Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty
The Nuclear Weapon States
By Rebecca Johnson
Sixth NPT Review Conference, Briefing No 3, April 26, 2000
Continuing with its General Debate, the NPT Review Conference on
Tuesday heard statements from 20 delegations: Belgium, Australia,
Brazil, Lithuania, Canada, Russia, Ukraine, France, Kazakhstan,
Sweden, Costa Rica, United Arab Emirates, Iran, Egypt, Colombia,
Saudi Arabia, Peru, Libya, and Switzerland. In addition, the
Executive Secretary of the CTBTO, Wolfgang Hoffmann, addressed the
Conference. It was agreed that Ambassador Chris Westdal would chair
Subsidiary Body 2 on regional issues and the Middle East.
In general, the second day's statements raised many of the same
issues as on Monday: welcoming Russia's ratification of START II
and the CTBT; disappointment about inadequate progress in nuclear
disarmament and concerns that nuclear weapons were being reinforced
in national security doctrines; concern about how the
non-proliferation regime should address the overt nuclearisation of
South Asia; the CTBT; CD paralysis and the fissban/cut-off treaty;
and US missile defence plans and the ABM Treaty. In addition, there
was more focus on regional issues and nuclear weapon free zones,
especially the Middle East, and concerns about Israel's nuclear
programme, which will be addressed in future briefings.
Briefing # 3 focusses on the weapon states. They tended to agree
on the importance of the CTBT, and on regional concerns, especially
in the wake of India and Pakistan's tests. They endorsed the view
expressed by the United States that there was no provision in the
Treaty for new nuclear weapon states" as that would "break faith"
with those who had joined the NPT as NNWS. They gave support to the
IAEA's strengthened safeguards and seemed enthusiastically to
endorse "peaceful nuclear cooperation" under the Treaty, which
China described as "a clean and highly efficient energy with
tremendous potentials". The sharpest divisions were, predictably,
over missile defence and US pressure to amend the ABM Treaty. The
US argued that times had changed, while Russia, China and France
expressed strong opposition to any move that would weaken the ABM
Treaty. Despite considerable concern in London, Britain was
publicly prepared only to acknowledge "the complex and difficult
issues". Though attempts to negotiate a P-5 statement are ongoing,
it appears that resolving the differences over missile defence, the
ABM Treaty, and China's related position on the fissban would
require common-denominator language so low as to be almost
meaningless.
United States
By the time US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright spoke on
Monday, US missile defence plans had already been criticised by
several delegations, and even the UN Secretary-General had raised
concerns that the pressure to deploy national missile defences was
jeopardising the ABM Treaty. Describing the indefinite extension of
the NPT in 1995 as "a priceless gift for our children -- and
ourselves", Albright said that the Treaty "has transformed
acquiring a nuclear weapon capability from an act of national pride
to a cause for international alarm". The Secretary of State openly
acknowledged that "the sharpest suspicions under the Treaty are
directed to whether the five nuclear weapon states are doing enough
under Article VI to bring about nuclear disarmament" and stressed
that "we share the frustration many feel about the pace of progress
toward a world free on nuclear weapons". Addressing "broader
concerns raised by missile defences", Albright defended the Clinton
Administration from accusations of "sabotaging the ABM Treaty and
strategic arms control". She argued that the world had changed
since the Treaty was signed, that it had already been amended once
"and there is no good reason it cannot be amended again to reflect
new threats from third countries outside the strategic deterrence
regime".
Presenting a comprehensive booklet setting out the nuclear and
disarmament-related steps undertaken by the United States over the
past decade, she quoted President Clinton saying "the United States
has devoted more time, effort, and resources to nuclear arms
control and disarmament than any other country". Albright welcomed
Russia's recent steps in ratifying START II and the CTBT and also
stressed US support for the test ban treaty notwithstanding the
Senate defeat in October 1999. In particular, she stressed the
Administration's firm commitment not to resume testing and
continued support for the CTBTO Preparatory Commission, assuring
the Conference "...like the President, I am convinced that America
will ratify the CTBT". The US statement concluded with a
warning that "if countries demand unrealistic and premature
measures, they will harm the NPT and set back everyone's
cause".
