The Issue of Human Cloning Essay Example for Free

The Issue of Human Cloning Essay INTRODUCTION Human cloning has been a favorite subject in science fiction stories, but has in recent years, it has become front page news. Anytime that a new scientific debate is born, many details about the topic itself is muddled with many inaccuracies. The problem is: do people understand enough of the science to predict whether cloning will be acceptable or not ethically and/or legally? Does it make sense to bring new people in the world whose origin is drastically different than the majority of people? This short review will focus first on arguments for cloning human beings based on scientific arguments and second on arguments against human cloning from the book by Leon Kass â€Å"The Ethics of Human Cloning. † REPRODUCTIVE AND RESEARCH CLONING Cloning is done in adult animals by somatic cell nuclear transfer. In the case of sheep like Dolly, the nucleus of a cell from a sheep is placed inside the cell of another sheep that has been emptied from its nucleus. However, contrary to the popular belief, the cloned sheep will not be 100% genetically identical to the donor sheep. The enucleated cell still has some DNA inside in organelles like the mitochondria that will be different than the donor’s DNA. The main arguments for cloning deal with the potential medical as well as scientific benefits that would be conferred upon humanity if adult humans could be cloned. The first reason is that cloning humans would bring forth medical breakthroughs for curing diseases like cancer. The rationale is that cloning involved in the differentiation of a cell may be an advantage that could help in the comprehension of how a cell differentiates and divides. Cancerous cells are multiplying without restraints since the cellular mechanisms for regulating cell division and cell growth are non-functional. Usually, unrestrained division and growth in normal cells do not continue because the cell has safety mechanisms that will induce death or apoptosis to stop this uncontrollable process. Other ideas about the benefit of cloning are cloning organs that could replace defective ones like heart, kidneys, and liver. This type of cloning is called research cloning contrasting with reproductive cloning. Another argument deals with infertility and reproduction. Many people cannot have children. Reproductive cloning would not only give them a child, but an ideal child in terms of genomic inheritance, implying that a clone could have its genome altered based on the parent’s disease history. This would guarantee a healthy child or some kind of twin to the parent. In essence, identical twins are clones of each other since their genome is identical. Cloning also happens all the time in nature. So, why not in humans too whenever it is wanted? ARGUMENTS AGAINST CLONING Leon Kass in his book â€Å"The Ethics of Human Cloning† analyzes the reasons why human cloning should never be used in our society. Dr. Kass expresses a fundamental distrust of human cloning based on the fact that human intervention is involved in the process. In effect, he draws a parallel between artificial insemination and cloning since both are in vitro processes in the beginning, being transferred to a host in vivo at the end. The problem with â€Å"human hands† is that ‘good intentions pave the way to Hell’ as the saying goes. We can start as wanting the best child, better health, and more intelligence, but in any case, we are not very far from eugenics. Eugenics have a strong opposition because it relies on selecting people based on genetic traits that are changed in order to bring about a specific characteristic in an individual. Eugenics may be the start of a socially unacceptable bias or discrimination based on the fact that the majority of mankind is naturally not fit genetically to qualify as persons almost physically and mentally perfect. In a world where only the most perfect humans would be chosen to survive, no room would be left for ‘inferior’ people. A past historical event connected with this idea is the Holocaust during which, people were gassed in order to get rid of their races or experimented upon in order to find out what physical perfection meant in order to improve the superior race. In addition, Dr. Kass deals with the traditional way of reproduction. Humans reproduce by sexual reproduction and have done so since the beginning of times. Since the announcement about cloning the first sheep, people have been upset about it because they feel that developing the technique further opens the proverbial Pandora’s Box. Will cloning affect our human dignity or our human nature? Moreover, based on the assumption that cloning humans would be accepted, he asks what status a clone would hold in our society. Past historical experiences with slavery and racism have troubled society till today. In fact, the general human population alienates who is different. It has been our nature people to ostracize others who are not judged normal. What would be the place of a clone in our society? What about a social status? What about legal perspectives concerning the rights and connections to their family? Dr. Kass also explains that science has more and more meddled with human reproduction, which he finds troublesome. He believes that there is an excess of consideration of what science in general can do to solve problems. In fact, by remedying one problem, it always creates new ones. In conclusion, cloning seems to possess multiple challenges to its establishment in society. The majority of humans feel that it is an attack on their human nature (reproduction and morality), which they hold sacred. The supporters of cloning are mainly concerned with what cloning can do for mankind in terms of acquiring scientific knowledge to cure diseases like cancer. Time will tell if cloning will bring doom or a better lot in life for humans.

Consequence Global warming

Consequence Global warming Introduction Climate change and a consequence global warming can be seen all around us. It has already started shaping each and every aspect of our lives in more than one ways: from how we travel to what products we buy to where we live. Hence, there is a concern that the use of non-renewable fuels and other human activities are increasing greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, contributing to global warming. To avoid this, enthusiasm is spreading for cap-and-trade systems to regulate the amount of CO2 emitted to Earths atmosphere. A new currency is emerging in world markets. Unlike the dollars, Euros and yen that trade for tangible goods and human services, this new money exchanges for pollutionparticularly emissions of carbon dioxide, which are caused by burning fossil fuels and are the leading cause of global climate change. Carbon credits, as they are called, are poised to transform the world energy system and thus the world economy. Carbon credits are used as a currency that allows companies and individuals to compensate their carbon emissions. This is done by either reducing carbon dioxide release directly or through offsetting their GHG outputs. Carbon Credits originated historically from The United Nations Clean Development Mechanism which was under the Kyoto Protocol. It allows a fixed quantity of carbon credits to be traded. It is important for people to limit their impact on the environment and buy carbon credits to offset what they cant reduce and work towards reducing their offsets. Carbon trading as per the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) is a big business in the open markets. Projects such as development of renewable energy, improving polluting industries, and planting carbon absorbing sinks are being funded by carbon credits. Companies and people are becoming carbon conscious by reducing their emissions. Many types of events and workings can generate carbon offsets. Renewable energy such as the wind farms, solar panels, geothermal energy, bio energy and small hydro turbines can create carbon offsets by replacing fossil fuels. Other varieties of offsets available for sale in the market include those including methane capturing from landfills or livestock, destruction of harmful greenhouse gases such as halocarbons, and carbon removal projects (such as reforestation) that absorb carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. Emission levels are increasing around the world and this has resulted in a number of companies wishing to buy more carbon credits. This would result in an increase in its market price and this would encourage businesses to perform more eco-friendly activities which would create more carbon credits to sell. Developed countries spend nearly $400-450 for every ton of reduction in CO2, as compared to $10-$25 spent by developing countries. Indias GHG emission is below the target and therefore, it can sell surplus credits to other countries. India is considered to possess about 31% of the total world carbon trade. This implies a trade opportunity of $25bn by 2010.This makes trading in carbon credits such a major business opportunity. Indiahas emerged as the leading horse in this race. More than 300 Indian entities have proceeded with their application for registering their CDM Project to avail carbon credits. Currently,1 carbon credit is worth 14 Euros. Indian companies can pose higher incomes