BACKGROUND ON THE PROLIFERATION OF ARMSProliferation means growth more like multiplication. The illicit growth of powerful weapons and ammunition around the world has become a source of great concern and a primary driver of modern armed conflicts to the International security. This is true even in countries that are at ‘peace’ where the presence and availability of illegal arms can contribute to high levels of violence. Why do we say this? This is because these weapons include deadly conventional armaments such as military-type guns, bombs, and missiles, and the more lethal weapons of mass destruction (WMDs), which are based on nuclear, chemical, and biological technologies. There have been countless goals for counter proliferation include stopping the development of new weapons, reducing and safeguarding the stockpiles of existing weapons, and preventing the spread of WMD technology.About more than a decade back, President Dwight D. Eisenhower gave his “Atoms for Peace” address to the UN General Assembly. He proposed to share nuclear materials and information for peaceful purposes with other countries through a new international agency. That speech led to negotiations that led to the creation of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). The IAEA today has the dual responsibility of assisting many countries that do not have nuclear weapons to engage in peaceful nuclear programs while ensuring that they do not make nuclear weapons. The IAEA gained authority for policing the nuclear activities of member countries to ensure that those without nuclear weapons did not acquire them. Historically, the IAEA has rarely demanded inspections beyond the perimeter of reactors or related nuclear sites that had been declared open for inspection by the countries where they were located. CITATION Geo03 l 1033 (Bunn, 2003)In the 21st century we have encountered more intense globalized nuclear age between countries and academics that are more than likely very efficient with critiquing the frameworks of many agencies that have been created to ensure that nonproliferation and security negotiations go through. Such an agency is the Nuclear Proliferation Treaty that has tried to significantly reduce the number of nuclear arsenals made within the last decade. This is evident since they reviewed that yes the number of harm has reduced but they cannot completely erase the number or use of nuclear weapons as they have expanded continually. Furthermore, global community has placed several measures in place as to protect and promote international dialogue. Examples of such communities are The Global Threat Reduction Initiative, The Cooperative Nuclear Threat Reduction Program, International Atomic Energy Agency as well as nuclear free zones. In as much as the main focus of the programs put in place is to reduce the devastating threat to humankind many of the countries now stockpile and modernize their ammunitions as the necessity of reviewing, reshaping and rethinking to their foundations. CITATION Jos15 l 1033 (Siracusa, 2015)THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK There are a number of theories that explain and justify the origin of illicit arms and weapons, some are conflicts and functionalists theory. For the purposes of this study, we will use the Security Dilemma commonly known as conflict theory (familiar to peace and conflict studies as well as international relations) to describe the effects of arms flows, and their destabilizing and conflict inducing consequences, creating mutual fear between groups and many communities within the International System. We chose security dilemma theory because it has key factors that explain better on the underlying measures that are on this study. Since arms are a central factor in the security dilemma, arms control measures can be seen as an ameliorating factor or even a possible solution to the conflict. Another such ameliorating factor described by security dilemma theorists is the effects of institutions and norms such as the arms control regime in reducing the mutual antagonism created by the conflict and dilemma hence creating options for cooperation instead of competition. The security dilemma theory has also again been backed up by a saying that goes the less secure you feel the more we arm ourselves creating a positive feedback system where your opponents are then again forced to arm themselves as well. This is the main issue that is fueling us to such a theory.Security dilemma theoryThe term security dilemma was first described as a phenomena that they both argue and influence all human relations: a deep seated uncertainty and fear of others intentions caused by the essential insecurity of human nature, that in the worst case may lead to a logic of kill first or risk being killed leading two parties to try to pre-empt each other even though both parties did not harbor any harmful intentions to begin with. But the security dilemma does not arise out of purely realist conceptions: it is caused by a tragic combination of a desire growing out of uncertainty for actors to prepare for the worst, coupled with a failure to realize how threatening their own security measures appear to others around them. CITATION Joh51 l 1033 (John Hertz , 1951)This theory emphasizes on the role of coercion and power mainly in producing social order. The security dilemma theory has been given a perspective of the society as a fragmented piece that is into groups that compete for economic and social resources. Social order is mainly maintained by domination and this is why we see this evident from our research that is yet to be read as we move forward. CITATION Kar82 l 1033 (Marx, 1882)The security dilemma theory was traditionally used mainly to explain arms races and conflicts between states, like the great power struggles of the cold war. But the theory has lately been applied to intrastate conflicts as well. Stephen M. Hill cites Barry Posen as the first scholar to draw attention to how the security dilemma can operate in intrastate conflicts. Posen argues that anarchy promotes security dilemma. From the above theoretical perspective, one will deduce that security dilemma theory or rather conflict theory is of the overview of many countries eg: that politicians are regarded as enemy of progress in the society. According to the theory, this situation makes the control of the menace of arms and weapons proliferation a very difficult task by the appropriate authority. Critics of the conflict perspective point to its overly negative view of society. The theory ultimately attributes humanitarian efforts, altruism, democracy, civil rights, and other positive aspects of society to capitalistic designs to control the masses, not to inherent interests in preserving society and social order. The strength of the theory lies in its recognition that arms and weapons proliferation is a violent crime against democracy and humanity generally. It hinders the effective utilization of human capital for national development. Based on the foregoing assumptions the theory has been adopted and the effectiveness of many of these proposed solutions are yet to be discussed.