Readers' Guide Comment on “states that commit to secure all nuclear weapons and materials to a ‘gold standard’”
This is a rather traditional state-based proposal. It ignores states with vast nuclear stockpiles that implicitly threaten other states with their land, air, and sea-based nuclear capacities. It presumes that future significant nuclear threats will come from non-state terrorists.
It is also interesting that this proposal does not include chemical and biological weapons. If WEF is serious about multi-stakeholder approaches, it should recommend that international civil society, academic, religious, and corporate representatives become formally involved in reducing all weapons of mass destruction, not just the nuclear variety.
The Readers' Guide welcomes comments with alternative examples or counter examples, supplemental assessments of the extracted GRI text or commentary – critical or otherwise – of the above interpretation of GRI’s perspective.