Ethical Issues Related to Nuclear Testing

This paper discusses the ethical issues related to nuclear testing, including the pros and cons of nuclear testing, hazard issues, and reaction plan to the issues. It also provides a background on nuclear testing and its effects on the environment and human health. The subject is Introduction to Research, and the course code and college/university are not mentioned.

Introduction to Research 1
Introduction to Research
Student’s name
Institutional affiliations

Introduction to Research 2
Table of Contents
Introduction......................................................................................................................................3
Research background....................................................................................................................3
Pros and Cons of Nuclear Testing................................................................................................4
Pros of Nuclear Testing................................................................................................................4
Puts Negotiation First...............................................................................................................4
Shields Veritable Wars from Happening..................................................................................5
Increases National Power and Status........................................................................................5
Cons of Nuclear Testing..............................................................................................................5
Overwhelming expense and Maintenance................................................................................5
Nonattendance of Morals.........................................................................................................5
Ethics, Integrity, Safety and Risk issues in Nuclear Testing.....................................................5
Hazard Issues...............................................................................................................................6
Reaction Plan to the Issues...........................................................................................................6
Conclusion......................................................................................................................................7
Reference list...................................................................................................................................8

Introduction to Research 3
Introduction to Research
Introduction
Reports from ICAN say" More than two thousand events of nuclear weapon tests have been
carried out since the start of nuclear era in 1945 – on land, submerged and underground. This has
staggered the environmental and human health toll. Today we pass endless radioactive
substances around our bodies from the result of nuclear testing, broadening the cancer
contraction risk. Radioactive particles have contaminated essential parts of the earth’s surface.
An analytical argument would associate nuclear testing with nations that have, for a long time,
sought to improve lethality through nuclear.
Most people are less knowledgeable about nuclear testing and pay little or no attention to articles
and papers which educate them on the subject. This paper seeks to expound the knowledge on
the ethical issues related to nuclear testing. The paper seeks to inform more on the less
understood effects of nuclear weapons. With the knowledge given in this paper, people can
understand how their lives are impacted and champion the lawful tests which consider the
humanitarian benefits and environmental conservation. The report will propel better approaches
to comprehension by drawing people closer and explaining the ethics of nuclear testing.
Research background
Nuclear tests are done to gauge their effectiveness. An excess of sixty regions around the globe
has hosted nuclear tests. These regions have been biased as they are only located in areas
inhabited by aboriginals of low profiles. The International Physicians for the Prevention of
Nuclear War has analyzed that about 2.4 million individuals would die because of the
atmospheric pollution by nuclear testing that occurred between 1945 and 1980 (French, 2016).
Wayne Biddle of New York Times argued that America's extensive test program got renewed
after the negotiations for a complete ban on nuclear testing were deliberately ignored by
President Reagan (Neufeld, 2011, Pg. 220). The questions relayed to our mind is how much
conservation would be done to the atmosphere and environment as a whole if there was a ban on
nuclear testing and the kilotons on nuclear wastes were brought down.
A focal issue is whether programs of nuclear testing would continue by relying on simulations
from laboratories. Under consideration of all factors, technical issues would be picked on
technical grounds. In any case, the prerequisite for continual testing has been ludicrously tinted
by politics, especially the deterrence ones. The Defense Nuclear Agency and the Department of
Energy have confirmedly argued on interviews that banning nuclear tests would threaten the
process of weapon development.
The impacts of nuclear testing on the environment and health have been brought to the public
concern. Studies on post-Nagasaki nuclear blast have shown that most people experienced
genetic disorders that lead to physical deformation, effects on mother’s milk and babies’ teeth.
Open worry over the thriving and typical effects of atomic testing, including its impact on moms'
exhaust, and infant youngster kids' teeth. The observed effects led to a negotiation treaty of 1963
which negotiated to ban underwater and atmospheric nuclear test comprehensively. In 1996,

