The nuclear security summit which will be held today and tomorrow in New York will constitute a decisive test for America's ability to earn international recognition for the new nuclear doctrine which will mark the third step toward building a “nuclear weapons free world,” as it was promised by President Barack Obama in Prague about a year ago. The first step had been seen in the American president's announcement of the “reviewing of the nuclear position” of the United States, one which was completely different from the previous ones in 1994 and 2001, while the second was seen in the signing of the START 2 treaty. These steps turned the page of the ideology that was adopted by President George Bush's administration for eight years and paved the way before the building of a new world order run by a realistic American policy making sure to include the other superpowers from China to Russia among others in leading the world. In the meantime, Obama has been the object of campaigns and accusations of reluctance and indecisiveness over many of his country's foreign political folders, whether at the level of the settlement in the Middle East, the situations in Iraq and Afghanistan or the Iranian nuclear dossier. However, during the last few months, he showed an uncanny ability to make use of patience and steadfastness. Indeed, during the first year of his term, he was busy fixing the domestic situation, supervising the relief plans to prevent the collapse of financial, economic and industrial institutions and adopting measures to rise from the worst economic crisis faced by the world since the beginning of the twentieth century. Moreover, he came out victorious, although exhausted, from one of the biggest domestic confrontations with the ratification of the healthcare bill. What took so much time internally was met with fast-moving developments at the level of strategic armament, and just like Obama's measures on the domestic arena raised relentless waves of opposition launched by the Republicans and some military leaders, the new nuclear doctrine will not be spared from such criticisms and attacks. Nonetheless, this doctrine which should be fully completed by the leaders who will be meeting in New York today and tomorrow, will constitute a wide-scale international safety front to distance the nuclear materials from the hands of states or groups which might “misuse them,” i.e. according to America to distance them from Iran, North Korea and the “terrorist groups.” During these couple of days, Obama's reputation will be at stake. Indeed, through his administration's reviewing of its nuclear strategy, the man offered something different while through the signing of START 2, he relaunched the relations with Russia which thus became a “partner” in leading the international campaign to fight nuclear proliferation instead of being a rival. Therefore, what is required from the summit is for the international community to support these two steps and adopt measures preventing the theft or trade of nuclear substances. If Obama's hopes are achieved today, he will have placed the cornerstone for a new world order to succeed to the one which President George Bush Sr. began building following the collapse of the Socialist camp but which was quickly destroyed on the military and economic levels and at the level of the US international relations by Bush Jr. In any case, regardless of the positions which Obama's new nuclear strategy has raised and is still raising, he cannot rest assured that his vision for a world free from weapons of mass destruction has become a reality or is on the verge of becoming so or that the security of the United States has become better established, just like he cannot be certain that the United States has become more exposed to threats and dangers or that America's command over the world had retreated or will retreat. In this context, Vice President Joe Biden assured that “the threat of seeing the intentional eruption of a global nuclear war has almost dissipated and due to the progress which affected the traditional capabilities and techniques such as the missiles defense system, the number of necessary nuclear weapons to deter the enemies and protect the allies has become much more limited.” Nonetheless, the agreement of the two nuclear superpowers over leading a world free from nuclear weapons is not enough at a time when nuclear powers are still outside of this agreement. China, India and Pakistan do not share a similar agreement, while Iran and North Korea are proceeding with their programs without heeding the opposition of the international community. At this level, Beijing's welcoming of the new treaty between Washington and Moscow and its corroboration of the fact that its nuclear strategy is a defensive one, may stem from its realization that the translation of its economic power and its ongoing rise into a more efficient and influential international role will face obstacles, not the least of which being that it is neighboring India, Russia, Japan and Pakistan. Although there are nuclear agreements between the United States and India, the latter agreements do not alleviate the rising fears over the Pakistani nuclear arsenal from traders and fundamentalist movements. As much as Obama's nuclear strategy enhances international partnership between the superpowers to build a safe world, it is