Nuclear Disarmament after the NPT Extension and the Role of NGOsJürgen Scheffran
The fall of the Berlin Wall, and the end of the Soviet Union - results of Gorbachev's Perestroika - have drastically changed the conditions that existed during the time the atomic bomb was born, matured, and proliferated. Today, the explosion of a nuclear weapon is by far too large and inadequate to counter the diverse risks and conflicts we are facing today. The existing arsenals of the Nuclear Weapon States (NWS) are the main justification for countries to acquire their own nuclear weapons, which undermines the security of the NWS themselves. China wants nuclear weapons because the United States and Russia have them; India wants to keep the nuclear option open because of China; Pakistan follows India; and so on. This domino effect can only effectively be stopped at its source. It is time for the world to get rid of these obsolete nuclear weapons as soon as possible, in order to free up resources that are needed to solve other problems threatening the Earth. The UN Conferences on Population and Climate Change have shown that the world is threatened by other catastrophes that urgently need solutions, and nuclear weapons distract attention from these problems. They are the outdated means for a policy based on confrontation rather than cooperation. Without doubt, the elimination of nuclear weapons must be put high on the agenda of the world community. The NPT Review and Extension Conference in April and May 1995 was one of the rare occasions where states could use their voting power to start the process toward a nuclear weapon-free world (NWFW), and transform the NPT regime into a Nuclear Weapons Convention. This chance was missed. Due primarily to strong pressure from the Western states and disunity among the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) resulting from South Africa's resistance, the NPT was extended indefinitely without a time-bound framework for the elimination of nuclear weapons. However, it became clear that the NPT belongs to an old era and is inadequate to address the need for nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament that exists today. While the consensus reached on an indefinite extension of the NPT, which was largely a reflection of the world's power structure, received a great deal of attention, a different majority was largely ignored by the media. Little attention was given to the fact that the overwhelming majority of countries in attendance favored comprehensive nuclear disarmament, and a considerable majority of those spoke in favor of banning the bomb altogether, including many Western countries and two Nuclear Weapon States: China and Russia. It was not the so-called "rogue states" supposedly pressing for the bomb, but the three Western NWS - USA, UK and France - which were rather isolated in blocking further progress on nuclear disarmament. Their isolation became apparent when they obstructed strong demands by the international community during the discussion of the final review document, and thus prevented a successful end to the whole NPT Review and Extension Conference. The "program of action" for disarmament that is part of the extension decision remains rather weak and unspecific compared to what had been proposed by critical governments and non-governmental organizations (NGOs). Probably, the most positive developments at the NPT Conference were the activities of those NGOs who worked closely together to spread the idea of nuclear abolition among delegates and NGOs. There were many activities to raise public interest in this issue, including a fast for the abolition of nuclear weapons led by Dan Ellsberg, and the International Citizens' Assembly to Stop the Spread of Weapons. NGOs were successful in finding common ground, and a statement from the NGO Nuclear Abolition Caucus was finally signed by more than 200 NGOs representing more than 10 million people. In this statement the demand for the elimination of nuclear weapons was expressed in 11 points that focused on a nuclear weapons abolition convention and included provisions for: effective verification and enforcement; a pledge not to use, or threaten to use, nuclear weapons and to make them illegal; a truly comprehensive test ban treaty with a zero threshold; an end to all nuclear weapon programs including research and development and the disabling of existing weapons; a prohibition of - and international control of - all weapons-usable radioactive materials; the creation of additional nuclear weapon-free zones; the establishment of an international energy agency for sustainable energy; and mechanisms to ensure the participation of citizens and NGOs promoting the abolition of nuclear weapons.