For more information
Call 1-800-351-0222
Call 1-800-351-0222
NUCLEAR TEST BAN TREATY.
Term Paper ID:28968
Essay Subject:
Proposes an empirical research design to investigate why the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) failed to be ratified by the U.S> in 1999.... More...
16 Pages / 3600 Words
6 sources, 13 Citations,
APA Format
$64.00
More Papers on This Topic
Paper Abstract:
Proposes an empirical research design to investigate why the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) failed to be ratified by the U.S. in 1999. Discusses worldwide attempts to stop nuclear arms proliferation. Resistance of other countries. Major role of U.S. politics in Congressional vote; partisanship in the Senate. Large public support for the treaty. Implications for further study.
Paper Introduction:
NUCLEAR TEST BAN TREATY FAILURE: RESEARCH DESIGN
Introduction
An empirical research design is proposed to investigate why the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) failed the ratification vote in the United States on 13 October 1999 (Raum, 1999). For all those people who have been in a coma for the past several years, the CTBT is a broad-based treaty that was aggressively negotiated by the United States. The treaty is designed to halt nuclear weapons development by preventing the testing of nuclear explosive devices. The CTBT, thus, represents a companion strategy to attempts to stop nuclear weapons proliferation to those countries that have not already developed a nuclear weapons capacity.
A few important countries, notably among them China, have failed t
Text of the Paper:
The entire text of the paper is shown below. However, the text is somewhat scrambled. We want to give you as much information as we possibly can about our papers and essays, but we cannot give them away for free. In the text below you will find that while disordered, many of the phrases are essentially intact. From this text you will be able to get a solid sense of the writing style, the concepts addressed, and the sources used in the research paper.
http://www.acronymn.org.uk/ 4 wrong.htm Raum, T. (1999 September 14). With polls showing that more than eight of 1 adult Americans favorratification of the CTBT (Coalition to Reduce Nuclear Dangers, 1999), thesimple solution to the problem for the American voting public would be towithhold their votes from Republican senatorial candidates. The independent variables will be (1)respondent position on abortion law, (2) respondent position on tax-reduction/ increased social spending, and (3) respondent position onratification of the CTBT. Thestrongest logic appears to characterize alternative two above with thesecond strongest logic characterizing alternative one. As the vote against the CTBT failed on a near exclusive partisan vote,the temptation is to conclude that it is just 199 s American politics asusual in Washington, DC, with the Republican-controlled Congress exploitingopportunities where they are available to pin a defeat on President Clintonto assuage their collective bruised ego for the many times they have endedup shooting themselves in their collective foot. (1995 July 8). The unit of analysis will be the individual American adult whoidentifies herself or himself as a person who voted Republican in the mostrecent senatorial election. Texts adoptedat the conference, however, implied some degree of conditionality as wellas greater accountability by the nuclear powers (Epstein, 1995). All parties are fully aware that anyparty can withdraw from the treaty, by giving the requisite three monthsnotice. Only the first part oftheir wish was fully granted. Nuclear treaties, therefore, while desirable in concept arelargely ineffective as they are currently constituted. Canada led the effort at the conference to achieve an indefiniteextension, but it dropped the unconditional requirement, which had muchless support. Test bantreaty backed by leading military, scientific leaders and vast majority ofAmerican voters. DisarmamentDiplomacy, (4 ), 3-12. The third decision on the extension of the treaty simplynoted that because a majority favored an indefinite extension, the treatywould be extended indefinitely. On May 11, a procedure sometimes used atthe United Nations when there is not quite a consensus for a proposal wasemployed. The treatyis designed to halt nuclear weapons development by preventing the testingof nuclear explosive devices. These decisions were as follows (Epstein, 1995): 1. Interval variables have numeric values, rather thancoded values. The majorimplication of the current situation, thus, is that some state likely willuse nuclear weapons in the not too distant future in the name of self-defense if effective treaties are not ratified and enforced. Discussion of Challenges and Obstacles Encountered in Researching This