Introduction to Research 4
another treaty was held to negotiate a ban of underground nuclear tests. The latter treaty never
entered legal forces; nonetheless, there has been a drastic reduction in nuclear testing. However,
some countries persist in taking nuclear tests.
Treaties that have aimed to ban nuclear testing have displayed brilliant ideas which need
immediate implementation. It is arguably clear that nuclear technology outstripped the
sensibilities of proper use and had led to more harm than good. The presence of nuclear weapons
has proven to be a threat to the human race since its impact in addition to waste offers a leeway
to extinction. Nuclear testing, in no question, poisons the environment which implies that the
existence of other living things is threated. At the very least, treaties fostering the ban of nuclear
tests have been pushing to diminish harm against the human race.
Pros and Cons of Nuclear Testing
Nuclear testing is pigeonholed harmful and destructive. Even though the assumption is not far
from the truth, it goes without a saying that nuclear testing has its advantages. The history of war
recalls that nuclear weapons have only been used twice – by America on the Nagasaki and
Hiroshima cities of Japan during World War II. The first detonation was aimed at Hiroshima on
August 6, 1945, while Nagasaki received the same treatment on August 9 (Etzioni and Etzioni,
2017). The immediate impact of the bombing was a loss of close to 200,000 lives. The bombing
has raised endless debates on the ethics of nuclear testing. This explains the world’s opposition
against North Korea’s Kim Jong Un who, in the latter, has ordered more nuclear tests in a
dismissal of international condemnation and sanctions.
Pros of Nuclear Testing
Puts Negotiation First
Nuclear weapons are taken as a shield against aggression. It is arguable that nations in possession
of nuclear equipment bring equilibrium in power. Thoughts holding peaceful negotiations amid
disputes are given high preference for launching attacks (Mukhatzhanova, 2017). Nations with
inferior weapons would also prefer peaceful compromise and agreements to engage in wars. For
instance, America's President, Donald Trump sought to negotiate with Kim Jong Un of North
Korea to negotiate steps to take on solving the disputes between the countries.
Shields Veritable Wars
The 2015 report on nuclear report gave a toll of 16000 nuclear warheads in atomically armed
nations. 90% of this arms belonged to the US and Russia. It was estimated that 10,000 of these
warheads were in military service whereas, the rest awaited pulverization (Thompson, 2017).
Attacks on a nuclear-armed nation are unlikely to happen even when the protagonist country
owns the same type of armaments. This can be arguably defended by the fact that good defense
would mean a nation's ability to protect itself and correspondingly strike back in case of an
attack. This balance results in state consciousness which promotes peace and diplomatic solution
to conflicts.

Introduction to Research 5
Increases National Power and Status
A country’s ability to carry out nuclear tests communicably relays a message of power to other
nations. With the historical scars of nuclear destruction in Japan, nations take careful steps while
dealing with those in possession of nuclear equipment (Dittmer, 2015). For instance, a country
like North Korea which is of small economic power has raised fear after its leader threatens to
detonate nuclear weapons.
Cons of Nuclear Testing
Countries in possession of nuclear weapons have excused themselves claiming that it's a move of
strategic defense. They claim vulnerability to attacks and ought to have this type of destructive
weapons. This has been used as an excuse to keep the weapons despite their devastation and
mass destruction risks, and this type of countries have preferred keeping nuclear weapons active
and ready for combat when necessary. Experts in defense have argued that demolition and
decimation of nuclear weapons would be disadvantageous to a country (Kishi, 2018, Pg. 25). The
claim is based on the argument that hostile nations are in a vigorous acquisition of dangerous
weapons. They propose continued testing by powerful nations to maintain order in the world.
Overwhelming expense and Maintenance
There is a dumbfounding measure of resources used to make and maintain nuclear weapons.
Testing these weapons is also costly since caution measures taken on the same is high.
Considering North Korea as a ripe example, it has been reported that the nuclear tests carried by
the country are infringing on its economic growth. By concentrating absurdly on working up
these sorts of weapons, nothing has been left for its citizens (Cesca, 2017, Pg.305). Resources
that would be used to improve the livelihood of citizens are channeled to building weapons of
mass destruction.
Nonattendance of Morals
Right when atomic weapons end up being the basic factor, the ethics related to a country’s
honesty to the goodness of its citizens is put into question. Lack of sensibilities to dispose of
ruinous weapons compromises a country's honesty to goodness. The United States and Russia
made consent to diminish the measure of atomic weapons to serve as an example for different
countries (Vanstone, 2014, Pg.520). It is often considered immoral and perilous for a state to be
in possession of nuclear weapons.
Ethics, Integrity, Safety and Risk issues in Nuclear Testing
There has been security, political, financial issues related to nuclear weapons. There are moral
questions in the ultimate analysis of nuclear testing. It is an issue of good and terrible, character
blowing, toxicity, and ethics (Kuletz, 2016, Pg.20). We focus on the bit of ethics of nuclear
testing basing as it applies to the design and manufacturing of this type of weapons.
Nuclear equipment has proved to be different from other classes of equipment. Their uniqueness
has been shown in their massive impact both at the time of detonation and its effects afterward.
Research has shown that women and children are most vulnerable to these effects. The effects of
atomic weapon which inherently indiscriminative and uncontrollable have shown to persist
through generations. The consequences of the explosion have shown to leverage incomparable

