Terrorist organization and the rogue states are discussed a lot about their nuclear abilities and pretensions. But how difficult is this to resolve the problem of those countries who kept destructive nuclear weapons from years? Changes on international level can have some sort of gambling effect with this respect.
Clinton Defense Secretary William Perry, the leading disarmament advocate is forcing on finishing off with those destructive weapons and disarm the countries on the plans of Obama administrations as it was put in discussion in one of his speech in Prague. Although understandably disturbed by the proliferation of nuclear weapons, Perry somehow has arrived at the conclusion that the same kind of appeasement that started WWII will charm ruthless, apocalyptic tyrants today.
The Nuclear Tipping Point examines the factors, both domestic and transnational, that shape nuclear policy. The authors, distinguished scholars and foreign policy practitioners with extensive government experience, develop a framework for understanding why certain countries may originally have decided to renounce nuclear weapons—and pinpoint some more recent country-specific factors that could give them cause to reconsider. Case studies of eight long-term stalwarts of the nonproliferation regime—Egypt, Germany, Japan, Saudi Arabia, South Korea, Syria, Turkey, and Taiwan—flesh out this framework and show how even these countries might be pushed over the edge of a nuclear tipping point.