from carbon credits as compared to their core business. The global carbon credit market was estimated $30 billion last year andis it is growing at tremendous pace. There is a need and a consequent demand to reduce 1 billion ton of carbon emissions in the world, in order to deal with threats like global warming. Indian companies have realized that money can be earned by becoming eco-friendly. With new infrastructure sector like power and steel developing in India, the carbon credit market will gain stature. The 800 million farming community in India also has an opportunity to sell Carbon Credits to developed nations. Companies like Wal-Mart, Dell and GE are going GREEN and purchasing carbon credits. These companies are improving their brand name, consumer confidence in their products. Global Warming Some Facts Global Warming Phenomenon Global warming has brought about one of the biggest challenges for planet earth in the 21st century. There is a global concern about the adverse impact of the emission of greenhouse gas (GHG) on the planet earths climate. Global warming is a phenomenon of gradual increase in earths temperature as a result of the increase in greenhouse gases. This is mainly due to two reasons: increase in human activities which have led to an increased production of Greenhouse Gases, and a reduction in the Earths natural Carbon Dioxide due to Deforestation. The green house effect has led to an increase in the temperature of the atmosphere near the earths surface. Shortwave light comes from the sun to the earth, and it passes unimpeded through a cover of greenhouse gases composed mainly of water vapor, carbon dioxide, nitrous oxide, and ozone. Infrared radiation reflects off the planets surface toward space but does not easily pass through the thermal blanket. Some of it is trapped and reflected downward, keeping the planet at an average temperature suitable to life, about 60 °F (16 °C). Increase in the quantity of greenhouse gases is trapping more heat and increasing global temperatures, making a process that has been beneficial to life potentially disruptive and harmful. The major natural greenhouse gases on Earth are Greenhouse Gases % of Greenhouse Effect Carbon Dioxide (CO2) 70% Methane (CH4) 20% Nitrous Oxide 5% Fluorinated Gases 5% The atmospheric concentrations of CO2 and methane have increased by 31% and 149% respectively above pre-industrial levels since 1750. These levels are considerably higher than at any time during the last 650,000 years. Effects of Global Warming Action must be taken against greenhouse effect, otherwise it could lead to an increase in average global temperature between 2 and 4 degrees and this could happen as early as the year 2030. This increase in temperature would be more towards the poles as compared to the tropics. This would also result in more winters becoming warmer. Such an increase will make the world hotter than it has ever been in the last 100,000 years. The rate of increase in temperature will also be faster than ever before. Just a comparison, a rise of approx 3 degrees Celsius after the ice age took many thousands of years. By the end of this century temperatures can reach those that were in the time of the dinosaurs making the survival of humans impossible. The effects can already be seen- the ten hottest years since the 18th century have been in the previous 15 years. Hurricanes will occur more frequently as oceans heat up resulting in increased water evaporation. Evidence is building at an dangerous rate. Droughts Continental areas will dry out in summer. Floods Sea levels are currently rising at a rate of around 1 mm each year due the top layer expansion of the oceans as they heat up and the polar ice caps melts. The predicted increase in the sea level by 2050 is between 20 and 50mm. This will cause greater flooding in coastal and low lying areas. Carbon Emission A major feature One of the major greenhouse gases is the carbon dioxide gas (CO2). Trees grow and they absorb CO2 from the air. Forest clearance and the burning of wood (tropical rain forests) are adding the CO2 to the atmosphere. Deforestation is getting out of control. The loss of the forests implies that there are lesser trees to absorb CO2. Despite deforestation making a large contribution towards global warming, it causes lesser contribution than half the yearly total CO2 released, the remaining and major part comes from burning coal, fossil fuels and oils. The fossil fuels are consumed in cars, power stations and factories. Nearly half of the CO2 which is released by burning fossil fuels is absorbed back by the oceans. It is taken up by sea life or it is dragged to the ocean depths by the circulation of water. Recent studies have suggested that as the earth heats up, the oceans will become less efficient in absorbing Carbon di-oxide, leaving more of CO2 in the atmosphere and hence adding further to global warming. The following Pie Chart shows the various countries globally responsible for increasing shares of carbon dioxide emission. Source: news.mongabay.com Efforts to contain Global warming It is imperative to slow down the global warming as much as possible. This would in effect happen by using less fossil fuel, eliminating the uses CFCs altogether, and stopping irregular deforestation. This can be done through energy conservation, better use of public transport, more efficient cars, and energy efficiency by greater use of alternative sources of power which produces less CO2 than conventional sources and through renewable energy such as solar power. We have to stop deforestation of rain forests and start afforestation. A United Nations research panel has estimated that we should reduce global fuel use by 60% immediately so that we can stabilize the climate changes. Current commitments by some governments participating in CO2 reduction will lower global CO2 by just 4 6%. The developed industrialized nations produce most of the CO2, the developing nations of South America and Asia are increasing their CO2 release at a much greater rate, and by 2012 they will overtake the Western countries as the major producers of CO2. KYOTO PROTOCOL OVERVIEW Kyoto Protocol A response to curtail Global Warming The Kyoto Protocol acts as an amendment to the international treaty of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (â€Å"UNFCCC†). It pledges mandatory emission norms to the nations who have signed the protocol for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. It was established December 11, 1997 in Kyoto, Japan. Countries that ratify this protocol pledge to reduce their CO2 and five other greenhouse gases emissions, and/or engage in emissions trading if they increase emissions of these gases. The Kyoto Protocol now encompasses more than 160 countries around the globe and more than 60% of countries in terms of global greenhouse gas emissions. The Kyoto Protocol works upon a collective reduction of 5% compared to 1990 levels by 2008-2012. This treaty expires in 2012 and international talks have already begun in May 2007 to chalk out a new future treaty to succeed the current one. Source: IPCC Third Assessment Report. 2001 Climate Change : The Scientific Basis. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Green house gases have a disastrous effect on global warming with varying proportions. This intensity is measured by the global warming potential of the gas. The GWP of carbon dioxide is one. One tonne of HFC-23 gas, for example, has 11,700 times more green house effect as compared to CO2. CERs are awarded on the basis of global warming potential of the gas. CER to a gas = Tonnes of green house gas reduced X Global Warming Potential of the Gas Features of Kyoto Protocol As per the Kyoto Protocol, Governments have been divided into two broad categories: Developed countries (they have accepted GHG emission reduction obligations and they are mandated to submit an annual greenhouse gas inventory report) Developing countries (they have no GHG emission reduction obligations but they can participate in Clean Development Mechanism) As per the rules, Any Annex I country which fails to meet the Kyoto obligation would be penalized by been mandated to submit 1.3 times its emission allowances in the second commitment period for every ton of GHG emissions cap they exceed in their first commitment period. The objective of the protocol is the stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system.