China
Ambassador Sha Zukang reiterated China's policy with regard to
support for ridding the world of nuclear weapons and its call for
the other weapon states to join China in promising not to use
nuclear weapons first, and said that CTBT ratification was being
considered by the National People's Congress. While asserting that
the nuclear weapon states "must faithfully implement their
obligations for nuclear disarmament", Sha identified two
preconditions for Beijing's participation in arms control
negotiations: that they did not compromise global strategic balance
and stability or undermine China's national security interests. As
the NNWS have increased their demands for more information about
nuclear weapon and fissile material holdings, China has felt it
necessary to justify its reluctance. Sha explained China's position
with reference to "a superpower which rampantly intervenes in other
countries' internal affairs, and wilfully resorts to force,
continuously improving its overwhelming first-strike nuclear
capability". Under such circumstances, he said, "it is neither
conducive to their own security nor in the interests of global
strategic balance and stability to ask the small or medium sized
nuclear countries to take transparency measures".
Much of Sha's statement focussed on US missile defence plans. He
quoted President Jiang Zemin that such programmes "will inevitably
exert an extensive negative impact on international security and
stability and trigger off a new round of arms race in new areas..."
Responding to criticisms that China was blocking CD attempts to get
fissban negotiations underway, Sha countered that "the prevention
of the weaponisation of outer space is a task even more urgent than
the FMCT negotiations".
Britain
Britain's statement, entitled "Towards a nuclear-free world" was
delivered by Foreign Office Minister Peter Hain MP. He endorsed the
EU statement and said that the Labour government had made an
unequivocal commitment to the pursuit of nuclear disarmament and
"transformed Britain's role". Arguing that Labour was "driving the
agenda forward", Hain reiterated UK policy that "when we are
satisfied with progress towards our goal of the global elimination
of nuclear weapons, we will ensure that British nuclear weapons are
included in negotiations". He enumerated UK achievements,
including: early ratification of the CTBT; a moratorium on the
production of fissile materials for weapons and support for FMCT
negotiations; withdrawal and dismantlement of all air-delivered
nuclear weapons, leaving just one remaining submarine-based system
(Trident), with reduced warheads, all of which have been
de-targetted, single patrols, and a reduced state of readiness.
Describing how Britain has led the way in providing greater
transparency, Hain announced the publication of a UK study on
verifying the reduction and elimination of nuclear weapons.
Russia
Russia's Minister of Foreign Affairs, Igor Ivanov, opened with
"heartfelt greetings" from President Vladimir Putin, underlining
the importance he attached to the NPT Conference. Ivanov then
referred to "new serious threats to international security and
stability", including "local conflicts, international terrorism and
militant separatism". He also castigated "attempts to build
national stability at the expense of the interests of other
states...[and] misappropriation of the right to use force" in
violation of the UN Charter and international law, calling such
actions "a direct invitation to a new arms race". Presenting also a
longer, detailed "National Report on the Compliance by the Russian
Federation with the Non-Proliferation Treaty", Ivanov enumerated
the concrete reductions and confidence-building steps which Russia
has undertaken in the past decade, and said that Moscow was
prepared to reduce its nuclear arsenal to 1,500 warheads, providing
that the United States would do the same. Such a "historic chance"
would be missed, however, if the ABM Treaty were to be destroyed.
In case anyone missed the point, Ivanov reiterated it in several
ways, underlining that "compliance with the ABM Treaty in its
present form without any modifications is a prerequisite for
further negotiations on nuclear disarmament in accordance with
Article VI" of the NPT. Ivanov then put forward Russia's March 2000
initiative to establish a global missile and missile technologies
non-proliferation control system as a "real alternative" for
addressing missile threats and missile proliferation.
France
Describing French policy as one of "strict sufficiency",
Ambassador Hubert de la Fortelle presented a detailed report of
French efforts to comply with the NPT, including: early
ratification of the CTBT and the closure of the Moruroa test site;
cessation of fissile materials production and dismantlement of its
military production facilities; the complete phasing out of
land-based nuclear weapons (leaving submarine-based and airborne
nuclear systems of which the delivery vehicles have been halved); a
reduction in alert status; and commitment to security assurances,
especially in the context of NWFZ. France also repeated its
willingness to discuss issues relating to disarmament at the CD
"subject to a mandate adopted by consensus", along the lines of the
NATO-5 proposal. In a clear warning to the United States, de la
Fortelle said that France was "anxious to avoid any challenges to
the Treaty liable to bring about a breakdown of strategic
equilibrium and to restart the arms race".
Briefing # 4 will consider the positions put forward by
Indonesia on behalf of the NAM. As there will be no General Debate
on Friday, the next briefings will be published on Monday, May 1,
and will analyse more fully the proposals and positions put forward
by non-nuclear-weapon states parties to the Treaty.
© 2001 The Acronym Institute.
|