PRESS RELEASE

19 May 2000

Nuclear Panic Brings Surprise Deal

NPT Meetings Conclude with Unexpected Consensus

UNITED NATIONS, MAY 19 – The world’s nuclear-armed powers are moving slowly on nuclear disarmament, driven in large part by a fear that they are losing control of the bomb.

Not only are the nuclear powers squabbling about their own plans for nuclear forces, they also have failed to stop new nuclear powers from emerging.  Nuclear war is actually more thinkable today than in the past decade, following nuclear testing and build-ups by India and Pakistan.  The nuclear weapons states themselves, in part because of the U.S. drive to build an anti-missile missile network that threatens to start a new arms race, are arguing about how they handle their own strategic relations.  Russia is showing a re-found enthusiasm for nuclear weapons, and China continues its modernization efforts.

With a strong kick from their non-nuclear partners, Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States grudgingly have agreed to an agenda for incremental change under the 187-member Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).

The steps taken during the four-week conference here to review successes and setbacks during the five years since the treaty was made permanent were only baby steps to be sure.  In fact, the final document could be seen as a retreat from some of the strong measures proposed earlier by a coalition of anti-nuclear countries: for example, a timetable for disarmament initiatives and a requirement that nuclear powers document their steps toward disarmament during the next five years was dropped. 

The five “nuclear haves” would not agree to tough language and measures, and gradually whittled the text to meet their desires to maintain their arsenals for reasons of “promoting international stability, and based on the principle of undiminished security.” They rejected concerns expressed in earlier drafts about the world's 35,000 nuclear weapons, and that many remain on hair-trigger alert, and would not pledge to never use nuclear weapons first in a battle. In fact, even the best language emanating from the NPT conference does not constitute a blueprint for action.  The paper is full of  “shoulds”, “urges” and “oughts.” 

Still, even baby steps toward a more secure planet are something to be smiled at.  The concepts agreed at the review conference can be considered seeds for future progress, provided that supporters of non-proliferation and disarmament can maintain a concerted effort to nurture the Nuclear-Weapon States along.

The conferees agreed there should be “an unequivocal undertaking by the Nuclear-Weapon States to accomplish the total elimination of their nuclear arsenals leading to nuclear disarmament.” 

They collectively called for the opening of global negotiations aimed at banning nuclear weapons, as well as banning tests; and the pursuit of a global treaty to ban military production of radioactive material.

Russia and the United States were urged to implement the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty II (START II) and a follow-on START III “while preserving and strengthening the [Anti-Ballistic Missile] Treaty as a cornerstone of strategic stability and as a basis for further reductions of strategic offensive weapons.” In addition, the countries agreed the Nuclear-Weapon States should consider new unilateral cuts in their arsenals and moves to reduce “the operational status of nuclear weapons.” 

Other new areas addressed include: 

• Developing verification capabilities “to provide assurance of compliance” with agreements; 

• Making nuclear weapons capabilities and agreements more “transparent;” making progress “irreversible,” for example by cutting up rockets and making plutonium fuel unusable; and, 

• Agreeing to a progress report for future review conferences, with the next opportunity 2002. 

The conferees further reaffirmed “that the strict observance of the provisions of the treaty remains central to achieving the shared objectives of preventing, under any circumstances, the further proliferation of nuclear weapons and preserving the treaty’s vital contribution to peace and security.” 

Overall, the conference has provided a prototype agenda for nation’s to pursue. Attention must now turn to NATO, whose foreign ministers will meet next week.  These ministers will be expected to begin to put this program into there military strategy.

Back to Nuclear and WMD