Effectiveness of Disarmament in promoting Global Domestic peace

The resolution required governments to focus on achieving constructive solutions and expressed hope that the interventions that will lead towards achieving disarmament would be agreed upon in the shortest duration. In 1961, the popular Zorin-Mecloy statement of the agreed principles were announced and later adopted by the United Nations General Assembly which agreed to establish a negotiation body, (The ENDC). Vellodi (1979) asserts that it is unfortunate that the momentum to have total disarmament decreased in the mid-sixties making the issue of complete and general disarmament relocate to the bottom of ENDC’s agendas where it has remained until the present. Ventura (2018) argues that a disarmament has been ineffective due to its inability to deal with security dilemma. Security dilemma refers to the situation in which a nation increases military power via stockpiling and developing particular weapons with the objective of increasing security.

Both Gray and Beets are real hold the notion that security issues tend to be state-centric and are mainly sorted through military or any other type of coercion. Hence, leading to a realist conclusion that war and conflict are inevitable as well as arms proliferation. Therefore, disarmament has a minimal effect since states have to protect themselves in international environment characterized by hostility. On the contrary, Clemens Walters (1972) argued disarmament plays a significant role in achieving perpetual peace. He asserts that disarmament is the sole path to attaining peace. With respect to the article, despite the major peace keeping and rehabilitation efforts by the United Nations, the mistrust between different bodies have fueled up more violence across various towns across the nation.

Notably, the factor that armed groups still have guns makes it hard to stabilize this nation. Similarly, Muggah (2012) also explored various limitations in implementing and achieving successful disarmament. He asserts that bureaucratic and administrative challenges also hinder successful disarmament. Muggah explains that the United Nations faces limitation in disarmament due to the confusion and disagreement over budgets and mandates. This leads to long durations of executing the process which contradicts with the set time by the United Nations (Brewer, 2010). However, despite various limitation of achieving disarmament in various nations, studies have focused on Libya and the reason then country’s disarmament efforts were successful. Squassoni (2006), Cigar (2012) and Hochman (2006) agree that disarmament has been successful in Libya. According to Hochman (2006) Libya’s success in disarmament makes the nation a role model to other states that are still struggling in acquiring complete disarmament.

Hochman explains that Libya’s decision to support disarmament reduced tensions between the United States and Libya creating peace which enhanced better economic and international relations between the two states. However, he acknowledges that the special nature of the present’s situation establishes a great opportunity of turning the disarmament ideal into a political practice and reality. Nonetheless, he acknowledges that the initial difference between the political reality and the ideal is still in existence. Notably, as the popularity of disarmament as an ideal grows, infrastructures that promote buildup of arms as well maintenance of nuclear weapons is still powerful as well as active across the universe. As a result, this makes disarmament more of an ideal and limits realizing it as a reality.