According to critics, efforts to exercise multilateralism to create a more peaceful world have been slowed down. Leading to the main concern of whether multilateralism can achieve world peace through nuclear nonproliferation?
By Shermineh Esmati
Analyst on Iran's Geopolitical and Security Affairs
In resolving the threat of nuclear
development, the United Nations Office on Disarmament Affairs began negotiating
the Non Proliferation Treaty during the 1960s. Officially signed in 1970 the
remit of the treaty was to make it a cornerstone in all international nuclear
disarmament efforts. Five times a year the NPT member states review the
advancement of the treaty thus the progress of nuclear non-proliferation.[1] As well, the United Nations Security Council
members formed the 1540 Committee in 2004 under Chapter VII of the United
Nations Charter. As an institutionalized global organization the 1540 Committee
can put into practice country specific visits, dialogue among the committee
members, governments, and assorted stakeholders within countries. With an
immediate ability to contact stakeholders the committee more easily can obtain
first-hand information about legislative and enforcement measures.
In general the organizations mentioned above,
exercise multilateralism in international relations, where multiple countries
work in concert for a common goal. In this case, these organizations have an
objective of making the world a more peaceful and secure place through nuclear
non-proliferation. According to critics, efforts to exercise multilateralism to
create a more peaceful world have been slowed down. Leading to the main
concern of whether multilateralism can achieve world peace through nuclear
nonproliferation? Scholars have found legitimate problems in multilateral
non-nuclear proliferation efforts, when observing the winners, losers, those
affected and key players.
Who are the winners and losers?
When assessing the winners and losers,
organizations such as the United Nations Security Council, Non Proliferation
Treaty and UNODA member states tend to be winners but at times losers when
goals are not accomplished. Looking at the winners, the UNODA provides
substantive organizational support for norm setting in the area of disarmament
through the work of general assembly and its first committee, the disarmament
commission, the conference on disarmament and other bodies. Since the
institution has five branching organizations, this keeps it active in the fight
to create a more secure world.
Losers are the members of the Non
Proliferation Treaty, threatened by volatile countries like North Korea who
find little reason to surrender their nuclear weapons. In the case of the Iran
nuclear deal, critics find that negotiations benefited the dangerous Islamic
regime more than the peaceful members of multilateral organizations.
Furthermore, members of the NPT, UNODA and 1540 Committee are expected to bring
security to the international community yet when left unfulfilled the member
states appear as the losers.
Problem for Multilateralism:
The problem scholars claim that the UNODA
does not require all countries to sign to the Non Proliferation Treaty. There
is concern in the legitimacy of a multilateral organization that does not push
Pakistan, India or Israel to abide to the rules. According to an article by
Sandra Smits from the International School of the Hague, Pakistan has publicly
confirmed their possession of nuclear weapons that had been tested in the past.[2] Although Israel does not acknowledge possession of
nuclear weapons, refusal to permit the International Atomic Energy Association
to complete inspections has led the international community to believe
otherwise.
Who is affected? In What sense?
Secondly looking at who is affected by
nuclear nonproliferation goals, includes the leadership composition at the 1540
Committee and NPT member states. The Security Council’s 1540 Committee formed
in 2004 puts much responsibility on the Chair, Spanish Ambassador H.E Roman
Oyarzun Masrchesi, Vice Chairs including New Zealand, Senegal, the United
Kingdom, Northern Ireland and its remaining members. The White House State
Department webpage explains that NPT members are to promote the 1963 Treaty
banning nuclear weapon tests in the atmosphere, in outer space and under water,
seek the discontinuance of all test explosions of nuclear weapons and to
continue negotiations. Thus, when observing the signatories to the Non
Proliferation Treaty, those affected are expected to cooperate with other
states to achieve its objective globally.
Problem for Multilateralism:
The problem that arises for those
organizations include decision making that might harm the lives of large
populations. When considering North Korea, scholar John Cherian of Front Line,
wrote “Bombs as Answer” an article concerning the downward spiral caused
by former President George W. Bush by including North Korea in the axis of
evil. Once North Korea walked away from NPT relations, the South deteriorated.
Evident when the right wing government gave up the sunshine policy introduced
by Kim Dae Jung in the late 1990s. The sunshine policy encouraged the
prosperous South Korea to work with the North through investment, trade,
diplomatic relations and family reunions. Here multilateralism failed in its
goal to create international security, instead the opposite was achieved.