† It aims to Put a limit onclimate change and global warming Reduce arbitrary usage of fossil fuels and encourage development and use of renewable energy Encourage sustainable development Operation of Emission Trading System Mechanisms under Kyoto Protocol The Kyoto Protocol pioneered by defining three innovative and distinct â€Å"flexibility mechanisms† to reduce the overall costs of achieving the set emissions targets. These mechanisms enable countries and organizations to adopt cost-effective opportunities to reduce emissions and/or to remove carbon from the atmosphere. While the cost of putting a cap on emissions varies considerably from region to region, thebenefit for the atmosphere is the same, no matter where the action is taken. Joint Implementation (JI): The Kyoto Protocol provides clauses for developed countries to implement projects that reduce emissions, and/or remove carbon from the atmosphere as per the Emission Reduction Units (ERUs). These ERUs can be potentially used to meet the emission reduction targets. A JI project may involve, for example, replacing a coal-fired power plant with a more efficient combined heat and power plant. JI projects must have a prior approval of all the entities involved, and must lead to emissions reductions or removal that are additional to any that would have occurred without the project. International Emission Trading (IET): The Kyoto Protocol also provides that developed countries can get carbon units from other developing parties and use them for meeting their emissions target. This enables developed countries to use low cost opportunities to reduce emissions. Such countries must, consequently, be prepared to transfer units when they do not require them for compliance with their own emission targets.CER: Certified Emission Reduction Clean Development Mechanism (CDM): Developed countries can take up GHG reduction project activities in developing countries where the cost of greenhouse gas reduction project activities is lower. The developed country would get the credits for meeting its emission targets. The developing country would get the capital and technology to implement the project. This technique is called Clean Development Mechanism. CDM covers projects in countries without any set targets, i.e. developing countries. Credits would be issued only for reductions if a project provides real and long-term climate change benefits. The main advantages for countries hosting CDM or JI emission reduction projects are the transfer of technology, attraction of foreign investment, and the contribution to the countrys sustainable development. GLOBAL SCENARIO The international CDM market has entered a high phase, having grown steadily after the Kyoto Protocol came into effect. The emission reduction targets during the first commitment phase of 2008 -12 for Annex II countries, are 713 Million tone CO2 eq. The initial national communication submitted by Annex I countries indicates a total demand of 846 Million tonne CO2 eq. per year based on the individual country commitment and action to reduce emissions. The Past highlights of the International carbon market are: In 2006, market traded an estimated 1.6 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (tCO2e) in all market segments compared to approximately 799 million tCO2e in 2005. Similarly, the financial value more than doubled from 2005 to 2006, with a total estimate of USD 22.5 billion for all market segments. In 2007, the market traded an estimated 2.6 billion tonnes of CO2e, at a total financial size of USD 23.6 billion. The projection for carbon market towards 2010 indicates With a high scenario, wherein the private sector predominates, the global carbon market can reach around USD 200 billion. With limited private sector participation and some speculations, it can be restricted to as low as USD 4.6 billion. It is estimated that the real market will be somewhere in between these two extremes with a forecasted carbon trade of USD 30 billion. INDIAN SCENARIO India is presently one of the world leaders in development of CDM projects. It is due to the Indian Designated National Authority that more than 297 project proposals with an emission reduction potential of over 297 million t CO2 have received the approval of the official host country. A wide range of project sizes and types in India help international buyers find the project of their choice or work upon a project portfolio to reduced risks. There is a huge evident potential for renewable energy generation from natural factors such as agriculture wastes, hydro and wind. Thermal electricity generation offers unlimited opportunities to improve energy efficiency. One example is the coal-fired power plants and the related transmission and distribution system. The chemical industry also allows reductions of industrial GHG which have large warming potentials The Carbon RUSH JSW Steel: The CDM has made environmental responsibility acceptable for India Industries. Recycle, reuse and reduce have become commercially viable as companies reprocess waste and heat, and cut down carbon emissions. Indias JSW Steel has been awarded about 5.4 million carbon credits, which includes 4 million carbon credits obtained from the single largest issuance of emissions permit by the U.N. to a Kyoto Protocol project. The 4 million credit issuance accounted for 6.5 % of the total 62 million CERs which were allocated by the UN. A total of around with 42 % of all issued credits have been assigned to ongoing projects in India. CERs were issued to two projects owned by JSW Steel for reducing greenhouse gas emissions between 2001 and 2006. Their CDM projects cut gases emitted through power generation from imported coal and waste gases from JSWs steel manufacturing operations. Current Problems with the Environment Integrity of CDM a practical perspective Unfortunately, despite pressure from the environmental community and other sectors, the CDM rules and the project design document still offer little guarantee of environmental integrity. The main weaknesses of CDM procedures in that regard include: The contribution to sustainable development including a transition away from ‘carbon dirty technologies and an emphasis on positive social and environmental impacts is often treated as an optional extra rather than a central project feature. Demand reform in CDM procedures so that there is transparency; accountability of different players (penalties on consultants and DOEs) Demand price negotiations have to be made public, otherwise will lead to corruption Demand simpler procedures (less convoluted methodologies for additionalityetc) so that meaningful projects can work Large public companies (GAIL, SAIL, IOCL, etc)are yet to take off with CDM business, due to lack of knowledge of CDM opportunities Potential in small and medium enterprises yet to be tapped Lack of transparency in CDM market Limited bilateral investment for project funding Governments role critical as a facilitator with different bilateral /multilateral organizations in organizing Carbon trade fairs or expos Number of Bilateral CDM projects need to be increased with more foreign investment for project funding Lack of awareness about CDM Tedious process High cost involved for documentation, validation and Monitoring Verification of emission reductions Inability of new promoters to bring in equity to be able to avail of financing As mentioned above, these problems stem in part from the weaknesses in the existing rules. At the same time, while it is possible that these flaws will be rectified by the CDM Executive Board in the near-future, the extreme pressure from investors to keep carbon prices at their lowest is forcing the project developers to cut corners. Business Implications The London financial marketplace has established itself as the center of the carbon finance market as a market for trading of the carbon emissions as per the Kyoto Protocol. This was estimated at $60 billion in 2007. The irony in the carbon trading endeavor could be noticed from the fact that it was the major multinational corporations who came together in the G8 Climate Change Roundtable, at the January 2005 World Economic Forum. This group was primarily a business group formed by 23 companies. Since, these corporations are the ones who have been chief proponents of ‘overconsumption, it seemed like a method by way of which they could clear their conscience of the damage that they were causing to the environment and planet earth. In June 2005 the Group published a statement stating that there was a need to act on climate change and the stress was on market-based solutions. The business in the UK and elsewhere have come out strongly in support of emissions trading as a key tool to limit the effects of climate change, and these efforts have been supported by Green NGOs. As per the Unites Nations Food and Agricultural Organisation FAO, approx 32 million acres of forests vanish each year, majority of them are in the tropics. The most important reason for forest clearing is the increasing need for agricultural land. The WWF has warned that if appropriate steps are not taken, more than 60 percent of the rain forests in the Amazon basin could disappear by 2030. Carbon trading was introduced by the Kyoto Protocol as a possible solution of the efforts to reduce GHG emissions to below 1990 levels by 2012. The mainstream idea was that the countries whose emissions are below the prescribed emissions could then sell those excess carbon credits to countries that do not meet their own caps. The caps are proposed to decrease over time and the price of carbon credits would rise due to scarcity. These signals towards a changing trend of carbon emission trading which would include a new global carbon emission based investment market, where companies and countries have incentives to invest in developing projects across the globe. All this is happening for the wrong reasons, as this is a method of obtaining the highly coveted carbon credits. This seems to be a sore point for those against carbon trading. As an example, Google has a market value of $200 billion, while all the worlds great forests are valued at nothing. The economic argument says that it makes it financially more appealing to countries not to allow their forests to be cut down. Moral tradeoff Some