2002 NPT Preparatory Committee (PrepCom)
8 - 19 April 2002, New York

The 2002 Preparatory Committee (PrepCom) meeting of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty opened on Monday, Apr. 8 with mixed expectations from governmental representatives and experts as delegates start paving the path toward the 2005 Review Conference (RevCon) of the NPT. With memories of Sept. 11 fresh in their minds, government representatives began delivering their statements with a renewed sense of urgency to control proliferation of nuclear weapons and component materials. [For official documents from the meeting, visit BASIC’s 2002 NPT PrepCom page.] 

Many of the opening statements also reflected international unease with controversial policy statements recently made by the United States, which indicate the continued prominence of nuclear weapons in military strategy. The Bush administration’s plans to develop a low-yield nuclear weapon able to penetrate hardened and deeply-buried targets also met with strong reactions from PrepCom participants, ranging from concern to outright condemnation. However, many delegates expressed hope that the conference would bring the key concerns of States Parties to the fore to help shape the agenda of the 2005 RevCon. At the end of the two-week meeting, the Chair will issue a factual account of events that will not require consensus agreement by delegates. 

Despite this lack of pressure to reach agreement on substantive issues, sources of disagreement are already emerging, causing headaches for Ambassador Henrick Salander of Sweden, the PrepCom’s chair. As part of the final document from the 2000 RevCon, all States Parties agreed to file reports detailing steps taken to advance the goal of disarmament. However, France and the United States refuse to file reports at the current PrepCom, citing the lack of an actual requirement for reporting. Several countries, led by members of the New Agenda Coalition (Brazil, Egypt, Ireland, Mexico, New Zealand, South Africa, Sweden) have responded by refusing to agree on the meeting’s timetable. Since the timetable requires a consensus agreement, the exchange of views among members states has stalled.

Salander has facilitated discussions among the disputing parties. He announced on Wednesday afternoon his plans to resolve the differences and, if no agreement is reached, indefinitely suspend the meeting several days early. Until Friday, the meeting will proceed following the draft timetable.

Other notes from the PrepCom:

- The Middle East Nuclear Weapons-Free Zone has been a key issue for Arab states, and Israel’s non-participation with the NPT regime was cited as the key stumbling block to the initiative’s success. These accusations are early signs of the anticipated difficulties with progress on the Middle East issue, a component of NPT review conferences, made more difficult by heightened tensions in the region.

- Iraq has made its opinions well-known at the conference. The country has raised objections through its own plenary statement, and also replied to the statements made by the International Atomic Energy Agency, United Kingdom, and United States. Britain and the United States levied strong accusations of Iraq’s non-compliance with its NPT commitments.

- The British delegation clarified statements made recently by Defense Minister Geoff Hoon that appeared to contradict the promise not to use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear-weapon states. In a U.K. parliamentary hearing in late March, Hoon stated that Britain would be willing to use nuclear weapons in response to chemical or biological weapon attacks against forward deployed troops. A delegate here noted that the statements cited situations that would fall within the rights to self-protection asserted by nuclear-weapons states when making these promises (most recently restated in 1995).

Back to Official Documents and Statements

Back to NPT home page