breaking the golden rule at the level of the “nuclear deterrence” principle which distanced the ghost of a cosmic war and consecrated a reasonable peace throughout decades of the Cold War. Moreover, it may start an armament race between regional powers which had until recently perceived the American nuclear umbrella as being their main protector. Indeed, just like the Islamic Republic felt the need for a nuclear deterrence power (although it says otherwise) to protect the regime and its interests as it is surrounded by nuclear states such as India, Pakistan and Israel, Arab and non-Arab countries may feel the same and may seek the acquisition of such weapons. For their part, some countries in Eastern and Central Europe under the umbrella of the NATO alliance and within the European Union were alarmed by the image of the signing of START 2 because it revived the image of the Soviet Union and the Cold War, although they are aware that Moscow is too weak to regain its long-gone role. As for this “nuclear trio” (the reviewing, the treaty and the summit), it is setting the foundation for two concomitant strategic courses, the first leading the American policy back to the recognition of the presence of other forces such as Russia which should be included in the building of a safe world and the establishment of a wide and coherent front to face the states aspiring to build a nuclear power, namely Iran and North Korea, and the second featuring the building of a new and strong world order which cannot be reliable unless it includes the biggest number of partners, much like the G-20 which was assigned to lead the global economic system. In the meantime, the White House circles did not conceal the goals of this “trio” since the American vice president considered that “the threats we are facing today from the terrorists and the non-nuclear states seeking such weapons have become more dangerous than ever.” As for Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, she said that the signing of the treaty with Moscow will show the world “and especially countries such as Iran and North Korea that the enhancement of the nuclear non-proliferation systems around the world and the prevention of the circulation of nuclear substances are among our top priorities.” This priority and the pivotal role it imposes on Moscow at the level of the Iranian, Afghan and Korean dossiers, were behind Obama's insistence on the revival of the relations with Russia, taking into consideration its vital interests. He thus froze the deployment of the missile defense shield - although this created bitterness and fear in Poland and the Czech republic, both of which are scared of seeing the return of the Russian dictations to their political lives, and did not mention the repercussions endured by Georgia due to Russia's interference and its truncation of Ossetia and Abkhazia away from Tbilisi. However, the greatest paradox was that the signing of the START 2 treaty proceeded in parallel to the Russian “coup” in Kyrgyzstan! In the meantime, what has encouraged and is still encouraging the Kremlin to reach an agreement with Washington is that its leaders have realized that the chances of restoring “polar parity” are long gone in light of the urgent need for an American and European partnership. Even if Obama has guaranteed a facilitating and aiding Russian position during the New York summit which will be held today and tomorrow, he will still face a difficult test of intentions from China to Turkey, Egypt, Brazil and others - although the Chinese prime minister reiterated his country's refusal to see the year 2010 as a “year of tensions” in terms of commercial and economic relations with the United States, including Beijing, in a front of decisive confrontation with Iran and North Korea that will require something in return from America. So what is the required American concession? Would the American recognition of a unified China be enough or should it be accompanied by the halting of the arms deal to Taiwan and the final closing of the door in the face of the Dalai Lama? Moreover, at the level of the Middle East, will the absence of Benjamin Netanyahu from the summit be enough to ignore Israel's nuclear arsenal or prevent Turkey and Egypt from raising this particular topic? The latter questions shed light once again on the “double-standards” policy of the United States, since it is not enough for Obama to reiterate the talk about the necessity to build a Middle East free from WMDs. Owing to his patience and perseverance, Obama achieved some of the most important promises he made to the American people on the eve of the electoral campaign. However, through his “nuclear trio,” will he be able to set the foundation for a safer and more just international order and restore his country's sound relations with a world that was hit by storms of wars, tensions and chaos due to the ideology of the neoconservatives which did not stop at the borders of China and Russia but reached the Arab and Islamic worlds? Therefore, Obama is now facing a crucial and decisive test. If he manages to ensure an international consensus over his nuclear strategy between today and tomorrow, he would have made an advanced step toward improving America's image and confirming its credibility and ability to lead the world, without the “parity” of Benjamin Netanyahu or Mahmoud Ahmadinejad!