critiques of Carbon Emission Trading believe that there is a huge moral trade off in place. A study on child care centres in Israel showed that imposing monetary fines on late coming parents did not teach them a lesson in punctuality; in fact, this created an economic trade off as now the parents could voluntarily come late and get away by paying fines. Drawing an analogy from it, the carbon credit trading is on similar lines except that one firm can be willing to pay for extra emissions by compensating the other firm which reduces its carbon emissions. This increases a scarcity and hence the price of carbon pollution. Can the interests of both the rich the poor be served? The major concern about the entire carbon credit trading evolution is the belief that the carbon emission trading really serves rich nations only; the main stream issue being that carbon trading could put the vital resources of the developing world in the hands of developed nations who can then use carbon credits as a way to counter the reductions of their own GHG emissions at the same time. The World Bank recently launched the Forest Carbon Partnership Facility (FCPF), a fund which is financed by the leading countries such as UK, Germany, the Netherlands, France, Switzerland, Denmark and Finland. The $160 million fund would be used to support programs targeting the drivers of deforestation and develop concrete activities to reach out to poor people who depend on forests to improve their livelihoods. It will also help developing countries build the technical, regulatory, and sustainable forestry capacity to reduce emissions from deforestation and degradation. There has always been confusion over the exact role that the World Bank is trying to play in carbon trading market. The World Bank claims to be aiming at reducing global deforestation by 10 percent by 2010. But its critics claim the World Bank has traditionally been an exponent of deforestation. There has also been concern over the consequences of carbon trading scheme on local forest communities that earn their daily living from the forests. Substantiating with an example -In the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) the World Bank is facing opposition from Pygmy groups and local communities which rely on the Congo basin for their living. There have been reports that accuse the Bank of encouraging commercial logging practices while ignoring sustainable forestry and conservation. The report also claims that the financial benefits of logging have gone to foreign firms, not the local ones. This makes one wonder what the real intentions of the World Bank are. The Million Dollar Question!!! EMISSIONS TRADING COMMODIFIES Carbon. Does this Really Help Solve Climate Change problem? Exponents of carbon trading see markets as the best mechanism for reducing emissions. The critics, on the other hand, believe that carbon trading is a devils bargain that navigates the profits to polluters. You cant solve problems just by using money, the old saying goes. Capitalists have a monetary solution to problems and they believe that the markets are the solutions to everything. They reverse this equation by turning problems from money-hoarding pits to money-makers. Essentially, they try to seek the profit motive to ‘cure societys woes by transforming problems into commodities. This is the set strategy behind the emerging carbon trading markets. The Solution as per the Carbon Trading Proponents By trading the capped carbon emission rights, the rights become scarcer and hence more valuable. Cap-and-trade markets help solve climate change by lowering carbon emissions while generating wealth for the developing nations! If only it were so simple!!! The first contentious question is about how to distribute carbon emission rights: auction or allocation. In 2006, the experiment with carbon credit pricing came to a collapse when it became known that the EU was, either naively or corruptly, handing out too many emission rights to companies based on their estimates. Obviously, their emissions came out to be much lower which gave them a right to trade the left over unconsumed carbon credits. There seemed no real intention of reducing the carbon emissions. â€Å"The dirtier you are, the bigger your entitlement . . . the polluter was paid.† British journalist George Monbiot. The second problem with carbon trading is about mandatory versus voluntary markets. The US, the largest carbon emitter in the world has not signed onto the Kyoto Protocol. To fill this regulatory gap, voluntary carbon markets such as the Chicago Climate Exchange have sprouted up. With proper market design which implies no price cap and a financial penalty for non-compliance -carbon trading forces the movement to cleaner technology and consequent emissions reductions. Carbon trading critics charge and claim that the financial benefits overshadow environmental concerns. With the carbon price suppressed and lowered, polluters energy providers, utilities, oil companies etc have little incentive to curb the rising GHG emissions, thus making the current system undermine the environment and the planet. Also, critics see it as an extension of colonialist exploitation. The third problem relates to the monetary and economic aspect. In reality cap and trade carbon markets have done little to reduce emissions and are plagued by corruption and inefficiency. The worlds carbon trading markets are becoming increasingly complex and this threatens another sub-prime style financial crisis that could again destabilise the global economy. There is also a distinct smell of middlemen involvement. The majority of the trade is carried out not between polluting industries and factories covered by carbon trading schemes, but by banks and investors who profit from speculation on the carbon markets packaging carbon credits into increasingly complex financial products. Conclusion A rational reasoning Even as they gain popularity as a carbon mitigating solution, carbon offsets have often been dubbed under considerable criticism for diluting collective action against global warming. The truth, however, exists in between. Proponents exist on both sides of the debate. We all participate in the consumption of fossil-fuel energy. These emit large amounts of climate-changing CO2 and other GHG gases. The terms carbon offset and carbon neutral have been used as a misnomer it is actually the idea of erasing the negative impact of our daily carbon emissions which drives the carbon offset market and its related controversy. A rational reasoning says that â€Å"You cannot make up for the use of carbon buying the power of money to leverage yourself into a position of freedom from responsibility for emitting it once the damage is done, its done. Ultimately what it all boils down to is the question of choosing from the rich display of effective opportunities that can be adopted if necessary actions are taken while ignoring, at the same time, the capitalistic monetary solutions like offsets.

Effects of Tourism on the Environment :: Cause Effect Tourism Ecology Essays Papers

Effects of Tourism on the Environment Tourism is a big part in not just the United States but in every countries economy. It is constantly growing and according to the United Nations World Tourism Organization there are more than 800 million people that travel either internationally or domestically each year (Goodstein C. Traveling Green. Natural History. Jul/Aug 2006; 115:16.). The world of tourism is always evolving the technology of travel has made it easier and more intriguing to travel. It is believed that the number of people traveling will grow by as little as 4% each year over the next twenty years. This means that the number of travelers a year could reach a staggering one billion people a year (Goodstein C. Traveling Green. Natural History. Jul/Aug 2006; 115:16.). The financial gain that comes of this is great for a country. In Rwanda for example they charge 375 dollars per person to go out and see the silverback gorilla that is indigenous to the area. This works out to be about 1 million dollars a year for the government to help deter the cost of damages that may be directly caused by tourism. Other countries that do this include the Galapagos Islands, which generates in excess of $38 million a year, and also in Belize the government uses a conservation tax of $3.75 for every foreign visitor leaving the country. The tax in Belize generates almost 750,000 dollars a year to help the government with conservation. With the advantages of financial gain come some drawbacks. The environment is said to take a big hit when dealing with the effects of tourism. There are a lot of things that are said to happen when dealing with the effects, anything from water in lakes being impure due to nutrients that may be added to it while people are swimming in it. The example that was used in the journals were the bodies of water around the Fraser Islands in Australia. It was said that tourists may be bringing nutrients in directly from another area (i.e. sand from another beach with different nutrient on their feet, or water with different nutrients in it). The other one that I find quite entertaining was nutrients that me in a humans urine that have a negative effect on the organisms such as coral, or fungi that are in the lake. (Hadwen L., Bunn S., Arthington, A,. Mosisch T.

