There is a saying that a tidy home is the sign of a misspent life. Not only is that stupid, but it also makes for bad international relations, and with something like nuclear testing, you're going to need more than a diplomatic Roomba to clean things up.
Whereas the atomic bomb represents all-out chaos, the Partial Test Ban Treaty represents the desire for order. It sets out rules for achieving, maintaining, and progressing that order perpetually. Think of the treaty as one major rule (as described in its official title, Treaty Banning Nuclear Weapon Tests in the Atmosphere, in Outer Space and Under Water) that is comprised of several smaller rules (the articles).
A treaty is a very orderly method of initiating order, and the PTBT is no exception. In fact, it is exceptionally orderly given its importance.
Questions About Rules and Order
- Do the rules set out by the PTBT sufficiently explain what is and is not allowed when it comes to nuclear weapons testing? Why or why not?
- Why doesn't the PTBT include a description of how a government might be punished if it violates the terms of the agreement? What are the options for other governments if one of the signing nations fails to comply with the treaty?
- Do you think a treaty, however legally and ethically binding it might be, is enough to contend with the magnitude of nuclear warfare? Why or why not?
- Do you think the terms of the PTBT hold up today? Does the PTBT endure as a strong diplomatic action, or does it need to be updated for the 21st century?
Chew on This
The PTBT does not need to explicitly state the condition of reprimand should a signing government violate the terms. The result could be, at best, the dissolution of the treaty. At worst, it would be nuclear war.
The PTBT is an extraordinary document because, though small and brief, it functions as a safety net for the increase of nuclear arms throughout the world. It's like a tiny plug that holds back an enormous flood.