Introduction to Research 6
environmental threats. Slightest nuclear tests have proven to devastate the global scale by
causing dramatic harm to the climatic stability and agriculture.
Hazard Issues
According to Walker (2016, Pg. 21), nuclear testing keeps running with a broad measure of
perils, a segment of the conceded delayed consequences of an atomic examination can hold up
quite a while after the preliminaries have been done. This raises the risks to human life. Nuclear
weapons can by chance induce radiation disasters with a monster reach. Sufficient if radiation
would leave in a minute. Shockingly, the dangers it positions to the earth and mankind remain.
The nuclear weapon industry makes a wide capacity of low-level radioactive waste that is
present in objects that regularly come in contact with people, for example, hand tools, clothing,
resins of water purification, and nuclear reactor building materials. Prelude to radiation will
actuate deficiency and cancers, and the effect can prolong for decades.
Remaining radiation from nuclear weapons can squash the earth and ordinary life for an
astounding period. The calamity that happened in Chernobyl is a good example of the
devastating and damage that nuclear weapons can cause. Testing of nuclear weapons in like way
causes destruction and pollution, a better reason why the world has tried to ban. It is doubtable
that creators of nukes would find other ways of carrying out tests would consider environmental
pollution and human coexistence.
Reaction Plan to the Issues
Institutions with ethical duties, especially religions, have a call to convey investment guidelines
and values into rationality. The resources used in industries which benefit from the degradation
of the environment and weapons of haphazard effects should be taken to companies affiliated
with an advance in sustainability.
The goal of this recommendation is to vivify and empower a divestment campaign in religious
affiliations. This campaign seeks to give a firsthand the proposition that these ethically instituted
societies should invest in a manner that encourages activities that support sustainability (Ceriotti
et al., 2017, Pg. 7531). It would incite the likelihood that we have obligations to protect future
generations against the negligence of environmental conservation by utilization of weapons that
cause indiscriminate effects.
We in a general sense should now create legal, unquestionable, and enforceable structures in the
setting of our ordinary marvelous credits to deny all weapons of haphazard effect. Nuclear
weapons should receive an equal share of treatment as that given to the biological and chemical
weapons. Raising open watch out for gainful change will help.
Conclusion
True spiritual sensitivity can be affirmed by feeling the tribulations of others as one’s own.
Nations should express compassion and love for the human race and environment by

Introduction to Research 7
amelioration of policies that completely ban nuclear testing. Solidarity in the protection of the
future of the human race would ensure governments take life as an undebatable priority while
giving. Prohibiting nuclear tests would provide a safe environment capable of sustaining life for
more generations.

Introduction to Research 8
Reference list
Ceriotti, M., Fang, W., Kusalik, P.G., McKenzie, R.H., Michaelides, A., Morales, M.A. and
Markland, T.E., 2016. Nuclear quantum effects in water and aqueous systems:
Experiment, theory, and current challenges. Chemical reviews, 116(13), pp.7529-7550.
Cesca, S., Heimann, S., Kriegerowski, M., Saul, J. and Dahm, T., 2017. Moment Tensor
Inversion for Nuclear Explosions: What Can We Learn from the 6 January and 9
September 2016 Nuclear Tests, North Korea?. Seismological Research Letters, 88(2A),
pp.300-310.
Dittmer, L., 2015. South Asia's Nuclear Security Dilemma: India, Pakistan, and China: India,
Pakistan, and China. Routledge.
Etzioni, A. and Etzioni, O., 2017. Pros and Cons of Autonomous Weapons Systems.
French, B., Funamoto, S., Sugiyama, H., Sakata, R., Cologne, J., Cullings, H.M., Mabuchi, K.
and Preston, D.L., 2018. Pre-Bombing Population Density in Hiroshima and Nagasaki:
Its Measurement and Impact on Radiation Risk Estimates in the Life Span Study of
Atomic Bomb Survivors. American journal of epidemiology.
Gilpin, R., 2015. American scientists and nuclear weapons policy (Vol. 2064). Princeton
University Press.
Kishi, T., 2018. Deliberations on Japanese Nuclear Policy During the Sato Administration:
Studies by the Cabinet Research Office (No. 17-15). National Graduate Institute for
Policy Studies.
Kuletz, V.L., 2016. The tainted desert: Environmental and social ruin in the American West.
Routledge.
Mukhatzhanova, G., 2017. The nuclear weapons prohibition treaty: negotiations and
beyond. Arms Control Today, 47(7), pp.12-19.
Neufeld, M.J., 2011. Wayne Biddle, Dark Side of the Moon: Wernher von Braun, the Third
Reich, and the Space Race. New York: WW Norton, 2009. xix+ 220 pp. $25.95.
Tarrado-Castellarnau, M., Cortés, R., Zanuy, M., Tarragó-Celada, J., Polat, I.H., Hill, R., Fan,
T.W., Link, W. and Cascante, M., 2015. Methylseleninic acid promotes antitumor effects
via nuclear FOXO3a translocation through Akt inhibition. Pharmacological
research, 102, pp.218-234.
Thompson, P., 2017. Peace and war: a theory of international relations. Routledge.
Vanstone, M., King, C., de Vrijer, B. and Nisker, J., 2014. Non-invasive prenatal testing: ethics
and policy considerations. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Canada, 36(6), pp.515-
526.
Walker, J.R., 2016. British Nuclear Weapons and the Test Ban 1954–1973: Britain, the United
States, Weapons Policies and Nuclear Testing: Tensions and Contradictions. Routledge.

Introduction to Research 9