Condoleezza Rice Essay -- Biography Biographies Essays

Condoleezza Rice Not many people can add the position of National Security Advisor to their list of achievements, especially if those people are women. Condoleezza Rice, however, can place the accomplishment right up there with being a previous member of President Bush’s foreign-policy team, and tenured professor and provost in the political science department of the prestigious Stanford University. Rice is well known for her knowledge on Russian history and current events. After growing up in Birmingham, Alabama during a time of racial segregation, Rice soon went on to graduate from the University of Denver at the age of 19 (she skipped two grades), where she became an expert in the issues of the Soviet Union. She also received two advanced degrees in political science. With a master’s degree from the University of Notre Dame and a doctorate from the University of Denver’s Graduate School of International Studies, she soon found herself a provost and professor at Stanford, only to be drawn away by a life in politics. In Washington, D.C., Rice worked on nuclear strategic planning with the Council on Foreign Relations fellowship at the Joint Chiefs of Staff. After returning to Stanford, she soon found herself back in the political spotlight. President George Bush, in 1989, trusted Rice to the point of allowing her to aid in Russian policy and relations. Rice became the director of Soviet and East European affairs with the National Security Council, special assistant to the president for national security affairs and senior director for Soviet affairs in the National Security Council. In essence, Rice helped Poland receive needed reforms, as well as helped with policies between the United States... ...ck and female, the world suddenly takes notice. â€Å" There aren't too many females in this business, she was really an exception in this almost 100-percent-male crowd -- which may be one of the reasons she earned the reputation of being tough," said Sergei Rogov, director of the Russian Institute of U.S. and Canada Studies in Moscow, who has known Rice for nearly two decades. Condoleeza Rice has been a member on the boards of directors for the Charles Schwab Corporation, the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, the Chevron Corporation, the University of Notre Dame, the International Advisory Council of J.P. Morgan and the San Francisco Board of Governors. She also has invested time working on various political books, such as â€Å"Germany Unified and Europe Transformed,† â€Å"The Gorbachev Era,† and â€Å"Uncertain Allegiance: The Soviet Union and the Czechoslovak Army.† Condoleezza Rice Essay -- Biography Biographies Essays Condoleezza Rice Not many people can add the position of National Security Advisor to their list of achievements, especially if those people are women. Condoleezza Rice, however, can place the accomplishment right up there with being a previous member of President Bush’s foreign-policy team, and tenured professor and provost in the political science department of the prestigious Stanford University. Rice is well known for her knowledge on Russian history and current events. After growing up in Birmingham, Alabama during a time of racial segregation, Rice soon went on to graduate from the University of Denver at the age of 19 (she skipped two grades), where she became an expert in the issues of the Soviet Union. She also received two advanced degrees in political science. With a master’s degree from the University of Notre Dame and a doctorate from the University of Denver’s Graduate School of International Studies, she soon found herself a provost and professor at Stanford, only to be drawn away by a life in politics. In Washington, D.C., Rice worked on nuclear strategic planning with the Council on Foreign Relations fellowship at the Joint Chiefs of Staff. After returning to Stanford, she soon found herself back in the political spotlight. President George Bush, in 1989, trusted Rice to the point of allowing her to aid in Russian policy and relations. Rice became the director of Soviet and East European affairs with the National Security Council, special assistant to the president for national security affairs and senior director for Soviet affairs in the National Security Council. In essence, Rice helped Poland receive needed reforms, as well as helped with policies between the United States... ...ck and female, the world suddenly takes notice. â€Å" There aren't too many females in this business, she was really an exception in this almost 100-percent-male crowd -- which may be one of the reasons she earned the reputation of being tough," said Sergei Rogov, director of the Russian Institute of U.S. and Canada Studies in Moscow, who has known Rice for nearly two decades. Condoleeza Rice has been a member on the boards of directors for the Charles Schwab Corporation, the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, the Chevron Corporation, the University of Notre Dame, the International Advisory Council of J.P. Morgan and the San Francisco Board of Governors. She also has invested time working on various political books, such as â€Å"Germany Unified and Europe Transformed,† â€Å"The Gorbachev Era,† and â€Å"Uncertain Allegiance: The Soviet Union and the Czechoslovak Army.†

Isaac Newton Is Better Than John Locke Essay

In all my life I have discovered many things. My discoveries have allowed us to make more new discoveries. But a problem I think of is what the world would be like if I never existed. To start things off one important discovery I made was modern physics. If I was never to make the discoveries in optics, motion, and mathematics modern physics wouldn’t of existed which means that scientist wouldn’t have never known that every object in the universe has a force that attracts each other. Something else the world would have never found would be my laws of motion. The laws of motion gave people a better understanding regarding movement which helps people today in space travel and mechanics. The world would be a better place without John Locke for many reasons. One good reason would be that if he didn’t exist there wouldn’t be a lot of abortion issues around the world and especially in the United States. The reason why there are a lot of abortion issues today in the United States is because John Locke influenced Thomas Jefferson and when Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence he included some stuff John Locke believed in. One thing was that he said human beings are free to do what they want with their property. There are good things about that but theirs also bad things like abortion. The reason why abortion is legal is because the baby are the parents property and John Locke said that when babies are in the stomach their blank so in other words babies are ok to be aborted because their nothing. So if john Locke was to never have existed he wouldn’t have been able to influence Thomas Jefferson which means that there wouldn’t have been a lot of abortions. To sum everything up I Isaac Newton has made the modern world a better place because of my discoveries and if John Locke never existed the world including the United States would have no abortion issues and remember all of us are here because we were all born and not aborted.

