AboutJames Bruno Expertise Diplomacy and foreign affairs. How government decision-making takes place. Interactions of the White House, State Dept., Pentagon, Congress and CIA in formulating policy. How governments deal with each other. Area expertise includes Afghanistan, Indochina, Europe, Cuba. Served in Guantanamo. Currently a member of the Diplomatic Readiness Reserve and Standby Response Corps.
Experience 23-years as a diplomat with the U.S. State Dept. Previously at the Defense Dept. Prior to joining government, worked as a journalist with major news organizations.
Publications CBS-News, UPI; various newspapers. Published novelist: PERMANENT INTERESTS and CHASM. www.lulu.com/JamesBruno
Education/Credentials M.A. - U.S. Naval War College
M.A. - Columbia Univ.
B.A. - George Washington Univ.
Expert: James Bruno Date: 6/27/2008 Subject: Foreign Nuclear Power
Question My question is regarding other countries having a nuclear power program. It seems that when a country is trying to sustain nuclear power, the US or UN push threats and sanctions onto these countries until the program is disbanded out of a fear that these countries will create a bomb. How does the US get away with telling a country not to have nuclear power when we use it ourselves and have several operating plants? Doesn't the other country think that it is hypocritical of the US to tell them to stop something that we currently use. And if the fear is out of having a bomb, don't countries find it disconcerting that we have nuclear bombs and we don't want other countries to have them. In short, how do we (the US) get away with having nuclear power and nuclear bombs but other countries get a lot of pressure when they try the same.
Answer Jeph:
Though nuclear proliferation itself is a complex issue, your question is rather easy to address.
It all boils down to whether a government is pursuing a peaceful nuclear power program to generate electricity or to weaponize nuclear material for military purposes. The technical means to distinguish between the two are very sophisticated. Countries with advanced intelligence means and the UN's International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) are able to do this. Hence, when a country like N. Korea claimed that it was pursuing a peaceful nuclear program, our intelligence agencies and the IAEA saw through their lies. Same for Iran now, though it is debatable whether Iran's military nuclear efforts were only in the past, or are continuing.
If you were my neighbor and you were buying gunpowder in large amounts, but claiming it was for "peaceful" purposes, I'd be concerned and would want authorities such as law enforcement to check you out. If the cops ascertained that you were a construction contractor licensed to blow up boulders with dynamite and you were following all the rules on storage and usage, then I'd be ok with that. If, however, the cops found you were not following the rules and had evil intentions, then I'd want action taken against you. The same principle holds for nations claiming to pursue peaceful nuclear energy programs. Legitimate pursuit of nuclear power generation is acceptable. Pursuit of nuclear weaponry generally is not. In Iran's case, the intelligence shows very suspicious activities going on regarding their involvement in the nuclear field. Their actions put the planet in jeopardy.
