President Obama hosts the 2010 Nuclear Security Summit in Washington D.C. April 12 and 13 aiming to raise world’s awareness about the threats of nuclear weapons getting into the hands of terrorists.
Agenda setting is part of public relations. In President Obama’s speech last year in Prague, he declared the agenda for nuclear disarmament, nonproliferation, and counterterrorism. The events—the results of the Nuclear Posture Review, the Nuclear Security Summit in Washington, the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) Review Conference in New York, and the ratification of the new START treaty between the United States and Russia—will show whether other leaders in the United States and around the world are willing to join Obama.
“It’s an indication of how deeply concerned everybody should be with the possibilities of nuclear traffic, and I think at the end of this we’re going to see some very specific, concrete actions that each nation is taking that will make the world a little bit safer,” Obama said Monday. (CNN, 2010)
The gathering that convenes leaders from 47 nations is considered an unprecedented PR effort to rally global action on securing vulnerable nuclear materials. As Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said last week, the nuclear summit would be the largest of its kind hosted by a U.S. president since the U.N. conference in 1945. President Obama also met with leaders from China, Malaysia and Armenia on Monday to bolster the summit.
Here’s the video from CNN about President Obama hosting leaders summit.
Harrtsdale wrote in his blog that the combination of public relations and nuclear annihilation would make a difference to the world peace and human society.
“It seems like a gross juxtaposition, public relations and nuclear weapons, but the way the two are conjoined could play a crucial role in the history of mankind. The coming summit called by President Obama to start in Washington today represents the largest gathering of world leaders since FDR called one to found the United Nations.” Harrtsdale said.
However, some experts doubt whether the nuclear summit is just a “PR gesture” and whether the meeting would achieve concrete results.
From the ABC News, “Internationally, U.S. allies such as India, Pakistan and Israel have been resistant to signing the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, citing national security concerns. The view in many countries is that this week’s treaty signing aside, if the United States and Russia — which together account for 95 percent of the world’s nuclear arsenal and material — cannot cut their nuclear stockpile, why should they be forced to?”
Besides, “Domestically, the partisan rift on Capitol Hill means possibly a tough fight ahead for Obama’s nuclear agenda. Critics of the new nuclear policy released last week complain that it gives a free pass to countries such as Iran and North Korea, and Republican senators are already taking aim at the U.S.-Russia arms treaty that was signed last week, saying it hurts U.S. security interests.” (ABC News, 2010)
Christopher Ford, director for the Center for Technology and Global Security at the Hudson Institute, and a former special representative for nuclear nonproliferation in the Bush administration, said the summit is a good way to bring together different world leaders to discuss a common threat, but what it means to achieve remains blurry (ABC News, 2010).