United Nations Reform for Indirect Exporting

An Indirect Exporter is when a firm†s product is sold in foreign markets with no special activity for this purpose occurs within the firm. Others carry a firm†s product overseas. Although exporting this way can open up new markets quickly a firm will have limited control over distribution of its product. A firm likes to have a buyer; thus products are sold in a domestic market then resold overseas in different ways. -Foreign wholesale and retail organisations that have purchasing agents in a firm†s home country may find the firm†s product good for their market. -Manufacturers and firms have U.S. offices obtain equipment and supplies to their foreign operations. Companies have an advantage by selling to the U.S. firms because they are using export routes already supplying their domestic operations via the U.S. -With multinational operations buy equipment and supplies for them through their regular domestic purchasing. Equipment is shipped and installed in foreign plant. Foreign producers take note of the equipment. Then orders for the equipment will follow. Thus, an active exporting involvement by the supplying firm. This has befitted the supplying firm with a free introduction to the foreign market. International trading companies are very important for some markets. Some of these companies handle the majority of the imports into the country. The size and market coverage of these trading companies makes them excellent distributors, especially with their credit reliability. They cover their markets and provide service for the products they sell. Using these trading companies has negative factors. These companies have a tendency to carry competing products and the latest product may not receive the attention its producers desired. The sales from these kinds of indirect exporting are as good as domestic sales and, show that they are less stable. Since being so far from the main market a firm has little control. Even though new sales is helpful the disadvantage of not having more control of foreign sales a company may look for a more suitable arrangements in the long-run. Some companies work with an export management to have increased control over its product. There are some advantages of using an export management company: -The manufacture receives instant foreign market knowledge and contacts via the operations and the experience of the EMC. -The manufacture saves the cost of developing the in-house expertise in exporting. An EMC cost is spread over the sales of several manufacturers. -EMC offer clients consolidated shipments for savings. -Lines of complementary products can better foreign representation than the products of just one manufacturing. Also, EMC†s accept foreign credit responsibility. There are also some disadvantages to using an EMC: -Some EMC†s handled too many lines to give the proper attention to a new exporter. -Many tend to be market specialist rather than product specialist, thus product expertise is weak. -Some EMC†s coverage is only regional rather than global. A ETC acts as the export arm of a number of manufactures. ETC†s allow U.S. companies or banks to form a trading company with the size, resources, sophistication, and international network comparable to the Japanese companies. Unfortunately U.S ETC†s have not really worked out. Most of them are small or they have failed. One manufacture uses it overseas distribution to sell other companies† product with their own. One party is called the carrier; the carrier is the firm that does the exporting. With the export of the new non-competitive product may help ease the cost of exporting. Piggybacking can be attractive because a company can fill up its exporting capacity or fill out their product line. Also, piggybacking can help in a lost cost way for the carrier to export and save on investment in R&D, production facilities, and market testing for a new product. There are also some negatives, quality control and warranty. The rider may not maintain the quality of the products sold by the other company. Concerns of supply, a carrier can develop a large market abroad, the rider firm may favor its own marketing needs it tight demand conditions. The party called the rider has a great advantage. By using another company a company can get its product to foreign markets. This offers the riders and established export and distribution facilities and shared expenses, and benefits close to an EMC and a ETC. The difference between direct exporting and indirect exporting is that the task of market contact, market research, physical distribution, export documentation, pricing, is bestowed on the company. Another producer under contract produces a firm†s product in a foreign market with the firm. This is feasible when a firm can locate a foreign producers with the ability to manufacture the product in satisfactory quality and quality. The advantages are the company can reduce the risk of failure in a foreign market by simply terminating the contract. Other saving include transportation. The drawback is to this is that the manufacturing profit goes to the local firm rather than to the international firm. Also, finding a suitable manufacturer may be difficult.

Assessment of the Progression of the Withdrawal of Weapons and Military Forces in the World

Assessment of the Progression of the Withdrawal of Weapons and Military Forces in the World This is my research paper on disarmament. It contains breifly all the important steps taken in the feild of disarmament till recently. Introduction Prof. Lincoln P. Bloomfield aptly remarked that, A visitor from another, more advanced planet would find many paradoxes on earth, but surely the most extraordinary would be the fantastic destructive potential of nuclear weapons which contrasts starkly with the primitive and near impotent institutions of global peacekeeping. He might marvel that a breed capable of producing the wealth for a 185 billion armory of lethal devices let alone the technology for killing several hundred in a single exchange of weapons had not produced a workable international order capable of regulating such apocalyptic man-made power. . Also no such International Order exists today and the prospects are not encouraging that it will exist within the foreseeable future. Dr. Hambro has also rightly remarked The armament race comes as close to collective insanity as anything in the history of mankind and it is, to my mind, surprising that public opinion is willing to take it. Disarmament has become a more urgent and complicated issue with the rapid development of nuclear weapons capable of mass destruction. Since the explosion of the first atomic bombs in 1945, the previous contention that armaments races were economically inexpedient and led inevitably to war was replaced by the argument that the future use of nuclear weapons in quantity threatened the continued existence of civilization itself. It was understood that war was unnecessary and nations of the world also understood the urgent need to part with these deadly weapons. The League of Nations writes Philip Noel Baker, is the first attempt in history to furnish the international society of nations with the permanent and organic system of international political institutions. This attempt was an outcome of the world war. In the post-World War II period, there were discussions at several levels with a view to the limitation and control of armaments. Efforts ranged from continuous talks at the United Nations to such discussions among nuclear powers from the SALT era to the START era and it still continues What is Disarmament? Disarmament is defined as the act of laying down arms, especially reduction or abolition of a nations military forces and armaments. It is not a new concept. It has been discussed for several centuries even before the formation of League of Nations. The idea of disarmament can be traced from the writings of Sully, William Penn, Rousseau and Kant. But plans for its implementation have failed because no State was willing to pay the price that was required (i.e. to reduce there armaments and military force). The proposal of Russian Czar to Lord Castlereagh of Great Britain in 1816, however, was the first practical attempt to achieve quantitative disarmament. French monarch also made similar proposals in 1831 and on several other occasions, but with no success. The International Peace Conference at Hague in 1899 is the first great landmark in the field of disarmament because it invoked for the specific purpose of limiting armaments by national agreement. Yet another landmark was the treaty of Versailles, which drastically reduced the German armaments. Thus during 19th century and down to the time of the First World War, numerous efforts were made to achieve the limitation and reduction of national armaments by international agreements. Although there had been a great number of discussions, conventions and proposals for disarmament, the ones that claimed success were few. It had been rightly observed by an eminent author: Disarmament efforts have been many, the successive few and limited. There has never been an approach to what Cohen calls effective disarmament. Disarmament and The League of Nations The Covenant of League of Nations was adopted as a part of the Treaty of Versailles in 1919. It came into existence on January 10 1920 with 18 member states. According to Philip Noel Baker, the League of Nations is the first attempt in history to furnish the international society of nations with the permanent and organic system of international political institutions. This attempt was an outcome of the world war. As the League was adopted just after the world war, the framers selected achievement of widespread disarmament as its fundamental goal. Finally, the Disarmament Conference met on February 2, 1932, in Geneva. The representatives of 61 States, who participated, agreed on necessity of arms limitation, of international supervision of the arms business and of publicity of arms budget. Though