The Munich Conference on Security Policy has traditionally been under the motto " peace through dialogue " but Iran, North Korea, not a single Arab or African country was represented at the conference, let alone representative of the "international terrorism", where the dialogue will be offered would, if the slogan was meant seriously and not just as today's world pretty stranger world politics.
And yet, the conference was important because after all this time she made quite an open debate among the world's strongest. Was progress or regression compared to the same conference? Always differences of opinion, the economic and even military still Competitive regionally and globally have their reasons. So were invited: Blackwill of Barbour Griffith & Rogers (lobbying as a business idea), Bishop of the Daimler AG (which has always been something more than the A-Class range), manager of Ford Motor Company, EADS and others, which the military competition the order books filled, including NATO's eastward expansion, which Moscow's new elite deeply regrets also less for ideological or security concerns. - It would be nice if this idea would be rebutted, but that can only succeed in the manner described below.
claims during the 44th Munich Security Conference ( 200 802 )
first If Russia, NATO and China threaten each other no longer do as they claim, it could and they should unite their levels of command for all strategic weapons, otherwise it is just talk, and the distrust remains, including arms race.
second If NATO, China and Russia claim that they are democratic, issues they are that none of them military " world politics make " may, without the consent of the world for it, because martial law is only according to common Charter in the United Nations. Therefore, to bring back all the States and its military alliances in our own borders or by making the command of that outside, where and as long as there are no UN approval, and if their military forces in international waters or international airspace, they should be subject to the United Nations, until they are ordered back into their territory.
third If the United States, Russia, China or any other nuclear country by other countries nuclear waiver request, this is indeed absolutely correct, but wrong is when they are not even in the way of control agreements in relation to global, that also aim at its own nuclear weapons freedom, which they made Article 6 of the NPT are already committed and by the refusal of the nuclear weapon states signed the proliferation fault of nuclear weapons.
4th The minimum requirements are all nuclear powers:
a) withdrawal of all nuclear weapons from non-nuclear weapon states.
b) Zurückbeorderung all nuclear weapons in international waters and international airspace.
c) guarantee to all non-nuclear weapon States against them that under no, absolutely no circumstances are nuclear weapons are used, so that non-nuclear weapon states secure their nuclear weapons by waiver and feel blackmailed not atomic.
d) guarantee of all nuclear weapons states to reduce their nuclear arsenals so drastically that kriegunbeteiligter have made the contamination States remains.
e) Mutual guarantee all nuclear states that they waive any strategy of a nuclear or "preventive" nuclear first strike, although it is also the second-strike strategy, and each mass destruction from the perspective of a civilized culture is no less inhumane than the first-strike strategy, but something more credible that one does not want nuclear war.
5th Receptive to negotiations and are no interruption until such contracts are closed and converted into controllable reality. Everything else would talk, keep mistrust and the arms race, as it always has been - and led to war.
"Peace through Dialogue" - sounds good, but enough already not to mere safety, because the security will require agreements, bilaterally, multilaterally - and in line with the United Nations.
None of the Munich conference is so stupid not to know the importance of contracts and the methods for their verifiability, but few of them will enter into contracts that limit their own power, because the populations are so stupid to trust politicians to peace, it can be to "dialogue" and "talk shows" are missing, but not sufficient to contracts, as it was their business.
- Mark Rabago - >> discussion
