Obama vows to pursue a planet free of nuclear weapons

[Skybird]

Translation:

"The president is right - and the president is wrong. In his speech in Prague the president correctly pointed at the danger of a new nuclear arms race, and the growing risk of such weapons being used. But wrong is his demand from that, to reach a world free of nuclear weapons. The applaus he got from angela Merkel and Frank-Walter Steinmeier feeds an illusion that would not lead to a better but more dangerous world.

It may be - at least in theory - imaginable to scrap all nuclear warheads in the world. But the knoweldge of how to construct them cannot be scrapped.

And Obama's offer to spread participation in peaceful use of nuclear energy, underlines this aspect. Becasue the way from civilian to military use of nuclear technology is short.

Who wants to give a guarantee that not in some unserious, abandoned part of the world the decision to end participation in the ending of nuclear weapons would be made? the almost-nuclear power Syria and the highly armed North Korea have demonstrated that such programs can be organised with relative discretion.

The world would also become more dangerous, because passing on the option of the nuclear bomb, whose logic was basing on not to use it, would boost a conventional arms race. Where nuclear deterrance is no more, readiness for a war with tanks, bombers and infantry, even chemical and biological weapons is becoming stronger.

Nevertheless, Obama'S hint of the danger of increasing availability of nuclear weapons is important. Would the shia Iran get the bomb, Sunni Saudi-Arabia would do the same, possibly even neighbouring Turkey.

That's why non-proliferation and the substantial reduction of nuclear arsenals must be the goal of politicians, but not "global zero". "More safety" is much more important than "no nukes".