Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
Ms Eshika Maji
ID No: 212077
On: 13/02/2015
Public International Law & Human Rights
Law
During the Monsoon Semester 2013
Topic:
The Practice of States as Regards Nuclear
Disarmament and Non-Proliferation
Treaties
Contents
I. Introduction.....................................................................................3
II. Current Assessment.......................................................................4
III. Treaties..........................................................................................5
A. Non-Proliferation Treaty............................................................5
B. Tlatelolco Treaty for the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons in
Latin America and the Caribbean..................................................6
C. Rarotonga Treaty on a South Pacific Nuclear-Free Zone.......7
D. Bangkok Treaty on the Southeast Asia Nuclear-Weapon-Free
Zone...................................................................................................8
E. Pelindaba Treaty on the African Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone8
F. Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty..................................9
G. Semipalatinsk Treaty an a Nuclear Weapon Free Zone in
Central Asia....................................................................................10
IV. Conclusion...................................................................................11
Abstract
Today there is no wide-ranging and universal ban on the use of nuclear weapons in
either customary or conventional international law. The obligation on states to
eliminate nuclear weapons, their strategies to update their weapon systems, and
their views on the possible uses of nuclear weapons. There is an extensive history of
all of todays nuclear weapon states pledging in principle to nuclear disarmament.
Article VI of the 1970 nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT) commits its five
nuclear-weapon-state parties: to pursue negotiations in good faith on effective
measures relating to the cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to
nuclear disarmament. This paper endeavors to trace nation states international
political commitments to nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation, their practices
regarding nuclear disarmament treaties and advances policy arguments for better
implementation of nuclear disarmament treaties according to customary
international law.
I. Introduction
Today, the security in the world is threatened by the proliferation of nuclear weapons in both
state and Non-state actors. States like China and India among seven others, are believed to
possess nuclear weapons, while around an estimated thirty states like South Korea are
technologically enabled to quickly acquire them. 1 The access to dual-use of technologies
seems to be on the rise in this era of energy crisis, competition for nuclear energy and the
continued diffusion of scientific and technical knowledge.
There has been consensus in the last decade, both implied and explicit, that substantial arms
reduction is the need of the hour. This is evident through the 2009 landmark speech of the US
President in Prague, the passing of the UN Security Council (UNSC) Resolution 1887 in
2009 regarding accelerated efforts toward total nuclear disarmament,2 and the increase in the
1 International Atomic Energy Agency,
https://www.iaea.org/Publications/Magazines/Bulletin/Bull492/49204734548.html
(last visited Feb. 11, 2015).
2 Council on Foreign Relations, UN Security Council Resolution 1887, Nonproliferation, (Feb 10, 2015), http://www.cfr.org/international-organizations-and3
number of states ratifying the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty to 157 in 2011, leading to the
inclusion of countries like United States, Israel, and Iran.
In spite of the apparent success of the current global nonproliferation or disarmament regime,
the existing multilateral institutions have failed in the case of preventing countries like India,
Pakistan, and North Korea from "going nuclear," and in dealing with the nuclear issue in Iran
as well as Non-state terrorist groups. This evidences the need for an updated framework of
regulation to effectively deal with the current issues, along with the fulfilment of the greater
objective of "peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons".3
alliances/un-security-council-resolution-1887-non-proliferation/p20316.
3 Remarks by President Barack Obama, Hradcany Square, Prague, Czech
Republic, WHITE HOUSE PRESS RELEASE, (Feb 10, 2015),
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Remarks-By-President-BarackObama-In-Prague-As-Delivered .
4 The Global Nuclear Nonproliferation Regime, COUNCIL ON FOREIGN
RELATIONS, (Feb 10, 2015), http://www.cfr.org/nonproliferation-arms-control-anddisarmament/global-nuclear-nonproliferation-regime/p18984.
5 Implementation of the NPT Safeguards Agreement in the Islamic Republic of
Iran, February 2012, COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS, (Feb 10, 2015),
http://www.cfr.org/iran/implementation-npt-safeguards-agreement-islamicrepublic-iran-february-2012/p27467.
4
III. Treaties
A. Non-Proliferation Treaty
The Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) is the most vital constituent of the world
nonproliferation regime. It creates a broad, legally obligatory structure based on three basic
doctrines: (1) states not possessing nuclear weapons, prior to a year the treaty opened for
signature, should not agree to obtain them; (2) As of 1967 the five states which have tested
nuclear weapons- the Nuclear Weapons State (NWS) - should not consent in assisting other
6 Implementation of the NPT Safeguards Agreement in the Islamic Republic of
Iran, November 2011, COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS, (Feb 10, 2015),
http://www.cfr.org/iran/implementation-npt-safeguards-agreement-islamicrepublic-iran-november-2011/p26448.