(1) The first demand was singled out as the central message to the delegates: "We call upon all states to initiate in 1995 negotiations on a nuclear weapons abolition convention, and to commit to do so in the final report of the NPT Review and Extension Conference." How to achieve the goal of nuclear abolition was discussed at a two day seminar on April 25 and 26, organized by the International Coalition for Nuclear Non-Proliferation and Disarmament. This international coalition was formed in 1993 by the International Network of Engineers and Scientists for Global Responsibility (INES), International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War (IPPNW), International Association of Lawyers Against Nuclear Arms (IALANA), International Peace Bureau (IPB), and was later supported by the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation, Peace Action, and the Fourth Freedom Forum, all from the United States. The coalition worked together throughout the NPT preparation process, including the PrepComs in Geneva and New York, to focus attention on the issue of the complete elimination of all nuclear weapons. The NPT Review and Extension Conference was one important step in this long-term strategy, and more will follow. On the first day of the seminar, the International Network of Engineers and Scientists Against Proliferation (INESAP), which is part of INES, presented a study entitled "Beyond the NPT: A Nuclear Weapon-Free World", which had been drafted by 47 scientists, engineers, and other experts from 17 countries. Proposals on how a nuclear weapon-free world could be achieved were presented by Joseph Rotblat (president of the international Pugwash movement), Fernando Barros (former president of the Physical Society of Brazil), Zia Mian (Islamabad University, Pakistan), and Wolfgang Liebert and Martin Kalinowski (IANUS, Germany), among others. In the afternoon, simultaneous sessions were held: Steps Toward a Nuclear Weapon-Free World; a Nuclear Weapons Convention; Regional Approaches to Abolish Nuclear Weapons; The Dis-Arms Race; Nuclear Materials Cut-off; The Control of Nuclear Capable Delivery Systems. During a strategy and networking forum on the second day, a number of speakers, including Randall Forsberg, Jonathan Schell, Miguel Marin Bosch, Victor Sidel, and Cora Weiss, explained their perspectives for a NWFW. In a final roundtable discussion, about 100 people from NGOs around the world debated strategies and possibilities for networking to abolish nuclear weapons. After the meeting the coalition agreed to continue its work(2). Of the many future topics related to achieving comprehensive nuclear disarmament and the nuclear weapon abolition convention, the most urgent ones are: a Comprehensive (Nuclear) Test Ban Treaty (CTBT), and a Comprehensive Cutoff Convention for nuclear weapon-usable materials. Both issues are currently under negotiation at the Conference on Disarmament in Geneva, and NGOs should work to influence this process. As was outlined in the INESAP study, both treaties must be truly comprehensive in effectively blocking any loophole for nuclear weapon development and production. While a test ban should prohibit experiments to develop nuclear weapons of any threshold - including hydronuclear explosions and test preparations - a Fissile Materials Ban should cover highly enriched uranium, plutonium in all isotopic compositions, and tritium to avoid transfer from civil to military use. There is no perfect solution for the disposal of plutonium, but of the many insufficient options that have been put forward, vitrification and safe storage seem to carry the lowest risk and cost. Another important step is a treaty on no-first-use of nuclear weapons as part of making any use, or threat of use, of nuclear weapons illegal, which is being promoted by the World Court Project. All these steps should be seen not as isolated parts but as components of a broader disarmament agenda that can lead to a nuclear weapon convention within this century. Negotiations toward this goal should be started immediately. The most important impact of NGOs on the NPT Conference - aside from providing information to delegates - was to address the frustration felt over the limited effectiveness and implementation of the NPT with the alternative perspective of nuclear abolition. Although the demand for a nuclear weapon abolition convention was not included in the agreed program of action - which vaguely called for the ultimate goal of eliminating nuclear weapons - a number of countries recognized this concept and some included it in their statements. In a dramatic move, the Philippines called for a conference to investigate a Nuclear Weapons Convention. On May 3, Ambassador Isaac Ayewah of Nigeria, chair of Main Committee I, presented a working paper calling for concrete, time-bound steps toward nuclear disarmament, including:
Although not agreed to because of resistance from the Nuclear Weapon States, this paper represented the perspective of a relevant and significant sector of countries. NGOs should work together closely with countries for a Nuclear Weapon Convention. In the words of Jayantha Dhanapala, president of the NPT Conference, the main task should be to convert the few remaining Nuclear Weapon States into Non-Nuclear Weapon States, which are the overwhelming majority in the world. Notes |
| contents | glossary of terms | seminar overview | wise homepage | search the wise pages |