We use Google Analytics to learn more about who is reading the resources on our website. Please read Google Analytics privacy policy for further information. Close

logo_reaching-critical-will

Shout outs for de-alerting and civil society; examples of anti-nuclear nuclearism

The permanent representatives to the Conference on Disarmament (CD) from Malaysia and the United Kingdom delivered statements at the fifth plenary meeting. The ambassador of Malaysia spoke on de-alerting nuclear weapons, moving forward in the CD, and engaging with civil society. The UK ambassador announced the release of a public information paper on UK nuclear weapon policy.

Brief highlights

  • Malaysia said the 2008 proposed programme of work, CD/1840, "falls short" of being balanced and comprehensive but hopes it can bring the CD back to substantive work through continued consultations and possibly amendments to its text.
  • Malaysia reiterated that it "strongly endorses" the "positive disarmament step" of decreasing the operational readiness of nuclear weapon systems.
  • Malaysia called for greater engagement with civil society.
  • The United Kingdom announced the release of a public information paper on UK nuclear weapon policy.

Engaging civil society
Concerning moving forward the work of the CD, Ambassador Datuk Othman Hashim of Malaysia urged "that continued efforts be made to accommodate [states' "legitimate"] concerns to arrive at a consensus, based on the Rules of Procedure." However, he also noted the necessity of examining the CD's methodology of work, in particular, its relation with civil society. Ambassador Hashim called upon the CD to "open its doors and engage with non-governmental organizations and civil societies," arguing it would "benefit from the valuable insights, views, data and research that civil societies have" and suggesting it "may be the the greatly needed impetus that the CD needs to move forward."

De-alerting nuclear weapon systems
Pointing to its co-sponsorship of the General Assembly resolution on "Decreasing the operational readiness of nuclear weapons," Ambassador Hashim of Malaysia argued, "de-alerting represents a renewed effort to highlight a practical disarmament aspect which is implementable that could help reduce the risk of nuclear war and enhance the security of all states" and would also "further promote the implementation of negotiated arms control treaties" and impact policies of nuclear weapon use.

Incidentally, in the information paper that UK Ambassador John Duncan announced during the meeting, a small section on operational status of nuclear weapons argues that while in particular the United Kingdom, France, and the United States have made "substantial moves" to de-alert and/or de-target their nuclear weapons, further efforts, "to the extent that the US and Russia could agree on mutual steps in this direction ... could help to build confidence."

UK policy paper on "disarmament"
On 4 February 2009, the UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office released a public information paper, "Lifting the nuclear shadow: Creating the conditions for abolishing nuclear weapons" (pdf). Ambassador Duncan of the United Kingdom explained that the paper does not change any formal statements made by him or other UK ambassadors to the CD but is rather a "compendium" of UK policies on nuclear weapons, "expressed in simple language."

The paper outlines three conditions and six steps that are "potentially attainable" within the next few years toward "a global ban on all nuclear weapons," including:

  • Preventing nuclear weapon proliferation by "securing agreement among all the Non-Proliferation Treaty states that the way forward must include tougher measures to prevent proliferation and tighten security" and by "working with the International Atomic Energy Agency to help states which want to develop a civil nuclear energy industry to do so in ways which are safe and secure and which minimise the risks of nuclear weapons spreading."
  • Aiming for "minimal arsenals" and an "international legal framework which puts tight, verified constraints on nuclear weapons"through US-Russian negotiations and agreements on further nuclear weapon reductions, bringing the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty into force, and starting negotiations "without preconditions" on a fissile materials cut-off treaty.
  • Finding solutions to the challenges of moving from small numbers of nuclear weapons to zero in ways which enhance security by "exploring the many complex political, military, technical and institutional issues" through a "strategic dialogue among the five Nuclear Weapon States (and, in due course, others)."

Notes from the gallery
The key phrase in the information paper is that the UK government has issued "a call to accelerate disarmament to prevent proliferation to new states and to ultimately achieve a world that is free from nuclear weapons" [emphasis mine].

In their Foreign Policy in Focus article on the phenomenon of "anti-nuclear nuclearism"—the concept of the nuclear powers' quest for sustained hegemony masquerading as non-proliferation masquerading as disarmament—Darwin BondGraham and Will Parrish note that this type of position emphasizes "disarmament" steps and conditions "entirely for what it means for the rest of the world — securing nuclear materials and preventing other states from going nuclear or further developing their existing arsenals." Current nuclear weapon states' "responsibility to disarm remains in the distant future, unaddressed as a present imperative."

Indeed, the UK information paper has sections on "stopping proliferation" in Iran, North Korea, and Syria, on "tightening controls" on nuclear materials and technology, on "strengthening international commitment to preventing proliferation," on "managing the growth in nuclear power" and finally, on "reducing arsenals" and "going to zero". In the "reducing arsenals" section, the paper argues, "Significant reductions in the nuclear arsenals of the US and Russia should be achievable without necessarily raising fundamental security issues." BondGraham has argued that whereas nuclear weapons once offered prestige and privilege in the international community they are now seen by government elites as as a drain on national resources, political capital, and other forms of military power.

The UK paper also asserts, "A global ban [on nuclear weapons] will not be successfully achieved and sustained without removing or at least significantly improving the political tensions which have led states to maintain their nuclear weapons." In this regard, the UK government argues, the nuclear weapon states have to ensure that elimination of nuclear weapons does not spark an arms race in chemical, biological, or conventional weapons—therefore, the international community needs "effective international controls on other weapons before a global ban on nuclear weapons could be agreed" [emphasis mine].

One suggestion for preventing arms races the UK paper does not make is that of reducing global and regional military expenditure. The Costa Rican government, in its concept paper on Article 26 of the UN Charter circulated before the open debate in the Security Councillast fall, suggested the establishment of regional commitments to maintaining collectively agreed levels of military spending.

Regarding the possibility of starting negotiations in the near future on a Nuclear Weapons Convention, the UK information paper asserts:

most of the states with nuclear weapons, including the UK, while accepting that some form of such an agreement is likely to be necessary in due course to establish the final ban, consider that it would be premature and potentially counter-productive to focus efforts on it now when the many other conditions necessary to enable a ban have yet to be put in place. Words alone will not rid the world of nuclear weapons.

However, the paper contains several points on how to "transition securely from low numbers to zero," which include "fierce verification requirements." WILPF notes that the United Kingdom has utilized some of their nuclear weapon establishment to conduct an intensive verification study, which was launched in 2005. Since they, it has also undertaken a joint study with a Norway and the non-governmental organization VERTIC on the technical aspects of verifying the dismantlement of nuclear weapons.

The next plenary meeting of the CD is scheduled for Thursday, 12 February 2009. According to the CD's organizational framework, informal debates on agenda items will begin next week and plenary meetings are henceforth only scheduled for Thursdays.

- Ray Acheson, Reaching Critical Will of WILPF