Nuclear Security Summit: A Step in the Right Direction?

On April 12th and 13th, 2010, President Barack Obama took a step away from his domestic agenda to focus on what he terms one of the greatest threats to international security: access to nuclear materials by terrorist groups. Bringing together representatives from 47 different countries, the Nuclear Security Summit, held in Washington DC, aimed to safeguard stockades of weapons-grade plutonium and uranium. Emerging from this event was an agreement among the participating countries on the urgency and severity of the threat, as well as adoption of a goal to secure all vulnerable nuclear materials within the next four years.

The summit built upon the momentum initiated by a new pact between Russia and the United States the previous week. Russia and the US agreed to dispose of 68,000kg of weapons-grade plutonium. While applauding the initiative of Russia and the United States, The Guardian stresses the need to garner multinational support to rein in nuclear proliferation. The backing of other vital countries, like China, will be necessary before the grand vision of a nuclear-free world can evolve into reality.

The sustained, and supposed, push by Iran toward nuclear-weapon capability dominated discussions at the Nuclear Security Summit. A nuclear Iran would at the very least alter the landscape of power in the Middle East, impacting US interests in the region. Despite its desire to impede the Iranian push for nuclear capabilities, the Obama administration has very little tangible progress to show for its efforts. An article in the BBC states that the hesitancy of Russia and China to agree to economic sanctions against Iran arises out of both states favoring continued dialogue with Iran.

In the end, despite its lofty goals, the Nuclear Security Summit was only able to collect verbal promises, hardly the concrete accord desired by President Obama. The summit ended shrouded in uncertainty, a sentiment highlighted in an article published by The Economist, who poses the question: so what now? What now still remains to be seen.

Recommended Articles:

Advanced Article: Al-Jazeera: US Leadership in Non-proliferation< a>
Intermediate Article: Time: Obama Makes Progress on Nuke Security, Less on Iran
Beginner Article: BBC News: World Leaders Agree to Nuclear Deal

Multimedia:

PBS NewsHour: Albright, Scowcroft Outline Nuclear Summit Goals
LinkTV: The Active Opposition: The Nuclear Lullaby
BBC News: Stark Nuclear Warning for Summit

Discussion Questions:

1. Why does a nuclear Iran pose such a looming threat to the world and the United States in particular? What effect would sanctions, as proposed by President Obama, have upon Iran?
2. Why are Russia and China both so reluctant to sign off on what the United States terms crippling economic sanctions against Iran?
3. Besides Iran, what other countries are said to exacerbate the threat of nuclear attacks?
4. What steps have already been taken by countries to ensure that they are adhering to the agreements made at the Nuclear Security Summit?
5. How does the nuclear policy of President Obama compare with the policies of previous presidents and their administrations?

Curriculum:

1. The New York Times Learning Network: One Step Closer to a Treaty
2. PBS NewsHour: Controlling Nuclear Weapons: Debating the Non-Proliferation Treaty
3. Choices: Nuclear Weapons: What Should our Policy Be?

Panel Tonight – Perspectives on Iran: Culture, History and Perceptions

World Savvy invites you to join us for:

Perspectives on Iran: Culture, History and Perceptions

A World Savvy Monitor Panel

Monday, December 7, 2009, 7:30PM-9:00PM

Columbia University Teachers College Milbank Chapel
525 W. 120th Street, New York, NY 10027
(120th Street between Broadway and Amsterdam –

near A/B/C/D at 125th street, or 1 at 116th Street/Columbia University)

Presented by World Savvy

in partnership with
The Middle East Institute of Columbia University

The Department of International and Transcultural Studies, Teachers College, Columbia University

The Society for International Education, Teachers College, Columbia University

The Vice Presidents Office for Community and Diversity, Teachers College, Columbia University

This panel will be followed by a reception with the panelists.  Copies of Mr. MacFarquhar’s book will be available for sale and signing.

This event is free but space is limited.  Reserve your spot now!

New York Times UN Bureau Chief Neil MacFarquhar Neil is the author of two books. The most recent, The Media Relations Department of Hizbollah Wishes You a Happy Birthday: Unexpected Encounters in the Changing Middle East (Public Affairs, May 2009), attempts to capture the underexposed side of the Middle East.