Issue The greatest challenge faced in researching this issue is findinganyone in the player group who will discuss the issue in any terms otherthan political platitudes. This hypothesis can betested by polling probable voters. Thus, thehypothesis that will be tested will be as follows: American voters whosupported Republican candidate in the most recent senatorial elections intheir states and who share support positions with those senators on anti-abortion legislation and tax-reduction legislation as opposed to increasedsocial spending will not cease to support those Republican senators forhaving voted against ratification of the CTBT. Two Republican senators voted for the CTBT. The NPT became effective in March 197 for a 25-year period followingratification by 178 nations. It is held thatbefore a regression equation can be used for causal analysis, a theoreticalbasis for a causal relationship between the variables concerned must beestablished. This last statement means simply that a perception is held by somepeople in the United States and many people in other countries that whatthe United States actually wants is not a nuclear weapons free world, butrather a world in which only the United States has nuclear weapons. There would beno point in investigating this question, because everyone knows that thevote was almost exclusively along party lines. Thus, a conclusion was reached that the onlyway to research this issue effectively was to survey the voters. Although representatives ofthe United States said this was tantamount to a consensus, there was infact no unanimity and no consensus. One result of this difference in emphasis is that,in regression analysis, both the independent and the dependent variablesmust be measured on an interval scale, whereas, in analysis of varianceprocedures, only the dependent variable is required to be measured on aninterval scale. Indefinite extension-with increasedaccountability. Each of thedecisions then were declared to be adopted. Implications for Further Study While the testing of nuclear weapons and the use of nuclear weaponsmay be socially unacceptable, neither is illegal within the context ofinternational law. The research design proposed herein isintended to find out what it is that Republican senators know about theAmerican voter that permits them to engage in what appears to many peopleto be petulant, irresponsible, and dangerous behavior in an attempt to geteven with a president that has managed to effectively dodge every would beknockout punch that the Republicans in Congress have thrown at him. Their demands included a comprehensive test ban treaty (CTBT),legally binding assurances to non-nuclear states against the use or threatof use of nuclear weapons, a cut-off of the production of and theelimination of stockpiles of weapon and usable fissile material, theelimination of nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction, theestablishment of additional nuclear-weapon-free zones, the non-discriminatory transfer of nuclear technology for peaceful purposes, andthe achievement of universality-bringing Israel, India, and Pakistan-allundeclared nuclear powers-into the fold. It will querysubjects on their positions on the abortion issue, tax reduction, increasedspending on social issues, the CTBT, and what effect, if any, theirsenator's vote on the CTBT will have on their support for the senator. Unfortunately, the treaties leave the determination of whatconstitutes an act of national self-defense up to the state using nuclearweapons. In an effortto sidestep a vote, the conference authorized a continuation to seek aconsensus. The CTBT, thus, represents a companionstrategy to attempts to stop nuclear weapons proliferation to thosecountries that have not already developed a nuclear weapons capacity. 29). The package eventually consisted of three documentsor decisions, which appeared to be generally acceptable and which couldcommand a near consensus. All 51 of the senators votingagainst the CTBT were Republicans. The 51 senators who voted against the CTBT allwere Republican. For all those people whohave been in a coma for the past several years, the CTBT is a broad-basedtreaty that was aggressively negotiated by the United States. Thus, while theactual vote against CTBT ratification may be explained by rank partisanshipin the Senate, the Republican senators must know something about Americanvoters that is not reflected in the polls showing 8 percent support forthe CTBT to justify the thumbing of their collective nose at the Americanvoting public on this issue. Economist, 338, 17-18. 