 1 (2016): 151-178.] [Ibid1]
Between the lines, it is essential to focus on investigating the causes and effects of such threats before setting a destructive measure to address it. Such a concept is preferably defined as pre-emption. A study defines pre-emption as an intervention from a third party to resolve a dispute among two nations. The action to be prepared with resources to deal with the threat before it realizes is termed as prevention...