7 http://www.cfr.org/nonproliferation-arms-control-and-disarmament/strategicarms-reduction-treaty-start-/p15097
8 http://www.cfr.org/nonproliferation-arms-control-and-disarmament/new-starttreaty/p21851
9 http://www.cfr.org/defense-strategy/sustaining-us-global-leadership-priorities21st-century-defense/p26976
5
states in obtaining nuclear weapons. All states should endeavor to move towards complete
disarmament; (3) the Non-nuclear Weapons State (NNWS) should be allowed access to
energy development and civilian nuclear technology.10
NNWS are subject to protections to guarantee that technology and materials from civilian
actions are not utilized in weapons programs. The International Atomic Energy Agency
(IAEA) is the executing body for the NPT, observing compliance with the treaty and helping
NNWS in harnessing civilian technology.11 Even though the scope and obligation of the NPT
and the IAEA are comparatively broad, there is a serious gap in application: 189 states are
members to the treaty, but three of the world's nine nuclear powersIsrael, India and
Pakistan did not sign the treaty, and a fourthNorth Koreawithdrew in 2003. Therefore,
even if implementation of the current regime were not in dispute, approximately half of the
world's nuclear-armed states have been left out from its provisions.
By scheme, the NPT does not talk about proliferation by non-state parties. After the attacks of
September 11, the UNSC adopted Resolution 1540, a legally obligatory mechanism
necessitating all UN member states to ratify and implement measures to prevent non-state
parties from obtaining Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD). Several states in the UN
General Assembly, nevertheless, have debated that the UNSC did not have the power to levy
a binding resolution in this zone. Partially as a consequence, some states have resisted
collaboration with the 1540 Committee instituted to supervise execution of the resolution.
An appraisal of the NPT in 2010 concluded with modest achievement. The concluding
outcome document recommits members to the codes of the treaty, offers some detailed action
plans for nonproliferation and disarmament, and appeals for the removal of nuclear weapons
from the Middle East through the formation of a nuclear weapons-free zone in the area.12
The Tlatelolco Treaty which covers the Latin America Region and the Caribbean region,
came into full force after the ratification by Cuba in 2002, leading to all the 33 states of the
region ratifying the treaty. Since then, the treaty has been a model for all future Nuclear
Weapon Free Zone (NWFZ) agreements
The Article 1of the Treaty lists out the obligations of the Member States as follows:
1. The Contracting Parties hereby undertake to use exclusively for peaceful purposes the
nuclear material and facilities which are under their jurisdiction, and to prohibit and
prevent in their respective territories:
a) The testing, use, manufacture, production or acquisition by any means whatsoever
of any nuclear weapons, by the Parties themselves, directly or indirectly, on
behalf of anyone else or in any other way; and
b) The receipt, storage, installation, deployment and any form of possession of any
nuclear weapon, directly or indirectly, by the Parties themselves, by anyone on
their behalf or in any other way.
2. The Contracting Parties also undertake to refrain from engaging in, encouraging or
authorizing, directly or indirectly, or in any way participating in the testing, use,
manufacture, production, possession or control of any nuclear weapon.
The concerned area was declared as a Zone of Peace, at the Second Summit of the
Community of Latin American and Caribbean States in Havana, on the basis of the Treaty of
Tlatelolco and international law. The member states at this Summit reaffirmed their
commitment to abide by the treatys nuclear disarmament policy.13
Parties the positioning of any nuclear explosive device; to check the testing of any nuclear
explosive material; not to dump radioactive wastes and other radioactive material at sea
anywhere within the treaty area, and to check the dumping of radioactive trash and other
radioactive substances by anyone in the regional sea of the members.16
into force of this treaty. With the verification of the IAEA, they also have to dismantle and
destroy nuclear explosive devices that they already possess. The treaty permits that parties to
take part in nuclear activities that are peaceful. The parties have an obligation to have
safeguard agreements that have been verified by IAEA for such activities. The parties cannot
use nuclear forces for armed attack or the like in the zone of application of the treaty.18
IV. Conclusion
Recent developments have brought the nuclear non-proliferation regime to the threshold of
serious crisis. The regime is under attack from both and non-state actors and rogue states, and
its basic bargain between the nuclear haves and have-nots is eroding. Boosting international
fetters on the world's most lethal weapons will need the State Parties to adopt substantial
19 http://www.nti.org/treaties-and-regimes/central-asia-nuclear-weapon-freezone-canwz/
11
steps to reinforce and close gaps in current treaty administrations, bodies, and partnerships.
Some recommendations to strengthen the global non-proliferation regime are:
1. The IAEA offers services on strengthening nuclear security so as to prevent atomic and
nuclear materials from falling into the wrong hands. Therefore, increasing the IAEA
budget and improving the security, safeguards and personnel systems will go a long way
in strengthening the global non-proliferation regime.
2. Improving national and international efforts to bring the CTBT into the picture and its
implementation effective. The CTBT is specially related to the global non-proliferation
regime, and its implementation would strengthen the fight against proliferation of nuclear
weapons and make it more problematic for states to have belief that nuclear devices
would work without testing.
12