Nuke proliferation - will rep for food.

[Heinz Guderian]

In the 1960s scholars believed by 2000, over 30 countries would have nukes. Only 8 have them today. Does anyone know what has helped prevent the spread of nukes and nuke technology since 1970? I got an exam - i have worked on this one question but i just want any ideas (perhaps from left field) that aren't obvious to me.

I will rep the crap outta you for any light bulb over my head incidents.

[Last Roman]

well,there are several reasons

-the information was so well protected
-it takes some very bright minds, which most countries don't access to
-the superpowers wanted to prevent the further spread of nuclear technology (kinda goes hand in hand with the first point)

[Pontifex Maximus]

I think a reason is all the bans on testing and even posession of nuclear arms. Not to mention countries like Austria were not permitted to have them until after the collapse of the Soviet Union.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty, 1968
A major step towards non-proliferation of nuclear weapons came with the signing of the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT) in 1968. Under the NPT, non-nuclear weapon states were prohibited from, inter alia, possessing, manufacturing or acquiring nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices. All signatories, including nuclear weapon states, were committed to the goal of total nuclear disarmament.


[edit] Negotiations for the CTBT
Given the political situation prevailing in the subsequent decades, little progress was made in nuclear disarmament until 1991. Parties to the PTBT held an amendment conference that year to discuss a proposal to convert the Treaty into an instrument banning all nuclear-weapon tests; with strong support from the UN General Assembly, negotiations for a comprehensive test-ban treaty began in 1993.

One of the largest issues was the priorities of the different countries. The Non-aligned movement countries were highly concerned with vertical proliferation (more and more bombs, new bomb technology) while the Nuclear Powers were focusing on horizontal proliferation (nuclear bombs being produced by states other than themselves).


[edit] Adoption of the CTBT, 1996
Intensive efforts were made over the next three years to draft the Treaty text and its two annexes, culminating in the adoption of the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) on 10 September 1996 by the United Nations General Assembly in New York

ALSO

"Opened for signature September 10, 1996[1] in New York
Entered into force Not yet in force
Conditions for entry into force The treaty will enter into force 180 days after it is ratified by all of the following 44 (Annex 2) countries: Algeria, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Bangladesh, Belgium, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, People's Republic of China, Colombia, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Egypt, Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Iran (Islamic Republic of), Israel, Italy, Japan, Mexico, Netherlands, Norway, Pakistan, Peru, Poland, Romania, Republic of Korea, Russian Federation, Slovakia, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, Ukraine, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United States of America, Vietnam.
Parties 144, including 35 of the 44 Annex 2 countries "


Also there was the test ban signed in 1963.


"The Treaty banning Nuclear Weapon Tests In The Atmosphere, In Outer Space And Under Water, often abbreviated as the Partial Test Ban Treaty (PTBT), Limited Test Ban Treaty (LTBT), or Nuclear Test Ban Treaty (NTBT) (although the latter also refers to the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty) is a treaty prohibiting all test detonations of nuclear weapons except underground. It was developed both to slow the arms race (nuclear testing is necessary for continued nuclear weapon advancements), and to stop the excessive release of nuclear fallout into the planet's atmosphere.

It was signed by the Governments of the USSR (represented by Andrei Gromyko), the UK (represented by Sir Alec Douglas-Home) and the USA (represented by Dean Rusk), named the "Original Parties", at Moscow on August 5, 1963 and opened for signature by other countries. It was ratified by the U.S. Senate on September 24, 1963 by a vote of 80 to 19. It entered into force on October 10, 1963.[1] [2][3]

Much of the initiative for the treaty had its locus in what was the rising concern about radioactive fallout as a result of nuclear weapons testing on the part of the nuclear powers. These concerns became more pronounced after the United States successfully tested a hydrogen bomb and a thermonuclear device with the power of eight million tons of TNT in the early 1950s.

Initially, the Soviet Union proposed a testing ban along with a disarmament agreement dealing with both conventional and nuclear weapon systems. The Western nuclear powers and the Soviet Union traded positions on this issue over the course of negotiations in the 1950s through offers and counteroffers proposed under the aegis of the U.N. Disarmament Commission. It was only later during 1959 and into the early 1960s that the United States, the United Kingdom, and the Soviet Union agreed to detach a general agreement on nuclear disarmament from a ban on nuclear weapons testing.

The Soviet Union, however, only agreed in principle to a testing ban with no verification regime or protocols. It was over what measures and the method by which they could be effectively be carried out that caused much of the deadlock in the latter half of 1961over a test ban agreement. The problem of detecting underground tests –that is, distinguishing it from an earthquake-- proved to be particular troublesome. Therefore the United States and United Kingdom insisted intrusive, inspection-based control systems as a means to verify compliance. While the Soviet Union, on the other hand, maintained the position that surveillance and seismic detection equipment operated from outside the boundaries of any signatory was adequate to verify compliance. The Western powers felt that any agreement not subject to a control system rigorous enough to verify compliance would set a bad precedent in nuclear arms control for future agreements.

Deadlock ensued until July of 1963 when Premier Khrushchev signaled his willingness to forgo a ban that would include underground testing. In effect, this meant the Soviet Union would agree to a test ban in the atmosphere, outer space, and under water environments; a position the Western powers had long favored as an alternative to a more comprehensive (underground environment) ban. This opened an opportunity for a three-power meeting among the United States, the United Kingdom, and the Soviet Union on July 15, 1963 in Moscow. The Moscow negotiations, in reflecting the long deliberations that had gone on for nearly a decade, took relatively little time as the treaty was signed by representatives of the three governments only 21 days later.


