The International Convention for the Suppression of Acts of Nuclear Terrorism will enter into force 30 days after the deposit of the 22nd instrument, on July 2007, nearly two years from its adoption by Member states. The Secretary-General of the United Nations Ban Ki-moon has already welcomed the 22nd State depositing a ratification or accession to this convention. However, the moot question is how far this effort would succeed and within how much time. It is also to be seen what ways and means are adopted to achieve this goal.

The quality of success, however, depends on the attitudes of the bigger nuclear countries, especially on the United States who are alleged to have been indulging in arm-twisting other countries on one or the other pretext, and sometimes without any evidence of possession or development of weapons of mass destruction or nuclear weapons.

There can be cited as many examples as one wish to enumerate. The latest one is the attack on Iraq on the ground of possession of weapons of mass destruction. Iraq was destroyed and the United States won it in the military or strategic sense of the word. However, The United States of America is yet to produce evidence for its allegations, the ground on which bases it attacked Iraq. There are also not many believers of Saddam Hussein encouraging or supporting terrorists and was developing weapons of mass destruction for them. Most of the people believe that USA attacked Iraq for narrow political ends like forceful possession of fossil oil.

There are, thus widespread apprehension among the non-nuclear countries about the real intention of the nuclear states of the world who do not want to lose their clout on the rest of the world. The want to retain their own nuclear weapon but want disarmament from all other countries who have recently acquired nuclear weapons or are in the process of acquiring one. If they succeed in preventing other countries of the world from becoming nuclear states, they would become perpetual rulers of the world, while non-nuclear states will have to live like slave countries.

This fear among the non-nuclear states needs to be addressed first, if we want a world free of State violence (one state attacking the other) or State sponsored violence (terrorism). There are, of course, other apprehensions. We can take example of India and Indo-US nuclear treaty. India has already acquired nuclear capability; however, it has not been given the status of a nuclear state. India is being prevented from using its own Thorium deposits and is being compelled to purchase Uranium and other nuclear technology from other developed countries including the United States. The eyes of the developed nuclear states are on the resources and the wealth of the other countries and are repeatedly devising one or the other instrument to get access to the wealth, either by persuasion or by force. India is being treated badly despite the fact that barring one or two countries, all agree on it's being responsible state. There is no fear of leak of the nuclear technology to the terrorist groups or other countries of ill repute. However, India is being under great pressure.

The fear of terrorists gaining access to weapon of mass destruction or nuclear technology is well acknowledged by all the right thinking people of the world.
The nuclear terrorism is indeed one of the most serious threats of our time. Even one such attack could inflict mass casualties and create immense suffering and unwanted change in the world forever. This prospect should compel all of us to act to prevent such a catastrophe, says Ki-moon in his latest statement.

He hopes that the Nuclear Terrorism Convention will help prevent terrorist groups from gaining access to the most lethal weapons known to man. It will strengthen the international legal framework against terrorism, which, together with this Convention, comprises 13 universal instruments. The Convention, among other matters, will encourage cooperation among States, which is crucial in defeating terrorism.

Preventing terrorism and becoming parties to the international anti-terrorism conventions and protocols are key elements of the United Nations Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy that the General Assembly adopted last September.
In pursuance of the strategy, all States are called upon to ratify or accede to this Convention without delay. They will have an opportunity to deposit instruments of ratification or accession to the Convention during this year's annual treaty event taking place at the beginning of the sixty-second General Assembly Session, when the Convention, along with other counter-terrorism instruments, will be highlighted.

The thinking in the United Nations is welcome, but the member countries should take the incidents of the past into consideration when one or the other countries having nuclear capability and veto powers violated the united decisions of the UN and attacked the weaker countries. It would be more perfect system if we run this organization more democratically and effectively, and no country should have free hand in intimidating the other. Otherwise the purpose of a peaceful world will be defeated.#