It looks as if climate change is not the biggest problem that the world has to face, after all. Now it’s the threat of nuclear weapons in the hands of the terrorists. Will this summit go down the way of the climate change fizzer in Copenhagen with lots of hot air and no results?
It seems as if nuclear weapons must be kept away from the baddies, the current baddies, that is. Apparently, the baddies are always the other guys.
In our humble opinion, we are good and can be trusted to handle our enriched uranium very securely and so we must hold conferences and summits and protocols etc to show how responsible we are.
And we must resolve to halt proliferation by the other guys, those who threaten us with their nuclear potential.
Does anyone else observe a paradox here? We in the West don’t approve of nuclear weapons except in our own hands.
So now we have the Ukraine announcing that it is going to dispose of its enriched uranium. Call me a cynic, but I can read “Destination Iran” in that announcement. Now isn’t that what the nuclear summit is allegedly trying to prevent? Or is this merely another of Obama’s walks in the clouds?
I often think that holding constant summits is one way of not doing very much but trying to look busy about it. But then, I wasn’t born yesterday.