Iranian Filmmaker Maryam Habibian Maryam Habibian, a native of Iran, received her Ph.D. in Educational Theater at New York University. Her most recent artistic endeavor, The Mist (2009) documents Maryam’s journey across Tehran to visit with poets, actors, artists, and university students living in a culture that is complex and variegated, restrictive and secretly adventurous.

Columbia University Visiting Assistant Professor of Education Reza Arjmand Reza Arjmand received his Ph.D. in Comparative Education from Stockholm University. He is the author of Inscription on Stone: Islam, State and Education in Iran and Turkey, and the forthcoming Handbook of Islam, Globalization and Education. He is currently a Visiting Assistant Professor of Education at Teachers College, Columbia University.

Moderated by Dana Curran Mortenson, Executive Director of World Savvy

Get ready for the panel – check out the Iran edition of the World Savvy Monitor.

Russia and China join to create majority U.N. vote to sanction Iran

Russia and China recently signed on to a resolution of the International Atomic Energy Agency demanding that Iran freeze operations at a once secret uranium enrichment plant. In the past, China has not been on board with sanctioning Iran. Furthermore, since Iran, Russia and China are strong trade partners, this vote will not likely change the relations between these countries. Still, Iran has expressed “serious grievances” with Russia and China for this vote.

For insights into this recent action by China and Russia, check out the November 2008 edition of the World Savvy Monitor, which discussed how both Russia and China’s economic rise intimidates the West because both countries were closed to the West for much of the 20^th Century. The Monitor also discusses how Russia’s basic security interests are actually similar to those of the West. At that time, Dmitry Medvedev had proposed the creation of a new series of high-level discussions on the security of Europe, but the US and Europe were unsure if they could take his intentions at face value.

Following the rebuke by the IAEA, Iran announced that it would build 10 more uranium enrichment sites. Iran’s desire for enduring and equal sovereignty is explored in the March 2009 edition of the World Savvy Monitor. Iran’s leaders believe their nation has a right to pursue whatever is necessary to protect it from foreign intervention, including the development of nuclear weapons capacity.  Will Iran continue to assert its sovereignty or begin to find room for compromise to ensure global nuclear security?

Teaching about elections & democracy

On September 27th, 2009, Angela Merkel was re-elected chancellor of Germany, with her Christian Democratic party winning 33% of the vote. August elections in Japan swept the Democratic Party of Japan into office, under the leadership of Yukio Hatoyama as the new Prime Minister, after over 50 years of rule by the Liberal Democratic Party. Other recent elections, such as those in Iran and Afghanistan, have been more tumultuous and potentially fraudulent (see past blog posts on Afghanistan and Iran). Each of these elections, however, highlight a number of interesting distinctions to democracy in the United States, and pose interesting comparison points for teachers currently in the midst of teaching students about the American democratic process.

To start with the example of Germany, one could ask: what is the role of Germany’s Chancellor in comparison to the President of the United States? And why are Chancellor Angela Merkel’s first steps after re-election to form a coalition with the Free Democratic Party, who garnered just under 15% of the popular vote in Germany’s elections? Why does the United States have two main political parties, but Germany has more? With all these differences, is one country more democratic than the other?

All these questions lead to an overarching essential question for students: what makes up a democracy? Elections are some of the most visible aspects of a healthy democracy, and thus aspects on which the media and those in the international community focus a great amount of attention. But what else makes a healthy democracy? World Savvy described the elements of democracy that political and academic experts believe makes up a democracy in the August 2008 edition of the World Savvy Monitor. An electoral democracy is made up of a system of governance in which people choose their leaders by casting votes. Yet simply electing leaders does not make for a healthy democracy, as recent news clearly indicates. Elections should be accompanied by the rule of law and the protection of civil liberties for its citizens, sometimes referred to as liberal democracy. Thomas Jefferson has noted that electoral democracy, without liberal democracy, is “nothing more than mob rule where 51% of the people may take away the rights of the other 49.”

Explore the “What is Democracy?” section of the Democracy edition of the Monitor with students to investigate the elements of democracy. Have students work in groups to develop a checklist of the elements of democracy they think are most important. Evaluate the United States in comparison to this checklist, and then have students choose another country to research and evaluate based on their checklist.

What innovative strategies and lessons do you use to teach students the elements of democracy? How do you teach students the differences between American democracy and other forms of democracy around the world? We invite you to post your strategies, lesson ideas, comments or questions below.