News in Brief from the News in Review, the daily NGO newsletter from the second session of the
Preparatory Committee for the 2010 nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty Review Conference
Friday, 2 May 2008

Complete PDF of this edition.

Proposals made during the Cluster 1 Discussion:

• Finland, on behalf of a group of a states, called for an enhanced focus and for the PrepCom to deliver a strong message on non-strategic weapons in the context of the NPT review and through bilateral US-Russia negotiations. The group’s statement acknowledged US-Russian reductions agreed to in 1991, but called for this arrangement to be codified in a binding agreement, which would also covers land-based weapons.
• Germany proposed a forward looking “New Implementation Baseline” to be agreed upon in 2010. To be introduced in a working paper, the approach is to consist of a comprehensive but realistic dual-track approach, designed to strengthen non-proliferation and to give new momentum to nuclear disarmament. The disarmament track would be based on the principle of incrementalism and include measures on non-strategic weapons, legally-binding assurances, and other issues.
• Japan announced the submission of a new working paper on non-proliferation and disarmament education, which suggests promotion of public awareness on the role of the NPT in international security and on the challenges it faces. Japan’s intension, in part, is to create international conditions to facilitate additional progress toward non-proliferation and disarmament goals.
• The Republic of Korea suggested that the 2010 Review Conference should review each of the 13 steps and bring them up to date to reflect changes in the international security environment.
• The New Agenda Coalition suggested a reporting mechanism for the arsenals of the nuclear weapon states would be a substantive confidence-building measure, if it were to provide information on the current status of their holdings, future plans for further reductions, and efforts to reduce reliance on nuclear weapons in their security doctrines. The Coalition further suggested that under such a mechanism, non-nuclear weapon states party to an alliance with a nuclear weapon state should report on steps taken to reduce reliance on nuclear weapons in their collective security doctrines.

Other Highlights of the Cluster 1 Discussion:

• In a joint statement, Japan announced that twelve additional states—bringing the total to twenty—had joined its initiative to promote non-proliferation and disarmament education through the NPT review process.
• The United Kingdom provided an update on its “disarmament laboratory” efforts.
• Australia voiced support for the eventual goal of a nuclear weapons convention.

Highlights from Day Three of the General Debate:

Article III- Safeguards and Compliance

• Kyrgyzstan and Belgium called for the Additional Protocol to become the verification standard.
• Libya reaffirmed that the IAEA is the only body with competence to deal with safeguards issues. Libya also called on all states to conclude an Additional Protocol.
• Austria called for the Addition Protocol to become the safeguard standard in the context of a new framework on security, centered around its ambitious proposal for multilateralization of the fuel cycle.
• The League of Arab States delivered a veiled critique of the United States for promoting the primacy of non-proliferation over the other two pillars of the Treaty. The League strongly criticized making the Additional Protocol a condition of supply, calling such proposals unacceptable, especially in light of the Treaty’s lack of universality.

Article IV- the Nuclear Fuel Cycle

• Libya said the Treaty should not be reinterpreted in a way that undermines Article IV.
• Belgium said the issue of rights and responsibilities under the Treaty, as well as various proposals on the fuel cycle, needed further study.
• Austria elaborated on its two-step proposal for extending multilateral control to the fuel cycle, stating that under the plan stateswould retain full rights. Austria also indicated the plan would be market-neutral.
• Namibia said that fuel cycle proposals on the table deserved further attention, but that the views of all states should be taken into consideration given the legal, technical, commercial, and economic ramifications of the issue.

Article VI- Disarmament

• Belarus accused the United States of violating the 1994 Budapest Memorandum of Understanding on Security Assurances by imposing economic sanctions in 2007.
• Five delegations called for the entry into force of the CTBT; three delegations called for negotiations to commence on an FMCT.

777 UN Plaza - 6th Floor - New York, NY - 10017 - Ph: 212.682.1265 - Fax: 212.286.8211 - info@reachingcriticalwill.org
This site was created by Kache Productions ©2008