Parties - (113) Afghanistan, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, The Bahamas, Bangladesh, Belgium, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Bulgaria, Burma, Canada, Central African Republic, Chad, Republic of China, Colombia, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d'Ivoire, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Fiji, Finland, Gabon, The Gambia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kenya, South Korea, Kuwait, Laos, Lebanon, Liberia, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Montenegro, Morocco, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Romania, Rwanda, Samoa, San Marino, Senegal, Serbia, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa, Soviet Union, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden, Switzerland, Syria, Thailand, Togo, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, United Kingdom, United States, Venezuela, Zambia
Countries that have signed, but not yet ratified - (17) Algeria, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cameroon, Chile, Ethiopia, Haiti, Libya, Mali, Pakistan, Paraguay, Portugal, Somalia, Tanzania, Uruguay, Vietnam, Yemen"

It's not cheap to develop a nuclear arsenal.

I think alot of it has to do with price. The numerous laws also act as an inhibitor and serves to make developing a nuclear arsenal even more costly. Alot of places simply cannot afford it, or do not need to. Places like Canada and Japan are directly under the protection of the United States. In essence, they don't need to spend on the military because they have a big brother.

[Big War Bird]

The cold war umbrellas of the CCCP and the USA. The Soviets and Americans each had their spheres of influence that gave nuclear deterence protection to many countries that might otherwise be capable of producing nukes in that time frame.

A certainly not all inclusive list would include

Japan, S. Korea, Australia, Canada, and a host of European companies, Norway Sweden, Finland, W. Germany, Italy, Yugoslavia, Austria, Poland, Turkey

[PointOfViewGun]

I think before the WW2 there were no superpowers. A lot of countries were powerful like Britain, Russia, Germany, Japan, USA, ... But with the creation of 2 superpowers USA and Russia prevented a lot of smaller nations to acquire nukes.

[Heinz Guderian]

Thanks guys. I'm gonna use the Umbrella (ella ella) notion and expand on it. Now you all get repped.

[Lawrence of Arabia]

The umbrella notion! (Rep plz?)

Not to mention that global opinion is against the whole world arming itself with nuclear weapons.

[Stalins Ghost]

Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty?

The fact that they are an absolutely abhorrent, reckless, destructive weapon of sheer terror perhaps? In a nutshell, various governments quite rightly recognised the negative impact nuclear weapons have on the whole human race and decided that their development was a crucial step towards stability.

While by no means a comprehensive or entirely successful effort, given the fact that nuclear weapons still exist, mostly so the major signers could keep a monopoly on them, it was a step in the right direction. Essentially, I think the fact that it's basically illegal kinda stops nations from developing them :/

[Dromikaites]

South Africa, Argentina, Brazil are countries outside the "umbrella" which intended to develop a nuclear arsenal but eventually didn't. South Africa came closest if I am remembering well.

The physics and the technologies behind building an atomic bomb like the ones dropped over Japan are within many countries' scientific abilities and that also was true at the time that prediction was made. However:

1. The process through which you get weapon-grade Uranium or Plutonium is very costly. Any country which needs the bomb must be able to produce uranium with a concentration of at least 20% U235 isotope in order to assemble a big, heavy and very difficult to deliver bomb (modern weapons use 85% U235 which results in the weapons built to be rather small and easy to deliver through a multitude of means ranging from missiles to artillery shells). What makes the process of obtaining enriched uranium (=uranium with at least 20% concentration of the U235 isotope) costly is the fact the natural concentration of U235 is ~0.7%. A very energy intensive process using rather expensive (and big size) equipment is required to increase the concentration of the needed isotope at least 20 times.

2. It is practically impossible to conceal the site where such process takes place because of the size of the equipment involved. So it's easy for any of the existing members of the UN Security Council to get wind of anybody else's nuclear program. They don't need a proof country X is working on enriching uranium. They only need to detect suspicious-looking facilities in order to take action. I will talk about this action next.

3. There are only a few countries where Uranium can be mined outside the 5 Security Council permanent members. Assuming some countries have enough money to invest in the enrichment plants and enough money to keep those plant running they still need the Uranium ore producers to want to sell to them. Since the Uranium ore producers are either the existing nuclear powers or 3rd world countries, that's not easy at all. The 3rd world countries like Nigeria are not willing to ruin their relations with the Western powers for the sake of a not-so-significant country which has nothing to offer in return. Any 3rd world government stupid enough to attempt to sell uranium ore without the permission of the "Big Guys" would probably be couped faster than it can say U235. Besides ships or planes carrying the unauthorized cargo of uranium ore can be intercepted, sunk or shot down.

[LSJ]

There's also the fact that during the 60s when the threat seemed so close, people were more accepting of nuclear weapons, and the idea of owning them was very appealing. As time went on though, more people objected to them, seeing them as a weapon for killing civilians and thus a horrid tool of government-sanctified terrorism.
So some countries that had nuclear weapons disarmed themselves, while others trashed any plans to build them.

Proliferation saw a bit of a renaissance in smaller countries when the USSR became visibly weakened, as the safety net didn't feel so safe anymore - it did raise some ambitions for nuclear proliferation to dissuade the US from invasion, because the US appeared less constrained, being the only true superpower. But its effect was limited, and the majority of the countries could barely afford such programs and had no true nuclear-armed allies, so they gave it up one way or another.