3. If a vote were taken, indefinite extension would have more thanenough votes. To contend that this hypothesis cannotbe tested until the next senatorial elections is tantamount to stating thatpolitical support can be measured only by elections, a premise that fliesin the face of the realities of contemporary American political activity. The participants simply agreed-bytheir silence-to accept the carefully crafted compromise without theformality of a vote. A core group of 14 non-aligned states, ledby Indonesia, wanted the treaty extended for a series of rolling fixedperiods of 25 years, subject to reaching certain goals during each timeperiod. The new resolution,sponsored by the United States, Russia, and the United Kingdom, endorsedthe Middle East peace process, called on all states in the Middle East thathad not yet done so to agree to the NPT as soon as possible and place theirnuclear facilities under full-scope IAEA safeguards, and urged all statesin the Middle East and all parties to the NPT to cooperate in the earlyestablishment of a zone free of nuclear and other weapons of massdestruction and their delivery systems in the Middle East (Epstein, 1995). Senate kills treaty to ban nuclear tests.Des Moines Register, 1A, 6A. News Release, 1. References China's broken promises. 2. The Arab states, led by Egypt, refused to endorse any proposal for theextension of the NPT, unless pressure was brought on Israel to accept tothe NPT and accept the full-scope of NPT safeguards. A compromise package of three linked proposals based onCanada's extension proposal as well as on specific ideas put forward by thecore group of 14 Arab nations, as well as by Mexico, Indonesia, and SouthAfrica was developed. There are a number of treaties already in effect that governactivities related to nuclear weapons. Unfortunately,the issue of why the CTBT failed the ratification vote in the United Statesis more complicated. In the less than three months that have elapsedsince that vote, no research studies have been published on the issue.Companion treaties such as the Nuclear Proliferation Treaty are relevant tothe dispute over the CTBT. Mexico, in return for acceptingan indefinite extension, asked for a program of action similar to that ofthe non-aligned states-but more specific: a CTBT had to be negotiated by1996; the nuclear powers had to end the production of nuclear weapons andwork toward reducing their arsenals to zero; International Atomic EnergyAgency (IAEA) safeguards had to be made more effective; and all states (thenuclear-weapon powers in particular) had to support and respect the newnuclear-weapon-free zones (Epstein, 1995). Kimball, D. Proposed Statistical Method for Data Analysis The statistical method that will be used for data analysis will bemultiple regression. Thegreatest obstacle that I face was the complete absence of the data requiredto investigate the research question. The Research Hypothesis Support among American adults for the CTBT varies little across thepolitical spectrum. In the future, there will be more systematic preparation for theconferences on substantive issues. 28). Canada, too,called for a consensus decision, and for a "deeper commitment toaccountability and implementation" of the treaty (Epstein, 1995, p. A surveyinstrument will be developed for use in the proposed study and will beadministered by telephone. A draft resolutionprepared by 14 Arab states called upon Israel to accede to the NPT withoutdelay and place all of its nuclear activities under full-scope IAEAsafeguards. Coalition to Reduce Nuclear Dangers. The empirical research design proposed is presented in 1 topic areas. If the issue were soeasily assessed, this report could be ended at this point. Rather,the research design will provide for a survey of voters to develop the datarequired to investigate the research question. The consent of the delegations to proceed with the adoption ofthe three draft decisions without a vote was obtained. (1995 July/August). A strength of regression analysis is that a causal relationship may beestablished between dependent and independent variables. The decision related to the principles and objectives fornuclear non-proliferation and disarmament reaffirmed the treaty's ultimategoals-the complete elimination of nuclear weapons and the achievement of atreaty on general and complete disarmament. (1999 September-October). The NPT was re-negotiated and renewed at aconference attended by 175 nations of the original 178 nations in 1995.The NPT was extended indefinitely on 11 May 1995 (Epstein, 1995). The dependent variable will be the level ofrespondent support for a senatorial candidate whose views mirror those ofthe respondent on abortion law and the tax reduction/social spending issue,but whose view on the ratification of the CTBT is in opposition to the viewof the respondent. Theanticipation is that some degree of meaningful variations mightcharacterize positions on the issue with respect to older versus youngervoters. Through extension of the NPT, the nuclear powers managed to maintaintheir