Since North Korea did not see the benefit in
remaining with the NPT, they conducted their first nuclear test in October
2006. The second test was conducted in May 2009, Kim Jong Il was in power at
the time of both the tests. After his son, Kim Jong Un, took over, North Korea
conducted its third nuclear test in February 2013.[3] A good analysis was made by Stratfor’s Roger Baker
who argued that policies in dealing with Pyongyang including engagement,
isolation, treat or direct military action, must be reassessed since there has
been little success. For instance, calls for military strikes on North Korea
are dismissed by South Korea and Japan due to proximity.[4] Thus must be a more direct channels for dialogue
with North Korea to manage long and short term disruption. By creating a deeper
understanding between potential adversaries this will provide valuable
intelligence and better polices.
Who are the key players involved in
international discussions?
Third, the key players involved in
international discussions include the United Nations Security Council, UNODA
along with its five branches. On 28 April 2004, the United Nations Security
Council unanimously adopted Resolution 1540 under Chapter VII of the United
Nations Charter. The 1540 committee affirmed that the proliferation of nuclear,
chemical and biological weapons and their means of delivery constitutes a
threat to international peace and security. The resolution obliges States, to
refrain from supporting by any means non-State actors from developing,
acquiring, manufacturing, possessing, transporting, transferring or using
nuclear, chemical or biological weapons and their delivery systems.
Problem for Multilateralism:
The problem for multilateralism is that
member states do not following through with their word. Nuclear weapons and
WMD’s have been the object of multilateral discussions almost from their
inception as weapons. Scholars like Darl Kimbell, Executive Director of the
Arms Control Association, found that there lacks a step by step plan in place
to cut off fissile material, “A step-by-step approach to nuclear
disarmament that promotes international stability, peace and undiminished and
increased security for all remains the only realistic and practical route to
achieving a world without nuclear weapons.”[5] The lack of consistency in the joint
statement creates a real concern of whether China, France, Russia, the United
Kingdom or United States spent any time in London developing a plan of action.
Therefore, there is a legitimate concern that when senior officials met in February
2015, it was merely an occasion to throw around glossy terms and much talk.
Nevertheless, efforts to use multilateral
organizations set a very high standard for achieving nuclear non-proliferation,
but problems remain with those affected, winners, losers and role of key
players. Once members of multilateral organizations such as the UNODA, 1540
Committee and the Non-Proliferation Treaty become more assertive and dedicated
to following through on public statements, peace will be achieved. It is also
important that key world leaders do not create a threat to international
security by encouraging war on nations possessing nuclear weapons. All the
more, there is much progress needed but multilateral organizations can play a
central role in securing international peace.
About The Author:
Shermineh Esmati (C-7295-2016) is an independent analyst on
Iran's Geopolitical and Security Affairs.
Shermineh obtained her Bachelor’s Degree (Honors) in Political Science
and History Minor (2012) from University of Toronto and pursuing her Master’s Degree in
International Relations and National Security Studies (2017) from Harvard
University. She can be reached at her twitter handle @Shermineh2
Cite This Article:
Cite This Article:
Esmati, S.S
"OPINION | Nuclear Nonproliferation & Problems for Multilateralism"
IndraStra Global 002, no. 02 (2016): 0050. http://www.indrastra.com/2016/02/OPINION-Nuclear-Nonproliferation-and-Problems-for-Multilateralism-002-02-2016-0050.html
|ISSN
2381-3652| https://dx.doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.2594578
References:
[1] Acheson Ray. “History of the NPT 1975-1995,”
Reaching Critical Will. Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom.
2015.http://www.reachingcriticalwill.org/disarmament-fora/npt/history-of-the-npt-1975-1995
[2] Smit Sandra, “Question of non-proliferation of
nuclear weapons and of weapons of mass destruction”, Munish. Model United
Nations International School of the Hague. 2011. http://www.munish.nl/pages/downloader?code=sc02&comcode=sc&year=2011
[3]Cherian John, “Bombs as Answer”, Frontline. Published by
The Hindu. 2015.http://www.frontline.in/world-affairs/bombs-as-answer/article8123682.ece
[4] Baker Rodger, “North Korea, the Outlier in U.S
Policy.” Geopolitical Weekly. Stratfor Global Intelligence. January 19 2016.https://www.stratfor.com/weekly/north-korea-outlier-us-policy
[5] Kimball G. Daryl. “ Nuclear-Weapon States Discuss
NPT Issues.” Arms Control Association. March 2015https://www.armscontrol.org/ACT/2015_03/News-Brief/Nuclear-Weapon-States-Discuss-NPT-Issues
.jpg)
