In a post 9/11 world, the reality of "state-less" terrorist organizations is a new force to be understood and countered. After years of casting a silent shadow over us all, weapons of mass destruction - from conventional arms to nuclear bombs - have suddenly moved to front and center in world affairs and headline news.

• What's being called the most deadly nuclear leak in decades was recently discovered. Abdul Qadeer Khan, father of Pakistan's atomic bomb, sold nuclear expertise and equipment for cold cash to nuclear "wannabes" like Iran and possibly to terrorist groups.
  
  
• After months of searching and billions of taxpayer dollars, chief U.S. weapons inspector David Kay announced that in his experience, contrary to pre-war intelligence, no evidence of nukes in Iraq existed.

But not all is bad news. On a more positive note:

• In an abrupt reversal, Libya pledges to dismantle its nuclear program and will admit UN inspectors. Iran, though a recipient of Pakistan's nuclear secrets, agrees to open its nuclear records under international pressure.
  
  
• North Korea has agreed to continue multi-party talks to discuss its controversial nuclear program.
  
  
• President Bush has proposed a new plan to prevent acquisition of weapons of mass destruction by terrorist groups through an international crackdown on states capable of building them.

The President's announcement was widely welcomed, yet many analysts expressed skepticism that others would be persuaded to abandon such armaments when the world's #1 nuclear power continues to possess, develop and tacitly "play" them as a trump card in world affairs. In addition, a new generation of nuclear-tipped "bunker busters" has caused some analysts to express concern that these "usable nukes" could blur the line between nuclear and conventional weapons and eliminate the last firebreak against using them in warfare.

• The Department of Defense 2005 budget gives a $332 million increase for nuclear weapons activities - a violation of the U.S. commitment to nuclear disarmament under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.

How will the world's nuclear club prevent proliferation when its exclusive possession makes them all the more attractive to others - nations and non-state terrorists alike - who seek the coercive power they wield? How can we devalue the power of weapons of mass destruction in international affairs? In a world where box cutters and airliners can terrorize us, are nuclear arsenals obsolete? Do our continued possession of vast stockpiles and our pursuit of "usable" nukes undermine the persuasiveness of our demand that others forgo them?