monopoly on nuclear weapons. The Research Design The research design will be neither experimental nor quasi-experimental, as neither a control-experimental groups configuration nor anexperimental intervention will be incorporated into the design. The United States, Russia, Britain, and France wanted thetreaty extended indefinitely and unconditionally. A continued insistence by the nuclearpowers that national security for themselves depends on the indefiniteretention of nuclear weapons, however, likely will place the extended NPTin jeopardy, as some non nuclear states have equally valid securityconcerns. (1996 January 27). The United States and the successor states of the Former Soviet Unionimplemented and are continuing the process of destroying nuclear weaponsprovided in START-I (Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty). This display type provides an understanding for theaudience of the meaning of the findings more quickly than can beaccomplished with other data display types. In the extension of the NPT, no state got all it wanted, although thenuclear weapon states had more reason to be gratified than the non nuclearweapon states. Hawkish members of the United StatesSenate who routinely advocate the use of massive retaliation against anycountry that fails to toe the party line advocated by the United Statesalso opposed the CTBT. Data Source The data source for the proposed empirical research study will be anational survey that will be administered in all states that arerepresented by a Republican in the United States Senate. There are 53 Republicans in the United StatesSenate, along with 45 Democrats, one independent, and one seat is vacant.The vote against the CTBT was 51 to 48. Thus, SenateRepublicans apparently believe that (1) support among Republicans who willactually go to the polls is not as high for the CTBT as indicated by thepoll of the general adult population, (2) the CTBT is not as important toRepublican voters as are other issues on which the Senate Republicans andthe Republican voters are more closely attuned, or (3) Republican supportfor the CTBT is not as high in the states that actually elect Republicansto the Senate as it is among Republicans in states that do not electRepublicans to the Senate. The NPT is not likely to last indefinitely if only the securityof the nuclear powers is assured. A Review of Relevant Literature The CTBT was defeated in the ratification vote in the United StatesSenate of 18 October 1999. A major difference between the analysis of varianceprocedure and regression analysis is that, in analysis of variance, theemphasis is on analysis of the variations in the independent variable, asopposed to the joint interaction of the variations in dependent andindependent variables. These topic areas are as follows; (1) the research question; (2) theresearch hypothesis; (3) the research design type; (4) the importance ofthe issue to be investigated; (5) a review of relevant literature; (6) datasources; (7) proposed statistical methods for data analysis; (8) type ofdata display proposed; (9) discussion of challenges and obstaclesencountered in researching this issue; and (1 ) implications for furtherstudy. The Research Question The research question that will be investigated will not be why theCTBT ratification vote failed in the United States Senate. Finish what you have STARTed. Further studywould be useful in relation to determining whether the people and theirleaders in the United States really want a nuclear-free world or whetherwhat they actually want is a nuclear-free world other than the UnitedStates. These existing treaties arerelevant to the CTBT. The most important of these existing treaties inrelation to the CTBT is the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT). Rather, the research question that will be investigated will beas follows: What factors persuaded the majority of Senators that they couldwith impunity vote against a treaty supported by 82 percent of the Americanpublic? A preparatory committee would meet fortwo weeks in each of the three years prior to a review conference, to give"focused consideration" to "specific issues relevant to the treaty"(Epstein, 1995, p. This decision contained a setof 2 principles and objectives dealing with seven issues: universality,nonproliferation, nuclear disarmament, nuclear-weapon-free zones, securityassurances, safeguards, and peaceful uses of nuclear energy. As usual, therefore, the ultra conservatives inboth communist and western states have more in common with one another thanthey do with persons in either type of society who would like to rid theworld of the scourge of nuclear weapons. Economist, 336, 17-18. The United States opposed the resolution, and activenegotiations led to less controversial language. The level of measurement for all variables