the Conference failed in reconciling the French demand for security and German demand for status of equality with other European nations, it proved to be useful in solving some technical problems of the disarmament. It also became evident that the concept of security was of greater than the concept of limiting arms i.e. to say disarmament must follow rather than precede security. However the League of Nations was considered unsuccessful in achieving the concept of widespread disarmament. The efforts of the League failed on multifarious grounds. Some of the reasons of the failure of League in achieving widespread disarmament are as follows: League of Nations was not universal. It was limited to a few nations. It didnt have any effective enforcement body. The Conference for disarmament was held too late under very hostile conditions. The major reason however was that there was no unity between the nations which were members of the League. They were hostile towards each other. The rise of Hitler and the efforts of Germany in re-arming proved that League was a failure in achieving Disarmament and peace. Finally, the League of Nations was dissolved in 1946. Disarmament and The United Nations Inefficiency of the League of Nations led to the Second World War in 1939, which was the most destructive among the two. The result of the Second World War compelled the nations to establish an international organization so that mutual disputes could be resolved peacefully and peace be restored in the world. This lead to the establishment of United Nations Organization in 1945. United Nations was far more effective and efficient in promoting widespread disarmament as compared to League. It also had a greater number of member nations and a better enforcement body. The Charter of the UN provides for the regulation of armaments. The provisions of disarmament in the UN Charter are as follows: The Charter empowers the General Assembly to consider the general principles of co-operation in the maintenance of the peace and security, including the principles governing disarmament and the regulation of armaments. The Assembly can also make recommendation with regard to such principles to the Members of the Security Council. Secondly, it is further provided that in order to promote the establishment and maintenance of international peace and security with the least diversion to armaments, the Security Council with the assistance of the Military Staff Committee (referred to in Article 47) can formulate plans for regulation of armaments. Thus the Charter aims to provide security along with the regulation of armaments by granting military powers to the U.N under Article 43. However it has to be noted that the special agreements in the Article 43 have not materialized till today. The Military Staff Committee has ceased to function and hence it never dealt in regulation of armaments. Thirdly, in order to enable the U.N. to take urgent military measures, the Charter enjoins the members to hold immediately available national air force contingents, for combined international enforcement action. However the first important step of the U.N in the field of Disarmament was of adopting a resolution on January 24, 1946, which established the U.N. Atomic Energy Commission. The function of this Commission was to regulate and reduce nuclear weapons. On June 24, 1946, United States presented a plan known as the Baruch Plan to the U.N. Atomic Energy Commission. This plan envisaged the establishment by treaty an International Atomic Development Authority which was to own, operate, manage and license all facilities for the production of atomic energy. The aim of the United States by this plan was to establish a control system independent of the Charter and the Atomic Energy Commission, which included inspection and verification of weapons especially nuclear weapons before taking major steps towards Disarmament. But this was opposed by the Soviet Union, which stuck firmly to the original Charter. The Soviet Union insisted for prior outlawing of atomic weapons and reduction of all weapons without effective international control by means of inspection. Consequently, a compromise was made by laying down certain principles, which governed the general regulation and reduction of armam ents. However when the US monopoly of nuclear weapons ended in 1949, Baruch Plan lost its importance. So a need was felt to form a body for regulation of weapons that too mainly nuclear weapons. This need led to the establishment of Disarmament Commission by the 6th General Assembly in 1952. This consolidated the U.N. Atomic Energy Commission and the U.N. Commission for Conventional Armaments. Soviet Union and the Western Allies constituted the five-power sub-committee of Disarmament Commission. Also in October 1956, another body namely International Atomic Energy Agency was established. The Agency aims to seek to accelerate and enlarge the contribution of atomic energy to peace, health and prosperity throughout the world. It comprises of three organs namely General Conference, A Board of Governors and Staff headed by the Director General. The most important and difficult task faced by it is inspection and safeguarding of fissionable materials. The Agency is neither related to U.N. nor is an independent inter-governmental organisation. It has a special status under the aegis of the U.N. Disarmament Efforts from 1960 to 1970 Though 15 years had passed after the establishment of the United Nations, there were no significant or important steps taken for the purpose of Disarmament till 1960. The year 1960 witnessed a turning point in the disarmament debates when there was a thaw in the relation between the two super powers namely United States of America and The Soviet Union. The consequence of this thaw was the signing of four important treaties, which dealt with Disarmament. These treaties were as follows: Partial Test Ban Treaty (1963) On 5th of August 1963, The Partial Test Ban Treaty (PTBT), also known as Limited Test Ban Treaty (LTBT) was signed in Moscow by the United States, United Kingdom and the Soviet Union. Finally 113 Countries became part to it, which included India, Italy etc. However, France and China did not sign this treaty. The treaty required the Parties to prohibit, prevent, and abstaining from carrying out nuclear weapons tests or any other nuclear explosions in the atmosphere, in outer space, under water, or in any other environment, if such explosions cause radioactive debris to be present outside the territorial limits of the State that conducts an explosion. However this treaty does not provide for international verification and it is understood that each party may do so by its own national technical means. Outer Space Treaty (1967) The Legal Subcommittee considered the Outer Space Treaty in 1966 and agreement was reached in the General Assembly in the same year. The Treaty was opened for signature by the three depository Governments (the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom and the United States of America) in January 1967, and it entered into force in October 1967. The Outer Space Treaty provides the basic framework on international space law, including the following disarmament principles: States shall not place nuclear weapons or other weapons of mass destruction in orbit or on celestial bodies or station them in outer space in any other manner. The Moon and other celestial bodies shall be used exclusively for peaceful purposes; States shall avoid harmful contamination of space and celestial bodies. 98 States have ratified, and an additional 27 have signed the Outer Space Treaty The Treaty for the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons in Latin America (1967) The Treaty for the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons in Latin America (also known as the Treaty of Tlatelolco) obligates Latin American parties not to acquire or possess nuclear weapons, nor to permit the storage or deployment of nuclear weapons on their territories by other countries. This Treaty was signed on February 14 1967, at a regional meeting of Latin American countries at Tlatelolco, a section of Mexico City. Non Proliferation Treaty (1968) The Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, also referred to as the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), obligates the five acknowledged nuclear-weapon states (the United States, Russian Federation, United Kingdom, France, and China) not to transfer nuclear weapons, other nuclear explosive devices, or their technology to any non-nuclear-weapon state. Non-nuclear-weapon States Parties undertake not to acquire or produce nuclear weapons or nuclear explosive devices. They are required also to accept safeguards to detect diversions of nuclear materials from peaceful activities, such as power generation, to the production of nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices. This must be done in accordance with an individual safeguards agreement, concluded between each non-nuclear-weapon State Party and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Under these agreements, all nuclear materials in peaceful civil facilities under the jurisdiction of the state must be declar ed to the IAEA, whose inspectors have routine access to the facilities for periodic monitoring and inspections. If information from routine inspections is not sufficient to fulfill its responsibilities, the IAEA may consult with the state regarding special inspections within or outside declared facilities. The Treaty was opened for signature on 01 July 1968, and signed on that date by the United States, the United Kingdom, the Soviet Union, and 59 other countries. However, India refused to sign this treaty on the ground that it was discriminatory and unequal. Disarmament Decade (1970 -1980) The decade of 1970 was declared by the United Nations as the Disarmament Decade. The U.N. Agency that has been mostly involved with the goal of Disarmament was the 26 Nations U.N. Conference on the