will be interval.Interval variables are quantitative variables which are measured on anumeric scale in which distances between the points on the scale can becompared meaningfully. Type of Data Display Proposed The proposed data display type is a representation of the findings intables and charts. The research question thatwill be investigated will not even be whether the vote failed because theRepublican majority in the United States Senate truly believed that thetreaty was not in the best interests of the United States or because theRepublican majority want to retaliate against President Clinton (anyone whobelieves that the CTBT failed on a balanced non-partisan vote shouldreanalyze the voting data). The survey instrument will be quite simple. Although the nuclear powers were prepared to proceed to a vote, someof their allies feared that a vote could leave a significant dissatisfiedminority that might weaken rather than strengthen the treaty. The decision to strengthen the review process provided for areview conference every five years, as had been the case for the past 25years. Canada submitted a simple proposal co-sponsored by 1 3(later, 111) parties that said the conference "decides that the Treatyshall continue in force indefinitely" (Epstein, 1995, p. Of the 48 senators voting for thetreaty, 45 were Democrats two were Republican, and one was an independent.The partisanship of the CTBT vote, thus, is not n question. Quiteobviously, such behavior has not occurred at a frequency that would lead toa solution to the problem of ratification of the CTBT. Nuclear Test Ban Treaty Failure: Research Design Introduction An empirical research design is proposed to investigate why theComprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) failed the ratification vote in theUnited States on 13 October 1999 (Raum, 1999). The CTBT has been negotiated but not ratified, and theNPT and other nuclear treaties permit the use of nuclear weapons in self-defense. The Importance of the Issue to Be Investigated The issue of the ratification of the CTBT is important in relation toboth the safety of the world's population and the ability of the UnitedStates to influence world affairs (Kimball, 1999). http://www.clw.org/pub/clw/coalition/bkgrsupprt 999.htm Epstein, W. A few important countries, notably among them China, have failed tosign the CTBT because the believe that it is simply a strategy designed bythe United States to perpetuate its dominance among the very few nuclearpowers that are known to exist. The Missile-Technology Control Regime (MTCR) and the NuclearSafeguards Agreement (NSA) are intended to keep missile delivery technologyout of the hands of states that might use nuclear weapons, and to preventthe use of nuclear reactors intended for peaceful uses from being used toproduce weapons-grade nuclear material. It had become clear, however, that a consensus on indefiniteextension was not likely, unless there were binding commitments by thenuclear powers to comply fully with their obligations under the treaty, andunless some system was devised that would lead to greater accountability(Epstein, 1995). CTBT in crisis. The control variable will be respondent age. The proposed researchwould yield important new information to explain why politicians frequentlycan afford to ignore strong voter support on a specific issue withoutsuffering a loss of support among voters. The 14 non-aligned states did not get 25-year rolling extensions, andneither they nor Mexico got the other requested conditions. There are pressuresamong conservative law makers in the United States, however, to abrogateSTART-I, and even stronger pressures to refuse to negotiate START-II("Finish What You Have STARTed," 1999). Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, 51, 27-3 . 29).Because the number of co-sponsors exceeded the 9 parties required for amajority decision to extend the NPT, this action effectively settled thequestion. (1999 October 14). Widespread acceptance andadherence to these protocols, however, has not materialized ("China'sBroken Promises," 1995). There would beno point in answering this question because the answer could be providedonly by the Senators casting the votes, and would be required to beunbelievably gullible to accept the validity of their answers to thisquestion. This approach must be used because the veryrecent vote defeating the CTBT means that no data exists with which to testthe hypothesis. While 82 percent of all voters support ratification ofthe CTBT, the level of support also is very high among Republicansgenerally-8 percent-and among self-described "conservative" Republicans-79percent (Coalition to Reduce Nuclear Dangers, 1999).
If this paper is not what you are looking for, you can search again:
or
We can write a Custom Essay just for you.
Browse Essays by Subject