Committee on Disarmament. It celebrated its 10th anniversary in March 1970. It was very heartening to note that the U.Ns Disarmament Decade began auspiciously with the coming into force on 5th March 1970 of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. The decade also witnessed the signing of a number of treaties. They are as follows: Treaty on the Prohibition of the Emplacement of Nuclear Weapons and Other Weapons of Mass Destruction on the Sea-Bed and the Ocean Floor and in the Subsoil Thereof. This treaty was opened for signature at London, Moscow and Washington from 11 February 1971 and it came into force on 18 May 1972. The Treaty read as follows The States Parties to this Treaty undertake not to implant or emplace on the seabed and the ocean floor and in the subsoil thereof beyond the outer limit of a sea-bed zone, any nuclear weapons or any other types of weapons of mass destruction as well as structures, launching installations or any other facilities specifically designed for storing, testing or using such weapons. However it has to be noted that the treaty prohibited only the placement and fixation of weapons on the seabed and is silent about mobile launchers and submarines, which are likely to remain a principle means of nuclear warfare. Thus it is evident that treaties dealing with nuclear disarmament that were made by U.S.A and Russia had the aim of preventing the non-nuclear countries from acquiring atomic weapons, rather than to regulating and giving up of their own armaments. Hence India did not sign this treaty, which was one-sided. In-spite of all this limitations, this treaty succeeded from barring nuclear weapons from 70% of the earths surface, which was a significant contribution towards disarmament efforts. Strategic Arms Limitation Talks (SALT) Strategic Arms Limitation Talks took place between U.S.A and the Soviet Union on May 1972. The aim of these talks was to find a way for both sides to agree on plans that would limit and perhaps some day reduce their vast nuclear arsenals. However this agreement permitted both the countries to replace existing offensive nuclear missiles with more sophisticated weapons as technological advance permits. Hence it was said by the Chinese Chief Mr. Chiao Kua Hua that Soviet American agreement to limit Strategic Arms be in no way regarded as a step towards nuclear disarmament. On the contrary, it marks the beginning of a new chapter in the Soviet American arms race. Convention on the Development, Production and Stockpiling of Bacteriological and Toxin Weapon and on their Destruction. This convention was drafted by the conference of the committee on Disarmament and was commenced by the General Assembly on December 16 1971. On April 10 1972, it was opened for signature with a special request of the then Secretary General Kurt Waldheim that the convention may be signed and ratified as early as possible. The aim of the treaty was to promote general disarmament and for that purpose, it prohibited development, production and stockpiling of chemical and bacteriological (biological) weapons. Geneva Disarmament Conference (1974) It began on 17 April 1974 with 25 nations participating. The aim of this conference was to prohibit the use of nuclear weapons under the ground. It also dealt in making an agreement regarding Chemical Weapons. Special Session of General Assembly on Disarmament (1978) The Special Session on Disarmament was held by the General Assembly from 23rd May to 1st July 1978 at United Nations Headquarters. Before the end of the session, a Final Document consisting of an Introduction, a Declaration, a Programme of Action, and Recommendations concerning the international machinery for disarmament negotiations. Under the Programme of Action, the Assembly set out a series of suggestions for negotiation and in Declaration, which is the part of the Final Document, it urged that the resources released through disarmament be used to promote the well being of all peoples and to improve the economic conditions of developing countries. The main aim of this Session was to strengthen the international disarmament negotiating machinery. Disarmament Efforts after 1980 After 1980, there was a revolution of technology. It affected almost all the fields including the field of armaments. With the development of technology, new types of weapons with immense destructive capacities were invented. Hence it was necessary to promote disarmament and regulate the creation of these armaments. Following are the important developments in the field of disarmament, which took place after 1980. Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons that may be Deemed to be Excessively Injurious or to Have Indiscriminate Effects (1981) It dealt with the prohibition of very harmful conventional weapons. These included prohibition of weapons that emitted radiation harmful to human body, prohibition and regulation of mines, booby traps, incendiary weapons (weapons that cause fire when used) and blinding laser weapons. Rarotonga Treaty (1985) In 1983, 16 years after the Treaty of Tlatelolco was opened for signature, Australia proposed to establish a nuclear weapon free zone in the South Pacific. As a result of the negotiations between the concerned States, a treaty was signed on August 6, 1985, in the city of Rarotonga, capital of the Cook Islands, establishing the proposed zone. Treaty on Open Skies (1992) The Treaty on Open Skies entered opened for signature on 24 March 1992, currently has 34 States Parties. The Treaty established a regime of unarmed aerial observation flights over the entire territory of its participants. The Treaty was designed to enhance mutual understanding and confidence by giving all participants, regardless of size, a direct role in gathering information about military forces and activities of concern to them. Treaty on Open Skies is one of the most wide-ranging international efforts to date to promote openness and transparency of military forces and activities. Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (1995) Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) was adopted as a result of the Geneva Conference, which took place in June 1995. This treaty was adopted with the view of removing the shortcomings of the Treaty on Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. It contained a comprehensive plan to prohibit nuclear tests. However, it was silent on the question regarding the destruction of already existing nuclear stockpiles. However this treaty was flouted by America by developing a super nuclear weapon capable of destroying targets placed under the ground. On the one hand, America has been pressurizing other countries to sign the treaty and on the other hand, it has been developing destructive nuclear weapons. These types of stand taken by America were severely criticized by many countries including India. Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines and on their Destruction (1997) This treaty is also known as Ottawa Treaty and was proposed by Canada. The main aim of the treaty was to destroy all types of Anti Personnel mines. The treaty also required that besides stopping the production and development of mines, a party to the treaty must destroy all the mines in its possession within 4 years. Just a small number of mines are allowed to remain for training (mine-clearance, detection, etc.). India and Disarmament Since Independence, India has consistently pursued the objective of global disarmament based on the principles of universality, non-discrimination and effective compliance. Given the horrific destructive capacity of nuclear weapons, India has always believed that a world free of nuclear weapons would enhance both global security and Indias own national security. Thus India has always advocated that the highest priority be given to nuclear disarmament as a first step towards general and complete disarmament. In 1978, India proposed negotiations for an international convention that would prohibit the use of threat of use of nuclear weapons. This was followed by another initiative in 1982 calling for a nuclear freeze i.e. prohibition on the production of fissile material for weapons, on production of nuclear weapons, and related delivery systems. At the special sessions of the United Nations General Assembly on disarmament, India put forward a number of serious proposals including the 1988 Comprehensive Plan for total elimination of weapons of mass destruction in a phased manner. It was a matter of regret that the proposals made by India along with several other countries did not receive a positive responsive and instead, a limited and distorted non-proliferation agenda, meant above all to perpetuate nuclear weapons was shaped. India didnt sign the Non-Proliferation Treaty and the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty because India considered these treaties as discriminatory and unequal. Both of these treaties were put forward by the nuclear power U.S.A, which later flouted these treaties. Thus according to India, these treaties were the ways designed by the nuclear powers to keep away nuclear know-how from non-nuclear states. However India has signed and ratified other treaties and conventions like Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC), Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention etc. This shows that India is an active country, which supports and takes actions for the promotion of disarmament. Conclusion Thus to conclude, it can be said that disarmament process is a very difficult one, but is very important in promoting international peace and security. However, complete disarmament can be obtained only if there is no threat to security of a nation or an individual and to achieve this task, there should be a strict and organized international order and absence of terrorist organizations. Unless this is achieved, the concept of disarmament will remain as the monopoly of the powerful nation to suppress other nations. The U.S attack on Iraq is a fresh example of this.